[Congressional Record: July 9, 2008 (House)]
[Page H6294-H6305]
ELECTRONIC MESSAGE PRESERVATION ACT
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1318, I call up
the bill (H.R. 5811) to amend title 44, United States Code, to require
preservation of certain electronic records by Federal agencies, to
require a certification and reports relating to Presidential records,
and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5811
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page H6295]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Electronic Communications
Preservation Act''.
SEC. 2. PRESERVATION OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS.
(a) Requirement for Preservation of Electronic
Communications.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 31 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 3108. Electronic communications
``(a) Regulations Required.--Not later than 18 months after
the date of the enactment of this section, the Archivist
shall promulgate regulations governing agency preservation of
electronic communications that are records. Such regulations
shall, at a minimum--
``(1) require the electronic capture, management, and
preservation of such electronic records;
``(2) require that such electronic records are readily
accessible for retrieval through electronic searches;
``(3) establish mandatory minimum functional requirements
and a software certification testing process to certify
electronic records management applications to be used by
Federal agencies for purposes of complying with the
requirements in paragraphs (1) and (2); and
``(4) include timelines for agency compliance with the
regulations that ensure compliance as expeditiously as
practicable but not later than four years after the date of
the enactment of this section.
``(b) Coverage of Other Electronic Records.--To the extent
practicable, the regulations promulgated under subsection (a)
shall also include requirements for the capture, management,
and preservation of other electronic records.
``(c) Compliance by Federal Agencies.--Each Federal agency
shall comply with the regulations promulgated under
subsection (a).
``(d) Review of Regulations Required.--The Archivist shall
periodically review and, as necessary, amend the regulations
promulgated under this section.
``(e) Reports on Implementation of Regulations.--
``(1) Agency report to archivist.--Not later than four
years after the date of the enactment of this section, the
head of each Federal agency shall submit to the Archivist a
report on the agency's compliance with the regulations
promulgated under this section.
``(2) Archivist report to congress.--Not later than 90 days
after receipt of all reports required by paragraph (1), the
Archivist shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives a report on Federal agency compliance with
the regulations promulgated under this section.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
31 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding
after the item relating to section 3107 the following new
item:
``3108. Electronic communications.''.
(b) Definition of Electronic Records Management
Application.--Section 2901 of title 44, United States Code,
is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (14);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (15) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(16) the term `electronic records management application'
means a software system designed to manage electronic records
within an information technology system, including by
categorizing and locating records, identifying records that
are due for disposition, and storing, retrieving, and
disposing of records stored in a repository.''.
SEC. 3. PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS.
(a) Additional Regulations Relating to Presidential
Records.--
(1) In general.--Section 2206 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (4);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (5) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) provisions for establishing standards necessary for
the economical and efficient management of Presidential
records during the President's term of office, including--
``(A) records management controls necessary for the
capture, management, and preservation of electronic
communications;
``(B) records management controls necessary to ensure that
electronic communications are readily accessible for
retrieval through electronic searches; and
``(C) a software certification testing process to certify
the electronic records management application to be used by
the President for the purposes of complying with the
requirements in subparagraphs (A) and (B).''.
(2) Definition.--Section 2201 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(6) The term `electronic records management application'
has the meaning provided in section 2901(16) of this
title.''.
(b) Certification of President's Management of Presidential
Records.--
(1) Certification required.--Chapter 22 of title 44, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
``Sec. 2208. Certification of the President's management of
Presidential records
``(a) Annual Certification.--The Archivist shall annually
certify whether the records management controls established
by the President meet requirements under sections 2203(a) and
2206(5) of this title.
``(b) Report to Congress.--The Archivist shall report
annually to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives on the status of the certification.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
22 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new item:
``2208. Certification of the President's management of Presidential
records.''.
(c) Report to Congress.--Section 2203(f) of title 44,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) One year following the conclusion of a President's
term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms
one year following the conclusion of the last term, the
Archivist shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives a report on--
``(A) the volume and format of Presidential records
deposited into that President's Presidential archival
depository; and
``(B) whether the records management controls of that
President met the requirements under sections 2203(a) and
2206(5) of this title.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1318, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the bill is adopted
and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
H.R. 5811
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Electronic Message
Preservation Act''.
SEC. 2. PRESERVATION OF ELECTRONIC MESSAGES.
(a) Requirement for Preservation of Electronic Messages.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 29 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 2911. Electronic messages
``(a) Regulations Required.--Not later than 18 months after
the date of the enactment of this section, the Archivist
shall promulgate regulations governing agency preservation of
electronic messages that are records. Such regulations shall,
at a minimum--
``(1) require the electronic capture, management, and
preservation of such electronic records in accordance with
the records disposition requirements of chapter 33 of this
title;
``(2) require that such electronic records are readily
accessible for retrieval through electronic searches;
``(3) establish mandatory minimum functional requirements
for electronic records management systems to ensure
compliance with the requirements in paragraphs (1) and (2);
``(4) establish a process to certify that Federal agencies'
electronic records management systems meet the functional
requirements established under paragraph (3); and
``(5) include timelines for agency compliance with the
regulations that ensure compliance as expeditiously as
practicable but not later than four years after the date of
the enactment of this section.
``(b) Coverage of Other Electronic Records.--To the extent
practicable, the regulations promulgated under subsection (a)
shall also include requirements for the capture, management,
and preservation of other electronic records.
``(c) Compliance by Federal Agencies.--Each Federal agency
shall comply with the regulations promulgated under
subsection (a).
``(d) Review of Regulations Required.--The Archivist shall
periodically review and, as necessary, amend the regulations
promulgated under this section.
``(e) Reports on Implementation of Regulations.--
``(1) Agency report to archivist.--Not later than four
years after the date of the enactment of this section, the
head of each Federal agency shall submit to the Archivist a
report on the agency's compliance with the regulations
promulgated under this section.
``(2) Archivist report to congress.--Not later than 90 days
after receipt of all reports required by paragraph (1), the
Archivist shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives a report on Federal agency compliance with
the regulations promulgated under this section.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
29 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding
after the item relating to section 2910 the following new
item:
``2911. Electronic messages.''.
(b) Definitions.--Section 2901 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (14);
[[Page H6296]]
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (15) and
inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(16) the term `electronic messages' means electronic mail
and other electronic messaging systems that are used for
purposes of communicating between individuals; and
``(17) the term `electronic records management system'
means a software system designed to manage electronic records
within an information technology system, including by--
``(A) categorizing and locating records;
``(B) ensuring that records are retained as long as
necessary;
``(C) identifying records that are due for disposition; and
``(D) the storage, retrieval, and disposition of
records.''.
SEC. 3. PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS.
(a) Additional Regulations Relating to Presidential
Records.--
(1) In general.--Section 2206 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (3);
(B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (4) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) provisions for establishing standards necessary for
the economical and efficient management of Presidential
records during the President's term of office, including--
``(A) records management controls necessary for the
capture, management, and preservation of electronic messages;
``(B) records management controls necessary to ensure that
electronic messages are readily accessible for retrieval
through electronic searches; and
``(C) a process to certify the electronic records
management system to be used by the President for the
purposes of complying with the requirements in subparagraphs
(A) and (B).''.
(2) Definition.--Section 2201 of title 44, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraphs:
``(5) The term `electronic messages' has the meaning
provided in section 2901(16) of this title.
``(6) The term `electronic records management system' has
the meaning provided in section 2901(17) of this title.''.
(b) Certification of President's Management of Presidential
Records.--
(1) Certification required.--Chapter 22 of title 44, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following
new section:
``Sec. 2208. Certification of the President's management of
Presidential records
``(a) Annual Certification.--The Archivist shall annually
certify whether the records management controls established
by the President meet requirements under sections 2203(a) and
2206(5) of this title.
``(b) Report to Congress.--The Archivist shall report
annually to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives on the status of the certification.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections for chapter
22 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding at
the end the following new item:
``2208. Certification of the President's management of Presidential
records.''.
(c) Report to Congress.--Section 2203(f) of title 44,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) One year following the conclusion of a President's
term of office, or if a President serves consecutive terms
one year following the conclusion of the last term, the
Archivist shall submit to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform of the House of
Representatives a report on--
``(A) the volume and format of Presidential records
deposited into that President's Presidential archival
depository; and
``(B) whether the records management controls of that
President met the requirements under sections 2203(a) and
2206(5) of this title.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect one year after the date of the enactment of
this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Clay) and
the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Davis) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri.
General Leave
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to recognize and
yield 5 minutes to the chairman of the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform, Mr. Waxman.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5811, the
Electronic Message Preservation Act of 2008, and I want to thank
Representatives Clay and Hodes for their commitment to oversight and
accountability and for their hard work on this bill.
The Electronic Message Preservation Act amends both the Federal
Records Act and the Presidential Records Act to ensure the preservation
of e-mail records.
In recent years, e-mail has become an essential form of communication
and a key source of information about Federal decision-making. Despite
the importance of these records, serious deficiencies exist in the way
e-mails are preserved both by the White House and Federal agencies. The
preservation of these records must be improved if historians are to
have access to a complete record of government decision-making and if
Congress is to perform needed oversight.
Under President Bush, the White House has allowed senior officials to
use nongovernmental e-mail accounts maintained by the Republican
National Committee for official business. An investigation by the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform found that many of these
e-mails have been destroyed. Other e-mails have been lost because the
White House relied for 5 years on an e-mail archiving system described
as ``primitive'' by a former White House information technology
officer.
While the problems have been particularly acute under the Bush
administration, other administrations, including President Clinton,
have also encountered problems preserving e-mail records.
To ensure that these Presidential records are appropriately
preserved, H.R. 5811 directs the Archivist to establish standards for
the capture, maintenance and preservation of e-mail records and to
certify that the White House is meeting these standards.
Committee investigations have also revealed that Federal agencies are
inconsistent in the management of e-mail records. Most agencies still
rely on an unreliable ``print and file'' process to preserve e-mail
records rather than preserving them electronically.
GAO, in a report released yesterday, found that senior agency
officials are not compliant with key e-mail preservation requirements.
GAO reviewed the practices of senior agency officials and determined
that the e-mails were not retained in adequate record keeping systems,
making the e-mail records easier to lose or delete and harder to find
and use.
This bill would modernize agency record keeping. The bill directs the
Archivist to issue regulations mandating that within 4 years of the
enactment of this legislation, all Federal agencies manage and preserve
their e-mail records electronically.
Mr. Speaker, some have said that this bill is about preserving
history. And it is. But it also is about our constitutional
responsibility for oversight and for holding this and any
administration accountable. Access to Presidential and Federal records
helps us do our job. I urge all Members to support this bill.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act would
require the preservation of certain electronic records by Federal
agencies and certification in reports by the National Archives relating
to Presidential records.
Why are we taking up this bill? We have been out of session for more
than a week. We have been getting ready for a month-long recess, and
this is the best they can offer to discuss on the House floor? This is
the major bill of the week? Not the housing crisis, not gasoline
prices, not retirement security for baby boomers, we are here today to
talk about preservation of electronic records in Federal agencies.
{time} 1615
This is the best they can come up with?
And though the answer to that is appropriately ``yes,'' this bill
doesn't take the right approach. As I said many times, secure
information is the lifeblood of effective government. And more often
than not, in today's society, information takes the form of electronic
transmissions and e-mails.
I have personally spent years focusing on government-wide information
management and policy and have consistently encouraged the Federal
Government to continue to embrace digital government, expand e-
government initiatives and find more ways to leverage information
technology.
[[Page H6297]]
With more and more of the government's business conducted
electronically, we need to make sure our records are protected and
preserved. Effective government is essential, and an effective
government depends not only on secure information but on an accurate
record.
The majority substitute amendment at markup addressed certain
technical definitional concerns that we raised. It clarified that the
legislation would apply to electronic messages rather than electronic
communications and provided a workable definition of ``electronic
messages.'' Similarly, based on comments from the National Archives
that the term ``electronic records management applications'' may limit
agencies' abilities to adopt changing technologies, the amendment
clarified that agencies and the White House should rely on broadly
defined electronic records management systems to manage records.
At that time, I urged the chairman to continue to refine this bill to
make sure that we got it right on issues like managing the cost of
preserving unknown, but presumably vast, electronic databases, how to
include emerging media in a system, and the functional parameters of
any requirement that voluminous and varied data be ``searchable.''
Those issues have not been addressed in any meaningful way in the
markup.
In addition, several issues raised by the Archives and the White
House remain unresolved as well. For example, Archives believes that
the annual certification requirement is unprecedented and would be a
significant departure from accepted and long-standing practice. Also,
there are several clarifications of terms and definitions asked for by
the Archives which are not addressed in the bill we're taking up today.
In addition, among other things, the White House views the bill as
overturning the historical distinction in law between agency records
and Presidential records, and the Statement of Administration Policy
issued yesterday reiterates the White House's veto threat.
Now, we have to remember the White House in this case is protecting
the ``institution,'' not the Bush administration. This bill doesn't
affect the current administration. And our interests here are
institutional as well. But if we want to legislate, we should do it
appropriately and thoughtfully, not in some needless rush to somehow
punish an administration that won't even be affected by this bill.
I'm not certain that this bill is the appropriate legislation, but I
do believe legislation is necessary in this area. And I want to work
with Chairman Waxman and the White House and the Archives on a bill
that will give appropriate guidelines to agencies and the White House
on preserving electronic records.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New
Hampshire (Mr. Hodes).
Mr. HODES. I thank my distinguished colleague, Mr. Clay, for his
leadership along with Mr. Waxman on this bill.
I rise today in strong support of H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message
Preservation Act. My colleague from Virginia has said that the
Archivist suggests that the requirement for certification under this
bill is unprecedented. Well, this bill is filed, in part, as a response
to White House practices that have been unprecedented and show clearly
the need for this legislation. The documents, which include e-mails,
correspondence, memos produced by an administration belong not to the
President but to the people of the United States.
This bill will help ensure that these records are preserved properly
for our future generations, and more importantly, this bill will help
lift the veil of secrecy that has fallen over our government under this
administration.
Every day the President and his staff generate thousands of documents
on the issues confronting our Nation. These documents contain important
insights into the way that our government is making decisions that
affect our lives. Why are those decisions being made? Who benefits? Who
gets to influence our government leaders?
We have serious concerns about the way the White House is preserving
these documents, or not preserving them, and whether the true purpose
of not preserving them is to hide the dealings from the American
people. Through the investigations by the House Oversight and
Government Reform Committee, we have learned that the White House lost
hundreds of days of e-mail records between the years 2003 and 2005.
Additionally, it appears that senior officials in the White House have
been found to be skirting the historical record laws by using an e-mail
system provided by the Republican National Committee for most of their
e-mail correspondence.
For example, Karl Rove, former Deputy Chief of Staff, is said to have
used the RNC system for 95 percent of his e-mail correspondence to
which the American people will never have access. Under the
Presidential Records Act, the President has the sole authority to
manage his records during his time in office. The General
Accountability Office found that this administration did not keep
records as it was required to.
So the question becomes: What were they trying to hide? It is no
surprise that the administration that leaked Valerie Plame's covert
identity and organized propaganda to promote a war in Iraq is evading
record-keeping practices to hide information from the American people.
This is arguably partisan politics at its worse, and the only remedy is
more accountability and more sunshine. The Electronic Message
Preservation Act will help to make sure that these important records
are kept and help shine light on what our government is doing and why.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to enter for the Record a letter supporting
this legislation that brings accountability back to the White House.
The letter was signed by a number of groups that advocate for an open,
transparent government, including the Government Accountability Project
and openthegovernment.org.
Mr. Speaker, the Bush administration has been one of the most
secretive and least transparent and most closed in American history. We
still don't know what was said in closed-door meetings with Big Oil
executives to set our energy policy, and today, we suffer from record-
high gas prices. The secrecy in the White House has prevented officials
in the White House from being held accountable to the American people.
The Electronic Message Preservation Act will reform White House
record keeping and allow the American people to have confidence that
future administrations will not be able to hide the truth from the
people of this country or from history.
July 9, 2008.
Hon. Henry Waxman
Chair, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Waxman: We are writing to support the passage
of H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act.
Investigations and reports by your Committee and by several
nonprofits document the significant deficiencies in the
preservation of e-mail by the federal government. H.R. 5811
directs the Archivist of the United States to establish
standards for the capture, management, and preservation of
White House e-mails and other electronic communications and
to issue regulations requiring agencies to preserve
electronic communications in an electronic format. This
legislation demonstrates that Congress is paying attention to
this serious issue, and taking steps to begin addressing the
systemic problems with electronic records in general and
electronic communications records that the federal agencies
and the White House have failed for too long to address.
Thank you for your leadership on this critical aspect of
government management and accountability. We look forward to
working with you on this and other issues in the future.
Sincerely,
American Association of Law Libraries, American Library
Association, Association of Research Libraries, Common
Cause, Essential Information, Freedom of Information,
Oklahoma, Government Accountability Project (GAP),
iSolon.org, Liberty Coalition, National Coalition
Against Censorship, National Coalition for History,
Mine Safety and Health News, and Minnesota Coalition on
Government Information.
Mississippi Center for Freedom of Information, National
Freedom of Information Coalition, National Security
Archives, National Press Club, 9/11 Research Project,
Open TheGovernment.org, Peacefire, People For the
American Way, Project on Government Oversight (POGO),
[[Page H6298]]
ReadtheBill.org Foundation, Society of Professional
Journalists, and Washington Coalition for Open
Government.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Let me just note that as the chairman noted in
his opening remarks, this was not just a Bush administration issue,
this was a Clinton administration issue as well. Over 2 million e-mails
were lost from the Vice-President's office, according to the GAO.
There has been a great deal of attention paid to the White House e-
mails, and the chairman and I are both working to make sure we can
preserve all the records from this administration. We've had a long-
going investigation on the committee, and a lot of Bush bashing here
today has become a personal hobby or even a crusade for some.
I understand the desire to pass legislation and score points, but I
hope my colleagues recognize that this bill does nothing today to this
administration. This doesn't take effect until the next administration.
It's effective 1 year after enactment. So keep in mind these provisions
affect the next President and the next administration for which there
is no guidance for the White House, and that's why the need for
legislation is there.
Our objection and concern, and something we hope to work with the
majority on, is that this legislation is currently too broad and it
gives unlimited authority to the Archivist who doesn't even want it.
There's got to be a better medium to be able to do that. But if we're
going to be in the games of blasting the administration which this will
not even apply to, we can play the game, too.
I would yield at this point 4 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).
Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for
yielding, and I rise in opposition to this bill for the reasons stated
by the gentleman from Virginia. We could have had a bill here with
bipartisan support dealing with the problems as they truly exist, but
instead, we have this bill on the floor.
The gentleman that just spoke on the other side of the aisle talked
about the fact that we had unprecedented action by this administration
and therefore we need to act. The fact of the matter is that what is
unprecedented, what is unprecedented is the tremendous increase that we
have had in the cost of gasoline to average Americans back home.
I just got back from my district. I had two town hall meetings. I met
with people at a local gas station. I talked with many, many other
people. They didn't want to know about what we were going to do about
electronic record keeping, and I do disappoint the gentleman. That was
not on the tip of their tongues. That was not in the back of their
brain. They never even thought about it. Frankly, they think we could
do that some time else. As a matter of fact, since this bill doesn't
take place until another year, we could do it another time.
What we should be doing here is responding to the American people who
are saying, When are you people going to get your act together?
So I came back hoping that I could find the electronic
communications, the secret e-mails of the Democratic leadership as to
what we're going to do about energy. And what I found was the statement
by one of the aides to one of the top Democrat leaders, and this is
their energy plan: Right now, our strategy is drive small cars and wait
for the wind. Drive small cars and wait for the wind.
I hope everybody across this land understands what the Democratic
plan for energy appears to be. It basically means, listen, to those of
you back home, sit down and shut up; you don't know what you're talking
about. We've got more important things to do. We have to rush back and
deal with the electronic record keeping bill because that is what is
going to be most important to the American people.
Now, I don't know about you, but I haven't found a single person in
my district who drives with a wind-driven car. And I'm all for wind
energy, and I'm all for solar energy. They want to know when we're
going to do something about bringing the cost down.
Now soon, we might hear from the Democratic side they're going to
bring a bill to suspend the laws of economics, and they're going to
tell us that supply and demand no longer prevail. Maybe that's the new
magic we're waiting for. But that won't satisfy the people in my
district. I'm in a small community in the foothills. The people I met
in the Delta, in Rio Vista, the folks I met in Citrus Heights, the
folks I was talking to in the Sacramento area, they demand that we do
something now. And what we ought to be doing is drill here. That's in
America. Drill now. Not 10 years from now. And pay less.
Now you can hear all the arguments that it's not going to make any
difference. If it's not going to make any difference, why do we hear
from the Speaker of the House that their first step with dealing with
this is to empty the Strategic Petroleum Reserve claiming that that's
going to make a big impact on the world market? At least they're saying
that supply does matter. If supply really matters, then let's not tell
the American people, as we hear now from the Democrats, drive small
cars and wait for the wind, or as we hear from the Senator from
Illinois who said that he's not so upset about the price of gasoline
going up, it's that it went up so fast. It would have been better for
us if the price of gasoline had gone up more slowly and continued on.
That's not an energy policy.
So while I respect the work of the chairman of the subcommittee and
the committee on this issue, and as important as electronic message
preservation is, it pales, it pales compares to the energy needs of the
American people. And certainly we can do better. We ought to demand we
do better. We ought to do better or not go home at all.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, to get back to the subject matter before the
House, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman).
{time} 1630
Mr. WAXMAN. Thank you very much for yielding.
The issue of energy is very much related to this question of e-mails
and the preservation of the records. Now, why do we have our energy
problems in this country? Suddenly Republicans are saying,
notwithstanding the fact that they have run this government for 7\1/2\
years, the Democrats, the Democrats are at fault.
Well, let me point out that as soon as President Bush came into
office, he asked Vice President Cheney to chair an energy task force,
and they operated in secrecy. We don't know exactly who they heard from
or what they were asked to do, but we know that the legislation that
the administration requested from the Congress was for billions of
dollars to be given to the oil, gas, coal, and nuclear industries,
industries that are making record profits.
Now, at that same time, those of us from California were having a
very difficult situation because energy wholesalers, including Enron,
were holding back supplies in order to drive up the price, and we all
met with Vice President Cheney. And you know what he said to us, The
reason you're having high prices of electricity is because of
environmental laws. And we said, No, it's because we're being taken to
the cleaners by Enron and other energy wholesalers. And he said, No,
it's not true. Well, when we did our investigations on Enron, we found
out it was exactly what was happening.
Now, the point I want to make is we don't know what went on with this
administration's deliberations for energy policy. We know that they've
all failed. We wouldn't have the high price of gas today if they had
done their job of getting us off our reliance on oil because we're so
dependent now on bringing in oil from overseas. Even if we drill every
possibility in the United States, we'd still be importing oil from
places that are very vulnerable and are very hostile to us.
But this energy task force, and this administration, proposed
benefits for the oil companies and no policies to help us get out of
that dependence on foreign oil and domestic oil, to look for
alternatives, to look for conservation, to do something other than
drill, drill, drill, and make the oil companies more profitable.
And when we tried to find out what went on, we couldn't get the e-
mails. We couldn't look at the e-mails. And why? Well, do you know why?
Because they weren't using e-mails from the government of the United
States while they were doing government business.
[[Page H6299]]
They were using the e-mails of the Republican National Committee. Are
they doing Party business or are they doing government business?
That's one of the reasons we need this bill, and we need to get away
from this partisanship on the question of high oil prices.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, let me just note that, once
again, getting back to the legislation at hand, which has not been
discussed recently, the Archivist, in testimony before the committee,
noted that the cost of this bill could be billions of dollars before
all is said and done. That money would come out of agency programs.
That's money not spent on securing information. That's money for an
open-ended and poorly defined initiative.
We want to better define this and work with the majority to do that,
something I thought we had agreed to in the committee. We need to get a
better hand on the price tag involved before we move forward.
I yield at this point 3 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Hayes).
Mr. HAYES. I thank the gentleman from Virginia for yielding, and, Mr.
Speaker, I rise today to confirm what I'm hearing here.
We've got an energy crisis. Gas prices, food prices are through the
roof, but the answer is to investigate. People at home in Raeford,
North Carolina, and Laurinburg and Albemarle are telling me: Congress,
legislate. Do what you need to do to get the price of gasoline down.
But I hear today we're going to investigate future Presidents and how
they communicate. My concern, Mr. Speaker, as I listen to my
constituents carefully at home is they're going to examine the records,
electronic and otherwise, of this Congress, and they will see that we
failed to legislate and do the four things that we need to do to drive
down the price of gas.
Expand our nuclear capacity, it's clean. We need to have tar sands.
We need to have coal turned into liquid and burn cleanly. We need to
expand our refinery capacity because, as we import refined product, it
costs us even more. And oh, by the way, exploration and drilling in
areas where we have known reserves is something that we could stand
together on the steps of this Capitol today and say we were going to
do, and people around the world who watch signals, telling us where the
price of energy is going, would see that America, the richest, the
best, and the most powerful Nation in the world, is serious about
becoming dependent of energy.
But no, Democrats, Republicans, I hear it off the floor of this
House, Democrats want to do that, Republicans want to do that, yellow
dogs, Blue Dogs, but the big dogs, the Democrat leadership, refuse to
allow a vote on this floor that will do the four things that I'm
talking about.
It's even in our own internal newspaper. It was there yesterday. Read
it and weep. We need to act. We have the ability, the capability, and
the capacity to do that. And by the way, we must not, as we take the
steps we need to take, let happen what has happened before, and that
is, as we drive gas prices down, and we can--and there's a bill with my
name on it that says any money that we derive from additional leases
will be used for research and development for alternative sources of
energy which are crucial.
So, Mr. Speaker, legislate, do it now, get gas prices down.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to my good
friend from Illinois (Mr. Davis).
Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend Chairman Waxman
and Representative Clay for their recognition of this serious
deficiency that we have in the way that we handle White House e-mails.
You know, the more I listen to this debate, the more convinced I am
that we need H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act, and
I'm convinced because even as we talk about energy, even as we talk
about the solution to problems, and even as we talk about Blue Dogs and
yellow dogs and big dogs, it seems to me that we ought to be able to
know what the conversations are about in the White House. It seems to
me that we ought to be able to look back historically and find out what
was being discussed, what was being planned, what the deliberations
were.
And as long as the level of secrecy exists, and I don't care which
administration it is, then it means that the public does not know, and
this bill simply opens up information and opportunity for the public to
know.
I support it.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I would yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Virginia.
I rise in opposition to this. Here we are talking about e-mails from
the White House and the executive branch when all we're hearing from
the people in America is you've got to help us with energy prices.
Now, I realize there may be, if you look at enough e-mails from the
White House, you may find out they're getting the same messages that
all of us are getting: help us with energy prices, we're desperate.
Now, what I was hearing was from retailers, from restaurateurs, from
people that are providing jobs, from people who have jobs and they're
hanging on just by the skin of their teeth. They're union jobs,
hardworking folks like that, that are just trying to make ends meet,
and now they're at the end point where they're having to use their
credit cards to pay for gas to get to the job so they can get paid so
they can pay down their credit card enough to buy gas the next month.
I'm seeing more and more people running out of gas on the interstate.
They're getting desperate. And what is so sickening to me is knowing
that in the last year all these different resources are becoming so
much more clear that we have.
You know, we have been told, some of us, that there may be 900
billion to 1 trillion barrels of oil left in the entire Middle East,
and then we hear that from that black shale that's in Utah, Colorado,
and Wyoming, that we could recover three times that much at least in
barrels of oil that could supply this Nation.
We've heard for all these decades now, for 3 decades, gee, let's
don't go after ANWR, it will take 10, 15 years. Well, the latest
information, as my friend from Alaska has pointed out, is there's a
pipeline 74 miles away. It can be flowing to this country, this
continental U.S., within 3 years.
And when you think about the Outer Continental Shelf, we may have
more natural gas out there than any country in the world. We have been
so blessed with natural resources, and yet, instead, we're making our
citizens struggle just day-to-day to make ends meet. We're losing jobs.
People are laying people off.
And I know--and I said this over a year ago--I know we have friends
across the aisle who believe that perhaps even $20 a gallon gasoline
would be a good thing because it would save the planet because people
would quit using it. And as Al Gore said, the internal combustion
engine was the worst invention ever created for the destruction of man,
something along those lines.
And the fact is, we do need to move to the alternative energy
sources. We need to do that. But it's going to be 30, 40 years before
we can get there, and in the meantime, it appears now we have enough
natural resources, we could tell some of these other countries to kiss
our backside and we don't need your fuel anymore. We can do it with
what we have ourselves, and we ought to be doing that.
We ought to be doing coal-to-liquid. We ought to be using ANWR, and
what's more, if you look at the royalties that could be obtained from
all of that wealth of resources, we could cut taxes and create some of
the programs that my friends across the aisle want to do. Do all of
that with the massive revenue that would come in. Everybody would win,
but until we get realistic and want to help folks, all we're going to
be doing is talking about e-mails.
So let's do the right thing by the people that send us here. Let's
help them with their energy costs. It is getting desperate, and it's
time to put that word and all that wind being created--you talk about
carbon emissions. There's no worse carbon emitter than this floor of
the House of Representatives, gosh, with all the wind being generated.
But let's do something constructive and put it into action.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, before returning to the subject matter before
[[Page H6300]]
the House, I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
I'm pleased to join my colleagues in the consideration of H.R. 5811,
and H.R. 5811 seeks to modernize the requirements of the Federal
Records Act and the Presidential Records Act to ensure the preservation
of e-mails and other electronic messages.
This bill was introduced by Chairman Waxman, Representative Holt and
myself on April 15 and reported as amended from the committee on June
11. I want to thank Chairman Waxman and Representative Holt for their
dedication to this important issue.
Now, my friend from Virginia and others have made some statements
that I would like to refute, and one is that this bill strikes a
careful balance. It's not going after this administration, but the Act
itself recognizes the President's authority to carry out the day-to-day
management of his records. This bill preserves that framework.
The Federal Records Act gives the Archivist the authority to conduct
inspection of agencies' record keeping programs, but the Presidential
Records Act does not include such language. This bill does not give the
Archivist any new authority to conduct inspections of Presidential
records. And also, the Archivist has the expertise and the
responsibility to determine how records should be managed and preserved
and to certify that it is done properly.
The status quo of having those at the White House make the decisions
has not worked, and so, therefore, Mr. Speaker, we know that this bill
is needed. And that's why we have it under consideration on the floor
today.
{time} 1645
I urge my colleagues to safeguard our Nation's rich history.
Therefore, I urge swift passage of the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Let me again just say to my friend from
Missouri and the chairman of the committee, we appreciate their efforts
on this.
We all agree that this initiative has to be addressed, that from
previous administrations from both parties there have been shortcomings
in our ability to adequately preserve electronic records, that these
administrations don't have the proper guidance from the outset. We
recognize that this bill will not affect the current administration, it
will affect the next administration.
I think the frustration on this side of the aisle comes from the fact
that, although this is an important issue, that the most important
issue in this country right now are the rising cost of fuels. And we
can't have a debate on that because the leadership on the other side
refuses to allow us votes on more domestic exploration. And the only
meaningful energy debate that we can have on the House floor comes on
this bill, to expand the National Archives' ability to preserve
electronic records from the executive branch.
This is a great frustration, I think, not just on this side, but on
the other side as well, to discuss this issue in a bipartisan manner,
to debate this issue, to make the requisite compromises and
accommodations to address this problem in a bipartisan manner, to
include more alternative fuel options and more research and development
in these areas, but also to include more domestic production and more
conservation efforts. I think they're all part of it. And we are
sitting here on, I think, issues that are important, but not nearly as
important as the issues we're all hearing about when we go home.
To that end, I yield 4 minutes to the former chairman of the
Transportation Committee, the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young).
(Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
This is an issue. And the frustration on this side--and it should be
on that side--is on the lack of an energy policy that only Congress can
solve.
I know there's a lot of talk. The Speaker just sent a letter to the
President to use the SPR, as if that's going to solve the problem.
That's not going to solve the problem. In fact, it will make the
problem worse. We have to address the supply side of this issue, and
we're not doing it.
The last time we produced any new energy on this floor was 1973 when
we had an embargo and we had no fuel, so we passed the Trans-Alaskan
Pipeline. In 1976, we produced the first barrel of oil to America from
Alaska. In 3 years, we built an 800-mile-long pipeline 48 inches
around. We built the terminus point in Valdez, and I wear that today on
my tie. We drilled the wells and we built the collection lines to
deliver that oil. And we got as high as 2.2 million barrels a day to
the United States of America because we were under the threat at that
time, the same threat we are today, of control by overseas forces, not
forces of military fact, but in fact those that control our supply. At
that time, we were importing 39 percent of our oil from overseas.
Today, it's 70 percent. And we have done nothing in this Congress to
relieve that problem.
Your constituents are paying for it today. There is no shortage of
fuel. There is a high cost of fuel because we don't have the domestic
capability of providing it. We need to have this debate on the floor.
Let us stand up and be counted on both sides of the aisle who is for
domestic production.
There is no shortage of fossil fuel in the United States of America.
We have an abundance of it. We've had the lack of will to produce it.
It was easier to buy it abroad. We just had a sale in Alaska, other
than ANWR, in Chukchi Sea about $2.6 billion from an oil company to try
to develop it because there is a lot of argument on that side, well,
they're not drilling the acreage they have now. You know why they're
not drilling? Because your friends and your allies are filing suits not
allowing them to drill, suits that say, oh, there's going to be polar
bears affected or there's going to be some little other type of animal
affected. In the meantime, your constituents are paying that $4.62 a
gallon. Yes, the oil did drop yesterday, but it will go up tomorrow and
the next day because we are not supplying the oil to our people through
the domestic source.
We have the shale that was mentioned in Utah and Wyoming and all the
other areas, Colorado; huge amounts of oil. We have more coal in the
United States than there is all around the world and we're not
developing it. We have not had the will to develop it because this
Congress sits by and talks about saving records of the past
administration. Your bill may not do that, but this is what this is all
about. And I'm saying that doesn't produce any gas. That doesn't help
the truck driver. It costs $2,000 to fill up one Peterbilt truck that
delivers your food to your grocery store. Wait until that price starts
hitting the prices in the grocery store, and it already has. The
harvester who harvests the grain today now is paying sometimes as high
as $4 and $5 for diesel fuel to run it. That's going to affect you,
too.
We have not acted on this floor. And the responsible way of
addressing the issue--now, some people will say we'll have the other
forms of energy, wind and hippy-hoppies and that type of thing to solve
the problem. But the reality is fossil fuels drive objects. It's the
trucks, the planes, the trains, and the automobiles that deliver to
your homes and your hospitals and your schools, and we must have that.
Yes, we can go into nuclear. Yes, we can go into wind. Yes, we can go
into solar. And we can go to geothermal and hydro. We can do all those
things and we should. My bill, H.R. 6107, to open ANWR--this, by the
way, 12 times it passed this House floor. We won't have a vote on it
this year, but we should have a vote. The one time we got it out of the
Senate and Bill Clinton vetoed it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I yield the gentleman 2 additional minutes.
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Bill Clinton vetoed it because he said it will
take 10 years to produce it; ANWR, 10 years. That was 13 years ago. If
we had built it then, we would have it pumping today over 1 million
barrels a day, but no, he didn't do that.
Let me stress again, ANWR is, in fact, 74 miles away from the
existing pipeline, 800 miles long, a terminus point and all the
infrastructure in place, and we built that in 3 years. And if you don't
think we can build a pipeline 74 miles away and drill the oil and
[[Page H6301]]
get it to that pipeline in 3 years, you're not studying this fact. It
can be done for the American people.
I'm asking you on both sides, let's drill, let's develop our domestic
sources for the good of America, the good of the Nation, and make sure
we can go forth.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, because of the inability to
figure what the costs of this are, and that's from the Archivist's own
testimony, money will be taken from other parts of the budget to pay
for this until we can get a handle on it, including information
security. And I would remind my friends that secure information is the
lifeblood of effective government.
We all know there have been a wide range of incidents involving data
loss or theft, privacy breaches and security incidents at Federal
agencies. The protection of personal information at Federal agencies
presents unique challenges. These recent data breach incidents
demonstrate the importance of strengthening the laws and the rules
protecting personal information held by Federal agencies.
And we can't address these issues after the fact. The evolving nature
of cyber threats requires us to continually look for ways to improve
government information privacy and security. We need to be proactive,
not retroactive. I am concerned that the costs of this bill, being as
nebulous as they are, without the regulations written and the like,
will draw away from some of these other areas.
In summary, let me just say our concerns at this point are our
inability to pin down the cost, which could be in the billions of
dollars. The Archivist testified that the cost could be in the
billions. The unlimited and unclear authority to the Archivist--who
doesn't really want this authority in this particular case--to define
it, these are issues that we can work on as it moves through. There are
issues that need to be worked on. It's an issue that needs to be
addressed. But I'm not comfortable with the way the legislation reads
today.
Finally, we have to think about what we're doing here in shifting the
Archivist from an advisory and collaborative role to that of a
regulatory enforcer in a role that they have never had in the past.
Again, I think the legislation is a step forward in many ways, but it
needs some refinement. We had hoped to be able to offer some
amendments, but we just got word last Wednesday or Thursday this bill
was on the floor. I didn't arrive back in town until Tuesday, when the
deadline had expired, so we were not able, from our point of view--I
was incommunicado--to address this, not having the advance warning, or
we might have been able to address these through the amendment process.
At this point, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Peterson), who has been waiting patiently.
Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I've been listening to the
discussion and the debate here. Having served in local government and
State government and here in Washington, I find it unbelievable that
we're talking about an issue that came from an energy discussion of the
beginning of the Bush administration's e-mail records.
Back home people are struggling--and I live in a big rural area--to
drive their cars. They're soon going to find out that natural gas
prices are probably going to double by fall and the costs to heat their
homes are going to double. My schools are going to pay twice as much to
transport their children. They're going to pay twice as much to heat
those schools. My hospitals are going to pay twice as much to heat
those facilities and to transport patients. I'm losing the air service
at my rural airports because you can't fly small planes with these fuel
prices.
This country's economic base is crumbling as we talk here today
because of exploding energy costs. We are not going to live in the
country we were born in. Opportunity is not going to abound. Americans
are frightened and concerned, and we're worried about e-mail records of
a meeting 8 years ago.
I think our priorities are backwards. We passed an energy bill in `05
that was timid. I think this administration has been timid. We've had
three administrations in a row that locked up our Outer Continental
Shelf, the only modern country in the world to do that. We've had 14
Congresses in a row that have locked up the Outer Continental Shelf
where there's huge resources.
I'm for all the wind we can produce. I'm for all the solar we can
absorb. But if we double them both in the next 5 years, we're less than
1 percent of our energy need, and our energy need is growing more than
1 percent a year, so it can't even fill that gap.
Whether we like it or not, we need fossil fuels. We need coal, we
need oil, we need gas--clean, green natural gas. I can't believe that
people are afraid of drilling a gas well.
Natural gas is driving the blue collar jobs out of this country as we
speak. Dow Chemical used to do 64 percent of its business in this
country in 2000; they're now at 34 percent of their business in this
country. They paid $8 billion for gas in `02; they now pay $8 billion
in natural gas quarterly. They can't afford to be here, folks.
Americans can't afford to heat their older homes. They can't afford
to drive their older cars. One hundred small trucking companies are
going out of business every week because they can't afford fuel oil
prices.
The working poor of this country are being destroyed economically.
The middle class are going to become poor. Most people in this Congress
won't feel much pain. They can afford to pay these prices. But I want
to tell you, my neighbors can't. A young lady that lives besides me
drives 36 miles to work. She makes $11 an hour.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania. She pays $200 a month to heat her home,
and she can't afford a doubling of those prices and she can't afford to
drive to work. I can tell you story after story after story.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I think we have discussed this,
and more, over the last few days.
I would just note that the frustration of some of our Members comes
from the fact that we have massive issues facing this country;
retirement of baby boomers and what this does to Federal budget
deficits in the out years, and what this means to our future
generation; American competitiveness, immigration, health care, and
energy costs, and we're not dealing with them. We're kind of fiddling,
sitting on this until after the election, and the public wants action
now.
I would say this though, I would say to our chairman, he is moving
ahead with items under his agenda. I appreciate him moving on this. I
hope to work with him in the future, should this be successful, to try
to strengthen this bill as it moves through.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, this bill addresses a real problem, and that
is a government operating in secret. And it requires agencies to
electronically preserve e-mail records.
Additionally, the bill has new requirements for the maintenance and
preservation of e-mail records that are sent and received by
Presidential advisers. The bill calls on the Archivist of the United
States to establish standards for the management and preservation of
these records.
It's ironic, Mr. Speaker, that the other side has talked about energy
during this entire debate when this administration's energy policy was
conducted in secret, which may explain why the country is in the
position it is in now because there was no openness to the policy, and
this certainly wasn't the correct path to take.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I hope we can go on and pass this bill and
open up our government for public perusal.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of
this legislation. H.R. 5811, the Electronic Message Preservation Act,
requires the preservation of certain electronic records by Federal
agencies, requires a certification and reports relating to Presidential
records, and requires that the information be readily retrieved through
electronic searches.
E-mail, because of its nature, presents challenges to records
management. First, the information contained in e-mail records is not
uniform: it may concern any subject or function and document various
types of transactions. As a result, in many cases, decisions on which
e-mail messages are records must
[[Page H6302]]
be made individually. Second, the transmission data associated with an
e-mail record--including information about the senders and receivers of
messages, the date and time the message was sent, and any attachments
to the messages--may be crucial to understanding the context of the
record. Third, a given message may be part of an exchange of messages
between two or more people within or outside an agency, or even of a
string (sometimes branching) of many messages sent and received on a
given topic. In such cases, agency staff need to decide which message
or messages should be considered records and who is responsible for
storing them in a recordkeeping system. Finally, the large number of
federal e-mail users and high volume of e- mails increase the
management challenge.
Preliminary results of GAO's ongoing review of e-mail records
management at four agencies show that not all are meeting the
challenges posed by e-mail records. Although the four agencies' e-mail
records management policies addressed, with a few exceptions, the
regulatory requirements, these requirements were not always met for the
senior officials whose e-mail practices were reviewed. Each of the four
agencies generally followed a print and file process to preserve e-mail
records in paper-based recordkeeping capabilities. (Among other things,
a recordkeeping system allows related records to be grouped into
classifications according to their business purposes.) Unless they have
recordkeeping capabilities, e-mail systems may not permit easy and
timely retrieval of groupings of related records or individual records.
Further, keeping large numbers of record and nonrecord messages in e-
mail systems potentially increases the time and effort needed to search
for information in response to a business need or an outside inquiry,
such as a Freedom of Information Act request. Factors contributing to
this practice where the lack of adequate staff support and the volume
of e-mail received. In addition, agencies had not ensured that
officials and their responsible staff received training in
recordkeeping requirements for e-mail. If recordkeeping requirements
are not followed, agencies cannot be assured that records, including
information essential to protecting the rights of individuals and the
Federal Government, are being adequately identified and preserved. H.R.
5811 ensures that these records will be kept properly. I support this
legislation and urge my colleagues to do likewise.
{time} 1700
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1318, the previous question is ordered
on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit Offered by Mr. Davis of Virginia
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. I am, in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Tom Davis moves to recommit the bill H.R. 5811 to the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith,
with the following amendment:
At the end of the bill, add the following new sections:
SEC. 4. PROCEDURES TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED REMOVAL OF
CLASSIFIED RECORDS FROM NATIONAL ARCHIVES.
(a) In General.--The Archivist of the United States shall
prescribe internal procedures to prevent the unauthorized
removal of classified records from the National Archives and
Records Administration or the destruction or damage of such
records, including when such records are accessed or searched
electronically. The procedures shall include the following
prohibitions:
(1) No person, other than personnel of the National
Archives and Records Administration (in this section
hereafter referred to as ``NARA personnel''), shall view
classified records in any room that is not secure except in
the presence of NARA personnel or under video surveillance.
(2) No person, other than NARA personnel, shall at any time
be left alone with classified records, unless that person is
under video surveillance.
(3) No person, other than NARA personnel, shall conduct any
review of documents while in the possession of any cell phone
or other personal communication device.
(4) All persons seeking access to classified records, as a
precondition to such access, must consent to a search of
their belongings upon conclusion of their records review.
(5) All notes and other writings prepared by persons during
the course of a review of classified records shall be
retained by the National Archives and Records Administration
in a secure facility.
(b) Definition of Records.--In this section, the term
``records'' has the meaning provided in section 3301 of title
44, United States Code.
SEC. 5. RESTRICTIONS ON ACCESS TO PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS.
Section 2204 of title 44, United States Code (relating to
restrictions on access to presidential records) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) The Archivist shall not make available any original
presidential records to any individual claiming access to any
presidential record as a designated representative under
section 2205(3) if that individual has been convicted of a
crime relating to the review, retention, removal, or
destruction of records of the Archives.''.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the reading of the motion be dispensed with.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
Mr. WAXMAN. I object.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
The Clerk will continue reading.
The Clerk continued to read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes in support of the motion.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit would
ensure that the integrity of the public record is preserved from people
who abuse their positions and remove highly sensitive records from the
National Archives.
Secure and accurate information is the lifeblood of effective
government. There has been a wide range of incidents involving data
loss, theft, privacy breaches. But more troubling is that some seek to
tamper with or corrupt the official records of this Nation, to rewrite
history, if you will.
Our goal here is to protect the integrity of the public record. Under
this motion the Archivist of the United States shall prescribe internal
procedures to prevent unauthorized removal of classified records from
the National Archives and Records Administration or the destruction or
damage of such records, including when such records are accessed or
searched electronically.
First, we set forth a number of procedures to ensure these records
remain secure. Second, we close a loophole in the Presidential Records
Act that allows those previously convicted of unauthorized removal of
classified materials back into the archives where they could do more
damage. If a person has demonstrated propensity to commit crimes
relating to the removal and destruction of classified Federal records,
we should take the simple step of blocking their access in the future.
The professionals at the National Archives are serious-minded
historians and are not well suited to the role of police officer or
security guard. The motion states that the archives shall not make
available any original Presidential records to any person convicted of
a crime involving the review, retention, removal, or destruction of
archives records. This prohibition extends to individuals with special
designations by former Presidents. In short, if you're convicted of
mishandling classified materials, we want to remove you from the pool
of people coming to the archives. You're a risk, and we are obligated
to mitigate risks of this type.
I would like to note that this second provision passed the House in
identical form over a year ago as part of H.R. 1255, the Presidential
Records Act, which still has not been enacted into law, by a vote of
333-93.
If we are serious about preserving and protecting the historical
records of the Nation, we must vote in favor of this motion to
recommit. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
California is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to everyone who is
listening to this debate that fundamentally this bill is about
accountability and preventing cover-up. On the Oversight Committee, we
have seen firsthand how destruction of e-mails frustrates
accountability and allows officials to hide wrongdoing.
We investigated Jack Abramoff's contacts with the White House. We saw
[[Page H6303]]
that Abramoff told his colleagues that he used the Republican National
Committee e-mail accounts when he was dealing with White House
officials so that his communications would remain secret. This bill
shuts down that loophole. It says Jack Abramoff can't send secret e-
mails to White House officials.
We tried to investigate the false intelligence that led to the war in
Iraq, but this investigation did not have access to Karl Rove's e-mails
because they were destroyed. This bill says that Karl Rove's e-mails
have to be preserved and not destroyed.
We tried to investigate the Cheney Energy Task Force, which gave us
the energy policy this Nation has followed under President Bush for the
last 7\1/2\ years, which I believe has led to these incredible high
prices for energy. But once again we needed access to the e-mails to
understand what deals were cut with the special interests, including at
that time Enron, which played a very active role on Vice President
Cheney's Energy Task Force.
A vote for this bill will make sure that the White House cannot hide
its abuses. What we need is for this bill to pass so we can have honest
and open and accountable government. That's why this legislation is
before us today.
Of course, we don't know what the motion to recommit is until the
very last minute; so we have to prepare for whatever may come. This is
not a motion to recommit that would destroy the bill, and I appreciate
that fact. It's a motion to recommit that, by and large, I think makes
sense, and why it wasn't offered as an amendment leaves me perplexed. I
do have some minor concerns about the motion to recommit, but that can
be worked out in conference. This should have been brought up as an
amendment to the bill. But, in effect, a motion to recommit is a motion
to amend the bill. And since I do not oppose, in effect, the amendment
that's being offered, I will join in support of this motion to recommit
because this bill is too important. I know it was minimized a lot in
the debate where people said why are we talking about e-mail
preservation when we should be talking about drilling in Alaska and off
the coast of the United States? Well, they are related because had we
been able to have the Energy Task Force, chaired by Cheney, Vice
President Cheney, we could have found out how we had this policy
decided, and now that we're saddled with it, we could have done
something about it 7\1/2\ years ago.
I will join in support of this motion to recommit, and I will urge my
colleagues to vote for it so we can get the bill passed with this
amendment that's being offered to it. I urge a vote for the motion.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. DAVIS of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the
ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a
quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on
the motion to recommit will be followed by 5-minute votes on passage of
the bill, if ordered; motions to suspend the rules on H.R. 3329 and
H.R. 6184.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 419,
nays 1, answered ``present'' 2, not voting 12, as follows:
[Roll No. 476]
YEAS--419
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Allen
Altmire
Arcuri
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doolittle
Doyle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Feeney
Ferguson
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goode
Goodlatte
Gordon
Granger
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Jordan
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lamborn
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul (TX)
McCollum (MN)
McCotter
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McHugh
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Musgrave
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Reynolds
Rodriguez
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sali
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Westmoreland
Wexler
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--1
Dicks
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--2
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Waters
NOT VOTING--12
Andrews
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Fossella
Hulshof
Pickering
Pryce (OH)
Renzi
Richardson
Rush
Udall (CO)
Wilson (NM)
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this
vote.
[[Page H6304]]
{time} 1739
Ms. ESHOO, Ms. KILPATRICK, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mrs. NAPOLITANO and
Messrs. COHEN, GUTIERREZ, SCOTT of Virginia, ROGERS of Alabama,
GONZALEZ, AL GREEN of Texas and CARNAHAN changed their vote from
``nay'' to ``yea.''
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas changed her vote from ``yea'' to
``present.''
So the motion to recommit was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mrs. WILSON of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 476, I was
unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the instructions of the House on
the motion to recommit, I report the bill, H.R. 5811, back to the House
with an amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Clay:
At the end of the bill, add the following new sections:
SEC. 4. PROCEDURES TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED REMOVAL OF
CLASSIFIED RECORDS FROM NATIONAL ARCHIVES.
(a) In General.--The Archivist of the United States shall
prescribe internal procedures to prevent the unauthorized
removal of classified records from the National Archives and
Records Administration or the destruction or damage of such
records, including when such records are accessed or searched
electronically. The procedures shall include the following
prohibitions:
(1) No person, other than personnel of the National
Archives and Records Administration (in this section
hereafter referred to as ``NARA personnel''), shall view
classified records in any room that is not secure except in
the presence of NARA personnel or under video surveillance.
(2) No person, other than NARA personnel, shall at any time
be left alone with classified records, unless that person is
under video surveillance.
(3) No person, other than NARA personnel, shall conduct any
review of documents while in the possession of any cell phone
or other personal communication device.
(4) All persons seeking access to classified records, as a
precondition to such access, must consent to a search of
their belongings upon conclusion of their records review.
(5) All notes and other writings prepared by persons during
the course of a review of classified records shall be
retained by the National Archives and Records Administration
in a secure facility.
(b) Definition of Records.--In this section, the term
``records'' has the meaning provided in section 3301 of title
44, United States Code.
SEC. 5. RESTRICTIONS ON ACCESS TO PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS.
Section 2204 of title 44, United States Code (relating to
restrictions on access to presidential records) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) The Archivist shall not make available any original
presidential records to any individual claiming access to any
presidential record as a designated representative under
section 2205(3) if that individual has been convicted of a
crime relating to the review, retention, removal, or
destruction of records of the Archives.''.
Mr. CLAY (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that the reading of the amendment be waived.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. SALI. 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 286,
nays 137, not voting 11, as follows:
[Roll No. 477]
YEAS--286
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Baird
Baldwin
Barrow
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Boyda (KS)
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson
Castle
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cramer
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Lincoln
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly
Doyle
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Engel
English (PA)
Eshoo
Etheridge
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Fortenberry
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gillibrand
Gonzalez
Gordon
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Heller
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (NC)
Jones (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Keller
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Lampson
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lynch
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McIntyre
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Murtha
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Perlmutter
Peterson (MN)
Platts
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Reichert
Reyes
Rodriguez
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sestak
Shays
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stupak
Sutton
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Udall (NM)
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weller
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (FL)
NAYS--137
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Bachmann
Bachus
Barrett (SC)
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Brady (TX)
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Buyer
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Coble
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Crenshaw
Cubin
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Tom
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Drake
Dreier
Duncan
Ehlers
Emerson
Everett
Fallin
Feeney
Ferguson
Flake
Forbes
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Granger
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Hunter
Inglis (SC)
Issa
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lucas
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McCrery
McHenry
McKeon
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Paul
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pitts
Poe
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Regula
Rehberg
Reynolds
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Royce
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Scalise
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Souder
Stearns
Sullivan
Tancredo
Thornberry
Wamp
Weldon (FL)
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman (VA)
Wolf
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--11
Boswell
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Cardoza
Fossella
Hulshof
Pickering
Pryce (OH)
Renzi
Richardson
Rush
Udall (CO)
[[Page H6305]]
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised that 2
minutes remain in this vote.
{time} 1751
Mrs. MYRICK, Messrs. LEWIS of California, McCOTTER, Mrs. BONO MACK,
and Mr. CAMP of Michigan changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
