The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 152, DISASTER RELIEF APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2013” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H99-H108 on Jan. 15, 2013.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 152, DISASTER RELIEF APPROPRIATIONS
ACT, 2013
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 23 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 23
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 152) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. That amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of order against that amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. After disposition of such amendments, the Chair shall put the question on the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Sec. 2. If the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution is not adopted, the Committee shall rise and report that it has come to no resolution on the bill. If the amendment in the nature of a substitute is adopted, the amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment. No further amendment shall be in order except the amendments printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules. At the conclusion of consideration of the amendments printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill, to the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules, or to amendment number 1 printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Sec. 3. Each amendment printed in part B and part C of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment
(except as specified in the report), and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments are waived.
Sec. 4. In the engrossment of H.R. 152, the Clerk shall--
(a) add the text of H.R. 219, as passed by the House, as new matter at the end of H.R. 152;
(b) conform the title of H.R. 152 to reflect the addition of the text of H.R. 219, as passed by the House, to the engrossment;
(c) assign appropriate designations to provisions within the engrossment;
(d) conform cross-references and provisions for short titles within the engrossment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 1 hour.
{time} 1230
Mr. COLE. 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 the consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule for consideration of H.R. 152, the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act of 2013.
The rule is a structured rule that allows the House to work its will and decide the appropriate amount of aid for the devastation as a result of Hurricane Sandy. It allows for an up-or-down vote on the first $17 billion in aid, along with an amendment by Mr. Mulvaney which would offset the cost. Additionally, the rule allows the House to consider Mr. Frelinghuysen's amendment for an additional $33 billion. The rule also makes in order 11 other amendments.
Additionally, this rule directs the Clerk of the House to add H.R. 219, a bill to improve and streamline disaster assistance for Hurricane Sandy, which passed the House yesterday by a vote of 403-0, as a new matter at the end of H.R. 152.
Mr. Speaker, as I review the rule and the underlying legislation, my own opinion is shaped by a variety facts:
First, there's no question that an enormous disaster has taken place and hit the northeastern portion of the United States and that the dimensions of that disaster are truly extraordinary. There's a lot of different estimates that are floating around about how much, but one is as high as $85 billion, and that doesn't begin to calculate the human suffering in addition to the enormous financial cost.
Second, there's clearly a Federal responsibility to act in this case. We've always acted after disasters. We acted quickly after Hurricane Katrina, after the Oklahoma City bombing, and after the horror of 9/11. In countless other instances where a Federal response was in order, we've quickly moved to that responsibility, and we need to do so again in this case.
Third, frankly, and I think this is too often overlooked in this discussion, we have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible, not only because it's the right thing to do, and it certainly is that, but because it's the smart thing to do. Over 13 percent of our citizens lived in the four most affected States that were damaged by Hurricane Sandy, and collectively, they produce over 17 percent of the wealth of this country. Having that area up, operational, and prosperous is critical to the prosperity of the entire country.
As an American and as an Oklahoman, I know that my State has often benefited from Federal disaster relief in the past. I think of the Oklahoma City bombing in particular, where I served as Secretary of State and chief liaison to the Federal Government, and know firsthand how critical it is and how helpful it is to have the resources of the Federal Government at hand when you're dealing with an unanticipated disaster.
Again, it's pretty unusual in my State to go through a year without a tornado disaster, and it's pretty unusual to go through a year without a drought disaster. Each time, we've come and asked for help from the Federal Government; each time, we received that help. Undoubtedly, we'll be doing that again in the near future. It would be hypocritical, in my view, to fail to do for people in the affected region what I and, I know, many others have routinely asked for our own regions.
I do think, as I look forward, we should do a better job in budgeting for disasters, and frankly, we've taken steps in that direction. To the credit of this body and the executive branch, under the Budget Control Act, we actually set aside money for disaster relief; and had we not had the disaster of Hurricane Sandy, we would have actually finished the year with a surplus in that account. This disaster, though, was so large and so sweeping that it used all that surplus and still demands more.
So going forward, I hope we can look at different mechanisms to budget in a more responsible and consistent manner. However, to not allow whatever shortcomings are in the mechanisms of disaster relief, to stand by and allow Americans to suffer while we sort all that through, we have never done that in the past during a disaster, we certainly shouldn't do so now.
In closing, I want to admit a personal debt to the Frelinghuysen family. I owe them a great deal. Almost 183 years ago today, in April, actually, of 1830, one of Rodney Frelinghuysen's distinguished forebears, Theodore Frelinghuysen, rose on the floor of the Senate to protest Indian removal, removal of my tribe from Mississippi and many other tribes to what's now Oklahoma. And he held the floor for 3 days defending a people that had no right to vote, had no ability to defend themselves, and tried valiantly to make sure that they were allowed to retain their homeland, retain their identity and their rights. He wasn't successful in that fight, but he fought it nonetheless. And, frankly, it would be incredibly ungrateful for me now not to, at the time of his people's greatest need, return the favor.
So I urge the passage of the rule, I urge the passage of the Rogers bill, and I urge the passage of the Frelinghuysen amendment to that bill.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I really appreciate the words of my colleague and the generosity--we were very happy last night at the Rules Committee that all members of the Rules Committee recognized that this is America in need. It's a fascinating story, and knowing Rodney Frelinghuysen, no one could be surprised about the action of his ancestor. Of course, we all apologize for what happened to you. That should not have happened to your ancestors.
But throughout our modern history, the United States Congress has always responded swiftly to help the victims of natural disasters. It is today 78 days since Hurricane Sandy absolutely devastated the Northeast. We never hesitated as Americans because we know that all of us are in it together and that when any American is hurt, we all hurt, and when communities are devastated by earthquakes, tornadoes, or hurricanes, we all feel our duty to respond.
{time} 1240
When Sandy plunged communities into darkness and left them without power or water for weeks, countless Americans volunteered their own resources to help the victims of Sandy, just as they had helped the victims of Hurricane Katrina and the victims of the Joplin tornado.
Yet, no matter the generosity of our Nation's people, there is no replacement for a swift and well-organized Federal response. From military-grade trucks, helicopters, and supply planes, to Federally backed small business loans, our Federal Government is absolutely vital to rebuilding efforts.
That is why we were so sad, all of us from the Northeast, that it took so long for the House to respond. While the Senate acted soon after Sandy occurred to pass a comprehensive aid package, there was nothing done in this House for months. This Congress responded to Hurricane Katrina in 10 days. As I pointed out, it's been 79 days for Sandy.
When the majority did act, they passed a partial aid package that could be described as a starting point at best. And while we appreciate that we're taking action to help Sandy victims, the piecemeal approach has hurt our disaster response efforts. Without knowing whether more aid is absolutely going to come, the governors and the mayors can't sign contracts with construction companies, can't complete their plans, and cannot prioritize repair efforts and provide effective aid. It simply does not do to give out money in tranches without a guarantee of the actual money needed to be coming. In addition, the majority's demands that any Federal aid include offsets has delayed and endangered the aid from getting into the hands of those who need it.
Yesterday, the Rules Committee was presented with almost 100 amendments for inclusion in today's bill . More than 40 of those 100 amendments proposed by the majority attempted to cut, hinder, and offset the aid that is contained in today's bill. Many of the amendments contained extreme and ideological proposals that should never have been considered for inclusion in a disaster aid bill.
Mr. Speaker, it is now entering the cold parts of winter. There are families up and down the eastern seaboard who are still homeless, while thousands more are still working to get back on their feet, and many small businesses and restaurants have been forced to close because of the slowness of aid. Meanwhile, important institutions such as the NYU hospital in New York City struggle to repair the flood damage, and countless restaurants, as I've said, have been forced to close.
After being battered and bruised by natural disaster, the victims of Sandy are now at the mercy of the House of Representatives.
I urge my colleagues to show fundamental humanity and pass the bill today that does not include unnecessary amendments that are little more than political ransom for the majority.
It's time the Chamber passes a bill that can and will be signed into law and gives the victims of Sandy the help they need to rebuild.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished Member from New York, the former chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and one of the most distinguished Members of this body, Mr. King.
Mr. KING of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule and equally strong support of the underlying legislation, particularly the Frelinghuysen amendment, which is so vital to the people of New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and especially my area on Long Island in Nassau County and Suffolk County.
To put this in perspective, there were 305,000 homes in New York damaged, 2.2 million people lost their power. That's more than the population of 15 States. That's 2.2 million people that lost their power. In Nassau County and Suffolk County, 95,000 buildings were damaged. More than 38,000 had more than 50 percent damage. In Nassau County--and the county executive, Ed Mangano, is here today--they had more than $6 billion in recovery costs. That's $6.1 billion for one county. In Suffolk County, under County Executive Steve Bellone, there were $1.8 billion in recovery costs. These are two adjoining suburban counties with almost $8 billion in recovery costs.
I was here in 2005 for Katrina. In fact, I had become chairman of the Homeland Security Committee just several weeks after Katrina. Within days of being chairman, I went to Louisiana with Ranking Member Thompson and to Mississippi. Congressman Reichert was with me, as well. That was less than 3 weeks after Katrina. Ten days before that, the House of Representatives had passed two appropriations bills totaling
$63 billion. The first appropriations bill was introduced, passed on a voice vote, passed unanimously by the Senate, and signed by the President all in one day. Four days after that, another bill came up for the balance of the $63 billion, which passed the House by a vote of 410-11, was passed unanimously by the Senate and was signed by the President in one day.
Now, 11 weeks have gone by. There's a lot of reasons for that. For one thing, Governor Cuomo, Governor Christie, and Mayor Bloomberg, they submitted the most detailed summaries ever, the most detailed accounting ever. It took them about 30 days to get that in. Then the White House held it for several weeks. They went through it. That was their prerogative. The Senate finally voted on it just before Christmas. And, as you know, I wish that this had passed our House 2 weeks ago on New Year's Day. The fact is it didn't, and that's behind us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. COLE. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. KING of New York. Right now we are standing together as one in a bipartisan show of support. The time for recriminations is over. Let's stand together as Americans, and let's get the aid to the people who need it because in my district alone, in my community, people are homeless, people are cold, people are without food. This is a serious matter we have to address, that we have to do as quickly as possible.
I'm proud to stand here today with all of us united. There may be divisions in the vote, but all of us are committed to getting this done.
I want to thank the gentleman from Oklahoma, I thank the chairman of the Rules Committee, Mr. Sessions, and the great job that they've done in bringing it here with a fair rule and allowing for an up-and-down vote.
Again, I urge support of the Rogers bill and the underlying, and the accompanying Frelinghuysen amendment--absolutely essential to the people of our region, and most importantly, essential to the people of our country.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut, a member of the Committee on Appropriations, Ms. DeLauro.
Ms. DeLAURO. I rise to express my strong support for this long overdue, this much-needed $51 million in disaster relief.
Sandy was one of the most severe storms to hit Connecticut in our history. We are asking, we are pleading--and we shouldn't have to beg--
for money for the Northeast to be able to survive this tragedy that hit us.
We need to make available the disaster aid. Families in the Northeast need to recover, repair from Superstorm Sandy, just as we have in the past from other disasters across the country. This is one of the central responsibilities of this institution, to act on behalf of the American people after a natural disaster.
I hope that we make sure that all the States affected by this storm are eligible to receive Community Development Block Grant funding, vital aid, so places like Milford, Connecticut, which saw hundreds of homes wiped out by the storm, can fully recover.
I also urge the defeat of an amendment that cuts funding for the rebuilding of seawalls and research buildings at the Stewart McKinney National Wildlife Refuge in Connecticut.
I might remind my colleague from Louisiana that between Rita, Wilma, and Katrina, this institution appropriated $130 billion, not $3.9 billion, in disaster relief.
The families affected by Sandy are in their hour of need. They have waited too long for this institution to act. I urge all my colleagues to support this disaster aid funding to help the Northeast rebuild.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from California, one of the most consistent and thoughtful conservatives in the House, Mr. McClintock.
Mr. McCLINTOCK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, this rule brings a suspending package of more than $50 billion that is supposed to be for emergency repairs in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. That averages about $450 from every household in America.
These families have a right to expect that this money will be used for genuine emergency relief, but it's not. According to the Congressional Budget Office, more than 90 percent of this money won't even be spent this year. That's not emergency relief.
There is $16 billion to quintuple the size of the Community Development Block Grant program. That's the slush fund that pays for such dubious projects as doggy day care centers, and it doesn't even have to be spent in the hurricane area. Two billion dollars is for highway repairs anywhere in the country, including up to
$20 million each for Guam, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands that aren't even in the same ocean as Hurricane Sandy.
I offered amendments to restrict funding for emergency relief this year. Future-year expenditures should be included in the normal appropriations process where they can be given scrutiny and be evaluated in relation to all of the other demands on spending.
{time} 1250
These amendments were refused.
Worse, this rule overrides the House rules requiring spending offsets against unauthorized appropriations and, most telling of all, against mixing nonemergency funding in an emergency bill. A tragedy like Hurricane Sandy shouldn't be used as an excuse for a grab bag of spending having nothing to do with emergency relief. At the Rules Committee hearing, I was told, Well, you have to understand that that's just the way things are done around here.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans were supposed to change the way things are done around here. Clearly, we have not.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to my Republican colleague who just spoke. I respect him tremendously, but I want him and everyone to understand that this really is emergency relief that we're talking about, and I want to give you some examples from my district.
For example, he talked about the Community Development Block Grant. I have a town like Sea Bright, New Jersey, where only two businesses in the business district right now are operating. The problem is that, oftentimes, their flood insurance doesn't cover the damage, and even the money coming from FEMA, which is probably only for some type of loan fund, doesn't cover it. So the Community Development Block Grant in Sea Bright will be used to help those businesses come back. It will be grants to the businesses and grants to the homeowners so that they can rebuild.
The same is true of the Army Corps of Engineers projects. We need the Rogers amendment. We also need the Frelinghuysen amendment because the Frelinghuysen amendment has all of the Army Corps projects as well as those of the Community Development Block Grant. Those Army Corps projects basically let us put back the beaches, put back the dunes, put back the flood control devices so that we don't have another storm in the future, which could happen at any moment, that would destroy the towns again and wreck even more of our businesses or our homes.
Also, the money that's in the $17 million initially is the public assistance money that allows us to rebuild our boardwalks, bring back our tourism. We can't delay any longer because, if we don't get our tourism industry back in place--our businesses, our homes, our boardwalks, our infrastructure back in place--by Memorial Day, then the jobs and the economy that are linked to tourism will be gone. We need this entire package.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), one of the most consistent and distinguished defenders of human rights in Congress.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. I thank my good friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. When emergencies strike, large or small, Americans can always be counted on to assist and to support the victims. At our core, we are a Nation of Good Samaritans. After Superstorm Sandy came ashore in New Jersey and devastated the region, first responders courageously rescued people trapped in homes and cars. They often had minimal regard for their own personal welfare, safety and well-being. Everyone rallied around the clock.
Governor Chris Christie, Emergency Management personnel, the National Guard, police and fire, elected officials, the Monmouth County OEM director Sheriff Shaun Golden were absolutely tenacious and effective, and our local mayors were like NFL quarterbacks--running the plays, making calls day by day, hour by hour. Faith-based organizations helped feed and clothe and shelter. Private voluntary organizations were on the scene in droves. Our neighbors to the north, west, and south poured in to the State to help restore power and remove fallen trees. Words are inadequate to convey my--our--appreciation.
Within weeks, however, the emergency phase seamlessly matriculated into the recovery phase--the flip side of the same coin. Now the big question is this: will the feds have our backs as we strive to recover? It is an absolutely arduous process. I believe that we will. Any delay in appropriating sufficient funds will likely stall a comprehensive and robust recovery.
Sandy was the most destructive storm ever in our region and, arguably, the second or third most costly in America's history. The Governor's office has estimated the damage in my State alone to be
$36.9 billion. Homes like this one--22,000 homes like this one--
completely and totally destroyed. Another 324,000 homes damaged; 41,000 people can't return to those homes--they're still not fixed. Businesses also took it on the chin: 19,000 New Jersey businesses suffered damage of a quarter of a million dollars or more.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. COLE. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.
Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Three-quarters of New Jersey businesses were hurt by Sandy. When asked, they put the small business loss at $8.3 billion. No wonder 100,000 storm-related unemployment claims have been filed. The Governor's office points out that public facilities and infrastructure sustained the same losses of some $7 billion. Boardwalks were snapped like toothpicks, beaches have eroded, and some have been radically reconfigured.
Significantly more funds are needed if New Jersey and our good friends in New York and other Sandy impacted areas are to recover. The Frelinghuysen amendment is absolutely crucial. We are not crying wolf here, I say to my colleagues. There are huge gaps. People who have filed for insurance claims find insurance has covered only this much. How do they ever recover? The same goes for the infrastructure in New Jersey. 860,000 people every single day use New Jersey transit. That infrastructure has been demolished--locomotives, cars, tracks as well as stations. Critical Army Corps projects need to be reconstructed and repaired, while new initiatives need to be funded. We need this money. And we need it now.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to my new colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).
Mr. JEFFRIES. On October 29, when Superstorm Sandy struck with devastating ferocity, at home, people died; businesses and homes were destroyed; families were torn apart. In times of disaster, the American people have come to expect that Congress will respond with swiftness and compassion, but the victims of Superstorm Sandy have been forced to languish in agony and languish in uncertainty.
Our response has been characterized by delay, obstruction, postponement, obfuscation. It's unacceptable given the nature of the disaster that people at home have experienced. We have defaulted on our obligation to provide assistance to Americans in need. We're a day late and a dollar short. In fact, we're 78 days late and $51 billion short.
New York, one of the original 13 colonies, has given much to the Republic over the last 236 years. Our sons and our daughters have died in each and every war. FDR, a tremendous statesman, helped us get through the Great Depression, and we regularly give more to the government than we get back in return. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the entire package.
Mr. COLE. I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
Mr. MEEKS. I thank the ranking member from the Rules Committee.
I stand here today as we deal with an American issue. It is an issue that is unique to America. It is an issue in which American people are saying we need help. It is an issue in which the American people say we want hope. I had the opportunity to look at Webster's Dictionary to see what ``hope'' meant. It said: ``Hope'' means to cherish a desire with anticipation.
``Hope'' means to trust. ``Hope'' means to expect with confidence.
Our people in New York, Connecticut, and New Jersey have hope today--
hope that their Members of Congress and that the Members of Congress from all across this great land will come together and help them; hope that the Members of Congress will do like their people in their various States because the hope that came to many of the individuals who were victimized by the storm came from people from all over this country. Whether you come from the East or the West or the North or the South, the American people came to help.
So I'm here today for John Corey, a man in our community who works hard, a civic leader. I'm here for Josephine and Gary Robinson, small business owners of Goody's Restaurant. I'm here today for Joann Shapiro at Elegante Pizzeria. I'm here today for Peter Corliss, a homeowner whose entire home was damaged and had to leave it. I'm here for Julia Blair and Lou Simon, who have lost everything and want to know a better hope for tomorrow. I'm here today for Barbara and Richard Rampy, who have to move away from their home because they can't stay there. I'm here for Americans. Let Congress be here for our American people.
{time} 1300
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Runyan).
Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support today of this rule. If you look next to me, you'll see damage from Seaside Heights, New Jersey, in my district. My constituents in Seaside have suffered for well over 2 months in trying to clean up the mess that was left behind by Hurricane Sandy.
In the past, taxpayers in New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut have gladly stepped up to foot the bill for the disasters of other States. Whether it was Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, or Texas, we didn't ask questions; we just stopped and delivered aid to those in need. It is important that Members who have been the benefactor of our goodwill in the past remember this generosity when voting today.
Almost 3 months later, and my constituents continue to suffer. I urge passage of the rule and the underlying bill.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding.
Seventy-eight days ago, a tremendous force of fury hit the northeastern region of the United States. Today we make an act of national interest. This is not an act of excess or an act of charity.
For those who claim that there is excess in this bill, I would suggest that they read it. Throughout this bill, the bill says that the spending is limited to ``necessary expenses related to the consequences of Hurricane Sandy.'' This is throughout the text of the bill.
This is not an act of charity. These three States--New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut--these three States pay almost 16 percent of the taxes collected in the United States of America. Three States, 16 percent of the taxes.
You ask the question: Who suffered because of Superstorm Sandy? Certainly our neighbors in New York and New Jersey and Connecticut suffered the most, but all Americans will suffer if this economic engine is not rebuilt.
The three States that pay nearly 16 percent of the taxes need this reconstruction, and so does the United States of America. All Members, Republican and Democrat, should vote ``yes'' in favor of this legislation.
Mr. COLE. I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, Representative Slaughter, for yielding me this time. I would also like to thank Representatives Lowey and King for their leadership on this issue, and I commend my colleagues in the New York and New Jersey and Connecticut delegations on both sides of the aisle for working so well together to advance the interests of our States at this critical time. And I would also like to thank my friend, Mr. Cole, for his support.
I rise to support the rule and urge my colleagues to support H.R. 152 and the Frelinghuysen amendment and to oppose the Mulvaney amendment.
It has been 2\1/2\ months since Superstorm Sandy hit communities in New York, New Jersey, and neighboring States which continue to face the almost insurmountable task of cleaning up and rebuilding homes, businesses, and lives. I'm grateful we've finally had the opportunity to consider a relief package to those who are most in need.
In my district on the eastern half of Long Island, businesses, farms, and homes fell victim to intense flooding. Ferocious winds caused substantial damage to property, vehicles, and businesses; and along the coast, Sandy created breaches in the coastline and severely eroded other parts of the beach. In New York and New Jersey, at least 651,000 homes were damaged or destroyed, and approximately 463,000 were impacted.
Mr. Speaker, our States are not asking for anything more than for help to get back on their feet and rebuild. We are asking for nothing more than to respond to this disaster as we have for Hurricane Katrina and other natural disasters that have brought damage upon our fellow Americans.
I urge my colleagues to support this package without any damaging amendments.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I heard the words a few moments ago about a grab bag. I can assure you that the Governors who introduced itemized lists went into them very deeply with the consultation of local officials. It's no grab bag. That's an insult to the northeastern States that were hit by this tremendous storm. And it's ironic, of those who oppose this legislation, that many of them--and I have the list here, Mr. Speaker, if you want to see it--supported not only disaster aid for their own areas, but some of them got disaster aid personally. The gentleman from South Carolina, he personally took a small business loan, Federal loan, as part of a disaster relief program, yet he comes here and to the Rules Committee to question what we're submitting?
I want to say to the chair and the ranking person in the Rules Committee, you did a good job yesterday. Going through 92 amendments, I don't know how you did it. Of course you dismissed some of them pretty quickly, which was very good. I also want to say, Mr. Rogers and Mr. Cole and Louise Slaughter have been particularly outstanding, along with Rodney Frelinghuysen's amendment, which I will definitely support.
There are two towns wiped out in my district: Little Ferry and Moonachie. Water came over the banks because of the surge. Thank God we didn't have that much rain or else we would have had a far worse disaster.
We stood on this floor after Katrina and voice voted billions of dollars--voice voted. We didn't even take an individual vote.
I think that the record is very clear on what is needed. We have taken out the extraneous and we've taken out what we call earmarks, and I think that those who put this legislation together deserve a tremendous amount of credit.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
(Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. LANGEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule which prevents consideration of critical amendments offered by me and my colleagues from disaster-affected States.
I'm particularly disappointed that my amendment was not even allowed a vote, as it would ensure that all States that received a major disaster declaration due to Hurricane Sandy are able to receive EPA State and tribal assistance grants. The failure of the House bill to provide this assistance to every State receiving a Presidential disaster declaration following Sandy is troubling and, quite frankly, extremely disappointing. The refusal of the majority to allow this amendment to come for a vote is even worse.
The Senate passed a fair and balanced relief package last year providing assistance for all of our communities and industries affected by a major disaster declaration, including our fishing industry. I'm deeply disappointed that this legislation before us reverses course, denying assistance to certain communities affected by Sandy, particularly after the House Republicans have delayed nearly 3 months in bringing even this flawed bill to the floor.
In this Congress, we've made it clear that we help our communities when they're in need when disaster strikes, and this bill doesn't adequately address assistance to all communities that have been impacted.
For these reasons, I will vote against the rule in the hope that we can improve the overall bill to include these critical amendments. But with that being said, should that rule pass, as flawed as it is, I won't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and I would urge my colleagues to act in good faith and pass the disaster assistance bill free from additional legislative gimmicks that will only further imperil its success.
With that, I thank the gentlelady for yielding. This bill is by no means perfect, but our States can't afford to wait another 3 months.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, first let me yield myself 30 seconds.
This is legislation, obviously, that I support, but I want my friend to be aware, the House did not sit on this for 90 days.
{time} 1310
The administration of the States concerned took over a month, appropriately, in my opinion, to assess the damage. The administration sat on it. We didn't get this bill until just before Christmas. We're actually acting on it with a deadline of Congress and proceeding more rapidly than anybody else has. So we've not been part of the delay. Actually, we've been trying to expedite things.
With that, I yield 2 minutes to my friend from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo), the distinguished Member from the affected area.
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in very strong support of the rule and the underlying legislation. But I'd ask my colleagues, because we seem to be very mixed and divided on some of this, think of the human face.
My constituents, the constituents of the Northeast, they're not just whining. They're not just uncomfortable. They are devastated. They've had everything ripped from them.
Imagine getting up in the morning, hearing there's a storm coming, not knowing what to expect, and realizing, within 24 hours, you have lost everything. That's not something any of us wants to imagine for ourselves or for our constituents, but that's the place we find ourselves in.
These are senior citizens, sometimes with no family. They've been displaced from their homes, living in a rented room on a rented cot for months.
These are families with young children who are trying to get their lives back together.
These are businesses, small businesses, the backbone of the country, who don't know how to get back up and running.
Disaster means disaster and emergency means emergency.
Sure, we can say, let's wait, let's do something differently. But we were there for you. We were there, Florida, when you had your hurricane, and God bless you if you think you're not going to have another hurricane. We need this and we need it now.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Hurricane Sandy supplemental appropriations bill, and the Frelinghuysen amendment to provide the funds necessary to start rebuilding and recovering from the storm.
Hurricane Sandy hit the east coast almost 3 months ago. Never before has the House of Representatives taken so long to meet its obligations following a major disaster. I'm relieved that we're finally considering this bill today; but I'm disappointed, once again, that some are still playing politics by trying to add poison pills and offsets that jeopardize this aid package.
As the current debate over the pending sequestration shows, finding offsets is no easy task, and it makes no sense to put that on the back of emergency aid. It defies the very nature of emergency aid, and it impedes the Federal Government from doing its most important job, protecting its citizens when calamity strikes.
On the surface, Mr. Speaker, New York City appears to be back up and running; but many people are still homeless, and the lack of long-term housing is a problem for which we do not have an adequate answer. The restoration of heat and power remains a challenge.
There are increasing reports of people, including small children, getting sick from exposure to toxic mold, sewage, or other hazardous substances. Entire neighborhoods are still dark and largely abandoned.
Many small businesses in Lower Manhattan are still paying off disaster assistance loans secured after the attack on the World Trade Center 10 years ago. Many of these businesses were already operating on thin profit margins. Now they've been hit again; and without additional resources and a faster rebuilding process, many of these small businesses may close for good.
The needs are great, and yet the House has still failed to act. Back in December, the Senate passed a $60.4 billion disaster aid package that tracked very closely to the administration's request, which was based on conservative assessments of the needs across the region.
The House should have passed the Senate bill back then. There is simply no justifiable reason for the delay, unless you believe that when disaster strikes we are all on our own. Let us, once and for all, reject that notion and meet our obligations to get emergency aid in the hands of those who need it urgently.
I urge my colleagues to end this madness and vote for the underlying bill, for the Frelinghuysen amendment, and against all restrictive amendments.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, my friend, Pete Sessions, and the person who crafted the rule that allowed us to move this expeditiously through a difficult process and bring this important matter to the floor.
Mr. SESSIONS. I appreciate the gentleman from Oklahoma leading, not just this exercise on behalf of the Rules Committee, but actually on behalf of the Appropriations Committee.
The Rules Committee, I know that the gentlewoman, Louise Slaughter, and I have great confidence, not only in Tom's leadership, but really his insight into what needs to be done. And, Tom, I want to thank you for your strong leadership in this endeavor on behalf of the Appropriations Committee, as well as the Rules Committee.
Mr. Speaker, today what I'd like to do is take just a minute, if I can, and kind of reset where we are. We've had lots of debate today about what we're doing and why we're doing this. But the bottom line is that our Speaker, John Boehner; our majority leader, Eric Cantor; and the minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, understand that we must approach a national disaster such as a superstorm together.
And as a body, whether it was Nita Lowey, whether it was Jon Runyan, Rodney Frelinghuysen, Chris Smith, Michael Grimm, Frank LoBiondo, we, as a body, understood we had a job to do. The gentlewoman from New York, the ranking member of this committee, Louise Slaughter, and I understand the responsibility because we had people back home like Mayor William Akers of Seaside Heights, New Jersey, who talked to Jon Runyan, or perhaps Sylvia Petillo for Hopatcong, New Jersey, talked to her Congressman, Rodney Frelinghuysen, about the needs of the communities, one Nation under God, the United States coming together at a time of extreme difficulty. And that's what we have done.
We have worked well together. We have worked with the Governors, Governor Corbett from Pennsylvania, Governor Cuomo from New York, certainly Governor Christie of New Jersey, Mayor Bloomberg of New York, people who got together and worked.
We did wait for the President's declaration of a national emergency; and we did, after 40 days and some few hours after that, receive the bill. But I think this House of Representatives, on a bipartisan basis, Members working together, Louise Slaughter, Michael Grimm, Tom Cole, others coming together; and we are now getting behind a bill. One of the amendments is called the Rodney Frelinghuysen amendment, and it is an amendment that meets the needs of these States and these people.
So for those who would say we've taken our time, I'd like to say, I think we're trying to do it right. For those who would say, well, we're not sure exactly how much should be in here or not, this body will determine it by the votes. Every Member of this body, I believe, will have a fair and open opportunity, not just as a result of the rule, but us working together.
And I'm very proud of that process, very proud of Hal Rogers, our Appropriations chair, who came to the Rules Committee yesterday and said that he placed before this body what he felt like was an equal opportunity for us to help people, this time in the Northeast--perhaps it will be people in other places--but he wants to make sure that fairness is done.
The Speaker of the House, John Boehner, cares deeply about the people of the Northeast and all the people of this country.
I think this rule today, and I think this bill, is an adequate opportunity for Members to speak clearly and that is, we care about our country, and we care about the people of this country.
Mr. Cole, thank you for yielding me time. I want you to know that we, the Rules Committee, appreciate the time that you have spent on this; and the results, I think, will come to bear for all of us.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), a fellow New Yorker.
Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. I appreciate the time.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to say thank you to Tom Cole for bringing this forward. And I want to say also to Congressman Sessions I appreciate his words.
We always fight down here; but I always knew that, in my heart, we would come together to help our constituents. We've heard from Republicans and Democrats Hurricane Sandy was not discriminating against whether you were a Republican or a Democrat. And we as New Yorkers, and people in Jersey and Connecticut, we've always been there for other parts of the country.
I think people have to understand; and by the way, a number of Republicans came into the district and they saw the disaster.
{time} 1320
One of your Members came and looked at Long Beach Hospital, which was underwater and will not be able to open for months. You have to understand, Long Beach was one of the areas that was hit the hardest. Thousands of people there are without their homes. I can't even tell you what these homes looked like.
I know we always hear at times that New Yorkers are rich. Let me tell you, these are little cottages. These are regular homes, blue-collar workers, hard workers, and because of this storm, their lives have been torn apart. I have seen the pain within my constituents and my small businesses, and, by the way, my health care workers, because not only were they taking care of everybody during and after the storm, they're taking care of people today because they're coming in with upper respiratory illnesses because of the mold that's in this area.
We need to do everything we can. We don't ask for much--we're pretty tough people--but we do need the help of the American people right now. We here in this body, we are representing the American people.
I just want to say thank you to everybody. I truly, truly do mean that. I always knew that we would come together. But I'm saying thank you from my constituents, because the pain that they are all suffering is unbearable for us as Members of Congress.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Florida, the former chairman of the Transportation Committee, Mr. Mica.
Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and hopefully I can shed a little light on some of the commentary in this debate.
First of all, the Congress always has and always will respond to disasters, and it is important in the Northeast superstorm that we do so, and we do so responsibly. Anyone who says that we did not act responsibly, the Republicans didn't act or our leadership, is wrong.
First of all, let me recount. After the disaster, our committee, Transportation and Infrastructure, which oversees FEMA, we went to New York. We met with officials. We assessed the damage. We came back and we did a hearing and hauled in FEMA personnel. We asked specifically, Is there enough funding available to provide disaster relief? The answer was yes. There was $6 billion in the continuing resolution that Congress had passed and another $1 billion left from the previous year, a total of $7 billion. The question at that time is how much would be spent. They said approximately $3 billion, leaving $4 billion, that would take us--in the disaster relief fund account--till February.
We worked with the Senate and others in trying to look at reforms, because the last word from Mayor Bloomberg and the President of the Staten Island borough when I left them was, Can you help me get money from Hurricane Irene, which they still couldn't get reimbursed because of the bureaucracy and red tape from current FEMA policy.
Yesterday the Congress--and we passed it twice before--passed those reforms that are so necessary so that New York and New Jersey and the others affected won't have the same problems in securing that money.
So, first, there was enough money and is enough money available in the disaster relief fund. There wasn't enough money in the flood insurance account, and that is a reimbursable. It will come back. Before we left, we put $7 billion to ensure that they would be taken care of, and they are taken care of.
There was enough money, there is enough money, and there will be enough money. This rule is constructed because, when the Senate passed their bill over to us at the last minute and the last hour, they porked it down. They put things in there that didn't need to be in there, thinking that they could pull one over on the House of Representatives and slide in with disaster relief a whole host of earmarks, and I won't go into the details to embarrass anyone. The record will reflect that.
So we acted responsibly, our leadership acted in a responsible fashion, and today this committee, the Rules Committee, is bringing this out in, also, a responsible fashion to deal with the disaster. We'll do it right, and we'll protect the American people in the process and their hard-earned taxpayer dollars.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney).
Mr. TIERNEY. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule. I heard comments over there from the chairman of the Rules Committee and others about how this was a fair rule and a fair process and how it's one nation under God and everybody trying to help everybody out, how they believe there's an opportunity for every Member to consider the matters that are in this bill.
That is simply not the reality that was expressed for the nine States that suffered from fishing quota failures and threats to their fishing that were declared disasters back in 2012, when the Commerce Department said that the fishery disaster in those nine States was leading to people losing their job and the collapse of an industry, one of the oldest and most historic industries in our country.
There was an opportunity for this bill to allow an amendment to be brought before the floor for a discussion about whether or not we ought not to do what the Senate did, which is put $150 million in that bill specifically for those States, specifically to deal with that aspect of disaster and move forward with that relief.
This Rules Committee in this House decided that Members would not have the opportunity to take that vote. The Members in this House would not be able to work, Republicans and Democrats and Independents, to discuss a disaster that cut across at least nine States, that dealt with people who were going to lose their job, lose their industry and shatter communities. Instead, they would do this on a partisan basis.
Although this was a bipartisan amendment that was proposed to the Rules Committee, and although every one of those communities that are in that disaster-declared area have Republicans and Democrats, and although they have mayors and Governors that are from both parties, the Rules Committee, on a straight party-line vote, decided that this Congress would not have the opportunity to even consider and debate and discuss and then vote on whether or not we would follow the path of the Senate and allow for $150 million in disaster relief to those communities.
This is not acceptable. This is not acting like there is one country under God. This is not acting as if there is fairness and that every Member of this particular body is being allowed a voice to represent their constituents.
I think we should vote against this rule. I think we should allow for an amendment to be brought. We should have these amendments come to the floor and provide for an opportunity to debate and discuss and include in this disaster relief those people that are suffering the disaster in the fishing communities of our country.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to my gentlewoman friend from New York (Mrs. Maloney).
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. I thank my colleague and good friend from New York for yielding and for her extraordinary leadership in this body.
I rise in support of the rule and the two underlying bills.
As a region, the Northeast should not be held to a different standard. The Northeast was there when other States were struck with disasters. We were there with the aid. We didn't delay. We didn't put roadblocks. We didn't put forward all types of requirements to be met. We voice voted. We moved swiftly.
The Northeast, which is suffering from the second worst natural disaster in the history of our great country, the residents there have been suffering for 2\1/2\ months. Over 2\1/2\ million people lost all their electricity; some still don't have it. We need the aid and we need it now so that we can start rebuilding.
The Northeast is important. These amendments are important, not only for this region, but for the entire country.
The New York metropolitan area produces an estimated 11 percent of our gross domestic product. The country is better off when our Nation's economic engine is working at 100 percent.
These three States pay 16 percent of the taxes of our great country, but they can't produce if their subways are broken, if their schools are flooded, if the hospitals have been evacuated and the money is not there to help them rebuild. They can't produce. They can't be part of the great economic engine of this country.
I just plead with my colleagues not to have a double standard, not to vote tornado relief to Alabama, to Louisiana, to Mississippi, Missouri, with Ike, Gustav, Katrina, Rita, but when it comes to the Northeast with the second worst storm in the history of our country, to delay, delay, delay. We need the aid. We need it now. We need the entire package. You can't rebuild a subway station with one brick; you have to do the whole thing.
{time} 1330
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Again, I associate myself very much with the substance of the gentlelady from New York's remarks.
There's no question there's a disaster here. There's no question there needs to be aid. I do differ with the speed with which the House has dealt with this. Let's remember, it took 30 days for the affected areas to assess the damage themselves. It then took the administration an additional couple of weeks to assess that--appropriately so, in my opinion. It then took the United States Senate a considerable period of time to deliver us something--essentially on Christmas Eve, with a deadline coming.
The House has actually moved expeditiously here. We have the issue before us now, certainly no intention to delay.
Mr. Speaker, with that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Israel), my fellow New Yorker.
Mr. ISRAEL. I thank my very good friend and colleague from New York for the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule.
It has been 80 days. For 80 days New Yorkers and other Americans have been waiting for help. Their businesses have been damaged, their homes have been damaged, their land has been damaged, their co-ops and condos have been damaged. They need the help.
It is one thing to be devastated by a weather storm; it is another thing to be devastated by a political storm. We need to put both storms behind us and move on and provide this help.
We have shown bipartisanship in my area, Mr. Speaker. The gentleman from New York (Mr. King), a Republican, and I and other members of our delegation have worked with Governor Cuomo and Governor Christie and with Mayor Bloomberg to move forward, despite the politics and despite the political winds.
We have our two county executives from Long Island--County Executive Bellone and County Executive Mangano--in Washington today, with residents who are Democrats, Republicans, conservatives, liberals, and independents. This isn't about party; this is about solutions.
This is not the time for recriminations about what went wrong. It is the time for recovery, about how to get this right. This is not the time for partisan posturing. It is a time for solutions.
We are cautiously optimistic that in a few hours both the political storm and the weather storm will finally be behind us, that the help will come, the assistance will be provided, that all Americans will provide the help that we provide them when times get tough for them, and that people back home who are counting on us will get the help they need.
I thank the gentlewoman again.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Markey).
Mr. MARKEY. I thank the gentlelady.
I rise in opposition to the rule.
From Cape Cod to Cape Ann, New Bedford to Newburyport, Massachusetts' fishing families are hurting. I, along with the gentlemen from Massachusetts, Congressman Tierney and Congressman Keating, offered three amendments to this bill to restore disaster funding for fishermen in Massachusetts and around the country. And to those three amendments, the House Republicans said no, no, no.
The House Republicans have cut a lifeline to our struggling Massachusetts fishermen. The Republicans in Congress are telling Massachusetts fishermen to take a long walk off a short pier.
The economic disaster declared for parts of the New England fishery industry last year was in large part a result of the same forces that made Superstorm Sandy so damaging--the forces of climate change. It hit New York, it hit New Jersey, it hit Massachusetts.
Climate change is increasing temperatures; it's raising sea levels; it's strengthening storms. That means more stress on New England's iconic cod and other species.
I support getting help to the people of New Jersey and New York and Connecticut, but we cannot forget the other Americans who suffered last year. The fishermen of Massachusetts, the fishermen of our country cannot be forgotten. This bill says no to them, no to their needs. I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to inform my colleague I have no further requests for time and I am prepared to close.
Mr. COLE. I am prepared to close as well.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, this process that has led us up to this point has been distressing. Indeed, this Congress has failed time and again to really look at what's happening here, and that is climate change. Because of that, and our inability to deal with it, there will be more and more disasters. We must be prepared for them in the future and not hold any area of the State up for 90 days to try to get the help for them that they require and that they need--80 days, actually, to be perfectly accurate.
I urge my colleagues to stop the political games today. Let's pass a bill that is free of unnecessary amendments and get the aid into the hands of those who need it most, those who have suffered the most.
As many of my colleagues have said, it's not just the Northeast that suffers. When an area that large and that populated suffers, the Nation suffers.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I'd like to say that I believe we've had a good debate on the rule. I believe the importance and timeliness of this legislation couldn't be more self-evident.
This bill has been carefully crafted and worked in a way to ensure that those Americans in need can access the resources necessary to begin the rebuilding process. This rule has brought this issue in a manner which allows this body to consider it responsibly and thoughtfully, but quickly.
Personally, I want to add that I hope every Member reflects on the situation of our fellow Americans in the Northeast. There's no question they've been overtaken by a disaster of historic importance. They've been there for us in the past; we certainly need to be there for them today.
Each Member ought to recognize at some point his or her area will be hit by some disaster, and they will be here seeking support. So I would ask that they consider this request from our fellow Americans in the Northeast in the same way they would want their requests considered at the appropriate and necessary time for them.
To close, I would urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. It continues the absurd denial of climate change that has blinded the House for the last two years.
This bill directs the Army Corps of Engineers to study the vulnerability of these coastal populations to future flood risks. I submitted a sensible amendment to the Rules Committee. My amendment would have required the Corps to consider projected sea level rise from climate change. With scientific consensus that sea levels are rising rapidly due to human-caused climate change, it would be nonsensical to ignore this critical factor.
But this rule does not make my amendment in order. Apparently, it is taboo to mention the words ``climate change'' in this body.
This is the height of irresponsibility. We have a very short window to act. And if we don't, storms like Sandy will grow in frequency and intensity.
We have a moral obligation to protect the planet for our children. That is why my amendment should have been made in order.
Ms. MENG. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the H.R. 152, made in order by this rule. But the rule itself is flawed. It allows amendments that would negatively impact the middle class. We should not offset disaster aid by cutting funding for veterans, food safety and education.
I am also disappointed that the Committee did not make in order an amendment I proposed, or a similar amendment offered by my new Colleague Chris Smith, that would help churches, synagogues, mosques and other houses of worship recover from the destruction left by Hurricane Sandy.
These amendments would have given houses of worship the same chance for aid that other private nonprofit facilities receive. Superstorm Sandy was an exceptionally rare event with immense destructive force, and these establishments provided extraordinary service to the community during the hurricane. It would be unfair not to give them FEMA support and an opportunity to rebuild.
Because of the severe crisis experienced by Queens and the rest of New York, houses of worship should be able to receive the same consideration for aid that other private nonprofits do.
I am grateful that the Committee is allowing us to consider the Frelinghuysen amendment, which would provide thirty-three billion dollars in much needed aid to the states devastated by Sandy. I urge the my colleagues to support the Frelinghuysen amendment and to support H.R. 152 on final passage.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 293, nays 127, not voting 12, as follows:
YEAS--293
AderholtAlexanderAmashAmodeiBachmannBachusBarberBarlettaBarrBartonBenishekBentivolioBilirakisBishop (NY)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBlumenauerBonnerBoustanyBrady (TX)BridenstineBrooks (AL)Brooks (IN)Broun (GA)BuchananBucshonBurgessBustosCalvertCampCampbellCantorCapitoCarterCassidyCastro (TX)ChabotChaffetzCobleCoffmanColeCollins (GA)Collins (NY)ConawayConyersCookCottonCourtneyCramerCrawfordCrowleyCuellarCulbersonDainesDavis (CA)Davis, DannyDavis, RodneyDelaneyDenhamDentDeSantisDesJarlaisDiaz-BalartDingellDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EllmersEngelEnyartEshooFarentholdFincherFitzpatrickFleischmannFlemingForbesFortenberryFosterFoxxFranks (AZ)FrelinghuysenGabbardGarciaGardnerGarrettGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)GraysonGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuthrieHahnHallHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (WA)Heck (NV)Heck (WA)HensarlingHerrera BeutlerHigginsHimesHinojosaHoldingHudsonHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIsraelIssaJeffriesJenkinsJohnson (GA)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanJoyceKellyKing (IA)King (NY)Kinzinger (IL)KlineKusterLabradorLaMalfaLambornLanceLankfordLathamLattaLoBiondoLoebsackLongLoweyLucasLuetkemeyerLujan Grisham (NM)LummisMaffeiMaloney, CarolynMaloney, SeanMarchantMarinoMassieMathesonMcCarthy (CA)McCarthy (NY)McCaulMcClintockMcCollumMcHenryMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeadowsMeehanMengMesserMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMullinMulvaneyMurphy (PA)NadlerNegrete McLeodNeugebauerNoemNugentNunesNunneleeO'RourkeOlsonOwensPalazzoPallonePascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPearcePerryPetriPittengerPittsPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)QuigleyRadelRangelReedReichertRenacciRibbleRice (SC)RigellRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRossRothfusRoyceRuizRunyanRushRyan (WI)SalmonSanchez, Linda T.ScaliseSchneiderSchockSchweikertScott, AustinScott, DavidSensenbrennerSerranoSessionsSewell (AL)Shea-PorterShermanShimkusShusterSimpsonSinemaSiresSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStewartStiversStockmanStutzmanTerryThompson (CA)Thompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTurnerUptonValadaoVargasVelaViscloskyWagnerWalbergWaldenWalorskiWalzWeber (TX)Webster (FL)WenstrupWestmorelandWhitfieldWilliamsWilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYohoYoung (AK)Young (FL)Young (IN)
NAYS--127
AndrewsBarrowBassBeattyBecerraBeraBishop (GA)BonamiciBrady (PA)Braley (IA)Brownley (CA)ButterfieldCappsCapuanoCardenasCarneyCarson (IN)CartwrightCastor (FL)ChuCicillineClarkeClayCleaverClyburnCohenConnollyCooperCummingsDeFazioDeGetteDeLauroDelBeneDeutchDoggettDoyleDuckworthEdwardsEllisonEstyFarrFattahFrankel (FL)FudgeGallegoGaramendiGreen, AlGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHanabusaHastings (FL)HoltHonda HorsfordHoyerHuffmanJohnson, E. B.KapturKeatingKennedyKildeeKilmerKindLangevinLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)Lee (CA)LevinLewisLipinskiLofgrenLowenthalLujan, Ben Ray (NM)LynchMarkeyMatsuiMcDermottMcGovernMcNerneyMeeksMichaudMiller, GeorgeMooreMurphy (FL)NealNolanPaynePelosiPerlmutterPeters (CA)Peters (MI)PetersonPingree (ME)PocanPolisPrice (NC)RahallRichmondRoybal-AllardRuppersbergerRyan (OH)Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesSchakowskySchiffSchraderScott (VA)SlaughterSmith (WA)Swalwell (CA)TakanoThompson (MS)TierneyTitusTonkoTsongasVan HollenVeaseyVelazquezWasserman SchultzWatersWattWaxmanWelchWilson (FL)Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--12
Brown (FL)CostaCrenshawEmersonFloresJackson LeeKingstonKirkpatrickMoranNapolitanoSchwartzSpeier
{time} 1359
Messrs. TAKANO, NOLAN, HASTINGS of Florida, KENNEDY, PAYNE, Ms. ESTY, and Ms. CLARKE changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. PASTOR of Arizona, COURTNEY, HIMES, CONYERS, NADLER, RANGEL, Ms. ESHOO, and Ms. McCOLLUM changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, January 15, 2013, I was absent during rollcall vote No. 11 due to a death in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on ordering the previous question on H. Res. 23, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 152) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 367, nays 52, not voting 13, as follows:
YEAS--367
AderholtAlexanderAmashAmodeiAndrewsBachmannBachusBarberBarlettaBarrBartonBassBeattyBecerraBenishekBentivolioBilirakisBishop (GA)Bishop (NY)Bishop (UT)BlackBlackburnBlumenauerBonamiciBonnerBoustanyBrady (PA)Brady (TX)BridenstineBrooks (AL)Brooks (IN)Broun (GA)BuchananBucshonBurgessBustosButterfieldCalvertCampCampbellCantorCapitoCardenasCarterCartwrightCassidyCastor (FL)ChabotChaffetzCicillineClarkeCleaverClyburnCobleCoffmanCohenColeCollins (GA)Collins (NY)ConawayConnollyConyersCottonCourtneyCramerCrawfordCrowleyCuellarCulbersonDainesDavis (CA)Davis, DannyDelaneyDeLauroDelBeneDenhamDentDeSantisDesJarlaisDeutchDiaz-BalartDingellDoggettDoyleDuckworthDuffyDuncan (SC)Duncan (TN)EdwardsEllisonEllmersEngelEnyartEshooEstyFarentholdFattahFincherFitzpatrickFleischmannFlemingFloresForbesFortenberryFosterFoxxFrankel (FL)Franks (AZ)FrelinghuysenFudgeGabbardGallegoGaramendiGarciaGardnerGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGoodlatteGosarGowdyGrangerGraves (GA)Graves (MO)GraysonGreen, AlGriffin (AR)Griffith (VA)GrimmGuthrieHahnHallHanabusaHannaHarperHarrisHartzlerHastings (FL)Hastings (WA)Heck (NV)Heck (WA)HensarlingHerrera BeutlerHigginsHimesHoldingHondaHorsfordHoyerHudsonHuelskampHuizenga (MI)HultgrenHunterHurtIsraelIssaJeffriesJenkinsJohnson (GA)Johnson (OH)Johnson, SamJonesJordanJoyceKapturKellyKildeeKilmerKindKing (IA)King (NY)Kinzinger (IL)KlineKusterLabradorLaMalfaLambornLanceLankfordLarsen (WA)Larson (CT)LathamLattaLevinLewisLipinskiLoBiondoLoebsackLofgrenLongLowenthalLoweyLucasLuetkemeyerLujan Grisham (NM)LummisMaffeiMaloney, CarolynMaloney, SeanMarchantMarinoMassieMcCarthy (CA)McCarthy (NY)McCaulMcCollumMcDermottMcHenryMcIntyreMcKeonMcKinleyMcMorris RodgersMeadowsMeehanMeeksMengMesserMicaMiller (FL)Miller (MI)Miller, GaryMiller, GeorgeMooreMoranMullinMulvaneyMurphy (FL)Murphy (PA)NadlerNegrete McLeodNeugebauerNoemNolanNugentNunesNunneleeO'RourkeOlsonOwensPalazzoPallonePascrellPaulsenPaynePearcePelosiPerryPeters (MI)PetersonPetriPittengerPittsPocanPoe (TX)PompeoPoseyPrice (GA)Price (NC)QuigleyRadelRahallRangelReedReichertRenacciRibbleRice (SC)RichmondRigellRobyRoe (TN)Rogers (AL)Rogers (KY)Rogers (MI)RohrabacherRokitaRooneyRos-LehtinenRoskamRossRothfusRoyceRuizRunyanRuppersbergerRushRyan (OH)Ryan (WI)SalmonSanchez, Linda T.Sanchez, LorettaSarbanesScaliseSchakowskySchiffSchneiderSchockSchraderSchweikertScott (VA)Scott, AustinScott, DavidSensenbrennerSerranoSessionsSewell (AL)ShermanShimkusShusterSimpsonSinemaSiresSlaughterSmith (NE)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)SoutherlandStewartStiversStockmanStutzmanSwalwell (CA)TakanoTerryThompson (CA)Thompson (MS)Thompson (PA)ThornberryTiberiTiptonTitusTonkoTsongasTurnerUptonValadaoVargasVeaseyVelaViscloskyWagnerWalbergWaldenWalorskiWalzWatersWattWeber (TX)Webster (FL)WenstrupWestmorelandWhitfieldWilliamsWilson (FL)Wilson (SC)WittmanWolfWomackWoodallYoderYohoYoung (AK)Young (FL)Young (IN)
NAYS--52
BarrowBeraBraley (IA)Brownley (CA)CappsCapuanoCarneyCarson (IN)Castro (TX)ChuClayCooperCummingsDeFazioDeGetteFarrGreen, GeneGrijalvaGutierrezHinojosaHoltHuffmanJohnson, E. B.KeatingKennedyLangevinLee (CA)Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)LynchMarkeyMathesonMatsuiMcClintockMcGovernMcNerneyMichaudNealPastor (AZ)PerlmutterPeters (CA)Pingree (ME)PolisRoybal-AllardShea-PorterSmith (WA)TierneyVan HollenVelazquezWasserman SchultzWaxmanWelchYarmuth
NOT VOTING--13
Brown (FL)CookCostaCrenshawDavis, RodneyEmersonGarrettJackson LeeKingstonKirkpatrickNapolitanoSchwartzSpeier
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote) (Mrs. Capito). There is 1 minute remaining.
{time} 1408
Messrs. KEATING and LYNCH changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
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. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 12, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yea.''
Stated against:
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, January 15, 2013, I was absent during rollcall vote No. 12 due to a death in my family. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on agreeing to the resolution H. Res. 23, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 152) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2013, and for other purposes.
____________________
