Inside the House: Amendments to the CR

The House just concluded a vote on the rule, which will govern debate and the consideration of amendments on the continuing resolution, which will fund the government for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2011.  As we’ve said before, the $99.6 billion in cuts (relative to the President’s request) falls short of the GOP’s Pledge because it relies on $19 billion in security cuts, whereas the Pledge focused exclusively on non-security cuts.  However, conservatives plan to offer a variety of amendments that would close the gap, putting the CR in compliance with the Pledge.

Heritage Action strongly supports these efforts.

Below (and here) are the first 100 amendments:

Amendment No. 1—Rep. Cravaack (R-MN):  The amendment would reduce funds to the United States Institutes of Peace by $42.6 million and increase funds to State, Foreign Operations and related programs by $42.6 million.

Amendment No. 2—Rep. Rooney (R-FL): The amendment would reduce funding for the Navy and Air Force (Research, Development, Test and Evaluation) by $225 million each.  The funds would be transferred into the Defense spending reduction account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 3—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike the provision restricting certain funds from being used by the EPA to implement, administer, or enforce a change to a rule or guidance document pertaining to the definition of waters under the jurisdiction of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

Amendment No. 4—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike a provision restricting the use of certain funds for the Weatherization Assistance Program.

Amendment No. 5—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike the provision restricting the use of certain funds by the EPA for purposes of enforcing or promulgating any regulation or order relating to, or denying approval of state implementation plans or permits because of the emissions of greenhouse gases due to concerns regarding possible climate change.

Amendment No. 6—Rep. Campbell (R-CA): The amendment would reduce the total amount made available by the Act (except for amounts for the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs) by $16 billion.

Amendment No. 7—Rep. Campbell (R-CA): The amendment would reduce the total amount otherwise made available by this Act for the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs by $14 billion.

Amendment No. 8—Rep. Stearns (R-FL): The amendment would restrict funds made available in this

Act from being used for the design, renovation, construction, or rental of any headquarters for the United Nations in any location in the United States.

Amendment No. 9—Rep. Stearns (R-FL): The amendment would restrict funds made available by this Act from being used to implement the Report and Order of the Federal Communication Commission relating to the matter of preserving the open Internet and broadband industry practices.

Amendment No. 10—Rep. Stearns (R-FL): The amendment would prohibit funds made available by this Act from being used to regulate or classify coal combustion residuals as a hazardous waste or material.

Amendment No. 11—Rep. Pence (R-IN): The amendment would direct that none of the funds made available by this Act may be made available for any purpose to Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. or any of its main affiliates.

Amendment No. 12—Rep. McCarthy (D-NY): The amendment would increase and decrease by an equivalent amount the funding level for the Department of Justice, Office of Justice, Programs, State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance.  Often Members will use an amendment of this nature in order to clarify within the Congressional Record that funding shall be directed to a specific purpose.

Amendment No. 13—Rep. Rooney (R-FL): The amendment would prohibit funds made available by this Act from being used to implement, administer, or enforce the rule entitled “Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida’s Lakes and Flowing Waters” published in the Federal Register by the Environmental Protection Agency (75 Fed. Reg. 75762 et seq.)

Amendment No. 14—Rep. Andrews (D-NJ): The amendment would increase the amount of funding for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Medical Services by $9.9 billion with qualifying language that specified amount is used for comprehensive service programs authorized under subchapter II of chapter 20 of title 38, U.S. Code.  The amendment would also enact into law H.R. 601 of the 112th Congress, the “End Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act of 2011,” as introduced on February 10, 2011.  The amendment also would increase the amount of funding for the Financial Service, General Government account by $31 billion.

Amendment No. 15—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike section 1844, which states: Notwithstanding section 1101, the level for the first paragraph under the heading ‘‘Social Security Administration, Limitation on Administrative Expenses’’ shall be $10.6 billion.

Amendment No. 16—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike section 1846, which states: Of the funds appropriated for ‘‘Social Security Administration, Limitation on Administrative Expenses’’ for fiscal years 2010 and prior years (other than funds appropriated in Public Law 111–5) for investment in information technology and telecommunications hardware and software infrastructure, $500 million is rescinded.

Amendment No. 17—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would strike subsections (a) and (b) of section 1824, which states: (a) The level for “Department of Education, Education for the Disadvantaged” shall be $3.9 billion, of which $3.9 billion shall become available on July 1, 2011, and remain available through September 30, 2012 and an additional $10.8 billion to remain available through September 30, 2012, shall be available on October 1, 2011 for academic year 2011–2012.  Of the amounts available for such heading, $6.4 billion shall be for basic grants under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; $1.3 billion shall be for concentration grants; (3) $3 billion shall be for targeted grants; (4) $3 billion shall be for education finance incentive grants.  The tenth, eleventh and twelfth provisos under the heading “Department of Education, Education for the Disadvantaged” in division D of Public Law 111–117 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division.

The amendment would also strike section 1828, which states: The level for “Department of Education, Special Education” shall be $3.4 billion, of which $3.1 billion shall become available on July 1, 2011, and remain available through September 30, 2012, and an additional $8.5 billion available through September 30, 2012, shall be available on October 1, 2011 for academic year 2011–2012.

Amendment No. 18—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would increase the funding level for Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Low Income Home Energy Assistance by $390 million.  The amendment would also strike subsection (b) of section 1817, which states: The second proviso under the heading “Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Low Income Home Energy Assistance” of division D of Public Law 111–117 shall not apply to funds appropriated by this division.

Amendment No. 19—Rep. Tipton (R-CO): The amendment would reduce all amounts in the bill not directed to Department of Defense, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs accounts by 1 percent.

Amendment No. 20—Rep. Maloney (D-NY): The amendment would strike lines section 2122, which prohibits funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this division for the Department of State, foreign operations, and related programs from being made available for the United Nations Population Fund.

Amendment No. 21—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): The amendment would increase and decrease by an equivalent amount, the funding level for the Agricultural Programs, Agricultural Research Service, Salaries and Expenses.  The amendment would also increase and decrease by an equivalent amount the funding level for Agricultural Programs, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Salaries and Expenses.  Often Members will use an amendment of this nature in order to clarify within the Congressional Record that funding shall be directed to a specific purpose.

Amendment No. 22—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used by the Secretary of the Army to acquire land or construct any building or structure within the town of Lake Park, Florida.

Amendment No. 23—Rep. Hastings (D-FL): The amendment would reduce the amounts made available to Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Health Resources and Services; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Disease Control, Research, and Training; and National Institutes of Health by $14 million each.  The amendment would also increase the amount made available to Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Health Resources and Services by $42 million.

Amendment No. 24—Rep. Camp (R-MI): The amendment would prohibit any of the funds made available by this Act from being used for the opening of the locks at the Thomas J. 0 Brien Lock and Dam or the Chicago River Controlling Works, except in the event of flooding or as needed to protect public health and safety.

Amendment No. 25—Rep. Graves (R-GA): The amendment would prohibit any of the funds made available by this Act from being used to implement or enforce the Report and Order of the Federal Communications Commission relating to the matter of preserving the open Internet and broadband industry practices (FCC 10-201).

Amendment No. 26—Rep. McCaul (R-TX): The amendment would prohibit any of the funds made available by this Act from being used for a project or program named for an individual serving in the United States Congress as a Senator, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate to the House of Representatives, or Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico.

Amendment No. 27—Rep. Markey (D-MA): The amendment would prohibit any of the funds made available by this Act from being used to issue any new lease that authorizes the production of oil or natural gas under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to any lessee under any existing lease issued by the Department of the Interior pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water Royalty Relief Act where such existing lease is not subject to limitations on royalty relief based on market prices.

Amendment No. 28—Rep. Chaffetz (R-UT): The amendment would reduce by $4 million the amount made available to Independent Agencies, National Archives and Records Administration, National Historical Publications and Records Commission, Grants Program.  The amendment would also increase by $4 million the amount made available to Financial Service, General Government Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 29—Rep. Heller (R-NV): The amendment would reduce by $211 million the amount made available to Multilateral Assistance, Funds Appropriated to the President in section 2115, and would increase by $211 million the funds made available to State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 30—Rep. Burton (R-IN): The amendment would reduce by $2 million the amount made available to the Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Management of Lands and Resources.  The amendment would also increase by $2 million the amount made available to the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 31—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment would prohibit funds in the bill from being made available to demolish structures within the Delaware Water Gap.

Amendment No. 32—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment would prohibit funds in the bill from being used to give assistance to any individual who is a member of an organization designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the Secretary of State.

Amendment No. 33—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment would prohibit any funds in this bill from paying the salaries and expenses of personnel to carry out a market access program under section 203 of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978.

Amendment No. 34—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment reduces funding for the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities, National Endowment for the Arts, Grants and Administration by $145, eliminating funding for the account.  The funds would be transferred into the spending reduction account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 35—Rep. Garrett (R-NJ): The amendment reduces funding for the Institute of Museum and Library Services by $265.8 million, eliminating funding for the account.  The funds would be transferred into the spending reduction account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 36—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment reduces funding for the epartment of Housing and Urban Development, Community Planning and Development, Community Development Fund  by $1.5 billion, eliminating funding for the account.  The funds would be transferred into the spending reduction account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 37—Rep. Garret (R-NJ): The amendment would reduce by $17,676,000 the amount made available to Related Programs, United Institutes of Peace.  The amendment would also increase by $17,676,000 the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 38—Rep. Matheson (D-UT): The amendment would prohibit funds from the bill from being used for the ·Community Connect broadband grant program administered by the Rural Utilities Service of the Department of Agriculture.

Amendment No. 39—Del. Norton (D-DC): Strikes section 1590 in the bill which would stipulate that “None of the funds appropriated under this Act shall be expended for any abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or where the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.”

Amendment No. 40—Rep. Norton (D-DC):  The amendment would strike the prohibition on funding from the bill to be used for needle exchange programs in the District of Columbia.

Amendment No. 41—Rep. Norton (D-DC):  The amendment would decrease funding for D.C.  Opportunity Scholarships by $2.3 million (funded at $15.5 million in the bill) and transfer the $2.3 million to “expand quality public charter schools” (funded at $20 million in the bill).  The amendment also provides $1 million for administering assessments.

Amendment No. 42—Rep. Sessions (R-TX): The amendment would prohibit funds made available by the bill to be used to implement any policy, directive, administrative regulation, circular, or action to convert from private sector to public sector performance any functions or positions that are not inherently governmental in nature.

Amendment No. 43—Rep. Sessions (R-TX): The amendment reduces funding for the “Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Capital and Debt Service Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation” from $850 million to $403.1 million and transfers the savings into the Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 44—Rep. Nadler (D-NY): The amendment would strike funding in the bill for a number of Department of Transportation agencies including the Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Railroad Administration and the Department of Transportation, Office of the Secretary.

Amendment No. 45—Rep. Baldwin (D-WI): The amendment would reduce all funding under the bill by a pro rata amount so that the total reduction is $1 billion.  The amendment then redirects $1 billion to the “Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Health Resources and Services,” which the bill has funded at $5.3 billion.

Amendment No. 46—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available by the bill from being used to maintain an “end strength level of members of the Armed Forces of the United States assigned to permanent duty in Europe in excess of 35,000 members and end strength levels for active duty members of the Army, Navy, and Air Force of 565,275, 328,250, and 329,275, respectively.”  The amendment would also reduce the amounts provided for “Military Personnel, Army”, “Military Personnel, Navy” and “Military Personnel, Air Force” by $155.9 million , $18 million and $118 million respectively.

Amendment No. 47—Rep. Leutkemeyer (R-MO): The amendment would prohibit funding for the study of the Missouri River Projects authorized in section 108 of the Energy and Water Development Act of 2009 (division C of Public Law 111-8).

Amendment No. 48—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would prohibit funding for the enforcement of section 75.708 of title 34, Code of Regulations, that relates to the prohibition of sub grants under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

Amendment No. 49—Rep. McCollum (D-MI): The amendment specifies that no more than $2 million of the funds made available by division A of the Act can be used for military bands, musical equipment, or musical performances.

Amendment No. 50—Rep. McCollum (D-MN):  The amendment would restrict funds made available by this Act from being used by the Department of Defense for sponsorship of NASCAR race cars.

Amendment No. 51—Rep. McCollum (D-MN): The amendment would restrict funds provided in this Act under the heading “Related Agency, Broadcasting Board of Governors, International Broadcasting Operations” from being used for Radio and Television Marti, and would reduce the amount provided under such heading by $30.4 million.

Amendment No. 52—Rep. Tonko (D-NY): The amendment would increase funding level for the “Department of Energy, Energy Programs, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy” by $586.6 million and reduce funding level for ‘‘Department of Energy, Energy Programs, Fossil Energy Research and Development’’ by $586.6 million.

Amendment No. 53—Rep. Paul (R-TX): The amendment would strike section 2114 of the bill regarding International Security Assistance, Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund, Foreign Military Financing Programs, etc.

Amendment No. 54—Rep. Fleming (R-LA): The amendment would restrict funds made availa’le by this Act from being used to (1) finalize the proposed rule entitled “Rescission of the Regulation Entitled ‘Ensuring That Department of Health and Human Services Funds Do Not Support Coercive or Discriminatory Policies or Practices in Violation of Federal Law’” published in the Federal Register on March 10, 2009 or (2) otherwise rescind or modify any provision of part 88 of subtitle A of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations.

Amendment No. 55—Rep. Fleming (R-LA): The amendment would rescind unobligated balance of funds made available by section 1005(b) of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

Amendment No. 56—Rep. Murphy (D-CT): The amendment would restrict funds made available by this Act from being used by the Department of Defense for the purchase of seamless copper-nickel tubing, 4 inches and larger in outside diameter, used for shipboard pipe systems, that satisfies MIL—T—16420k unless the tubing is manufactured in the United States.

Amendment No. 57—Rep. Murphy (D-CT): The amendment would restrict funds made available by this

Act from being used to enter into a contract with a firm that engages in unfair trade practices as defined in subpart 9.4 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

Amendment No. 58—Rep. Cardoza (D-CA): The amendment would reduce to $0 any funds made available by this Act for the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Amendment No. 59—Rep. Cardoza (D-CA): The amendment would prohibit funds made available by this Act from being used to pay the travel expenses of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

Amendment No. 60—Rep. Cardoza (D-CA):  The amendment would reduce to $0 the amount made available by this Act for the “Department of Housing and Urban Development, Management and Administration-Executive Direction” for official reception and representation expenses of the Office of the Secretary.

Amendment No. 61—Rep. Cardoza (D-CA): The amendment would restrict funds provided in this Act from being used to pay for the travel expenses of the Secretary of the Treasury.  Those funds would be used for the purpose of educating the Administration’s staff on the fundamentals of housing policy and its impact on the national economy.

Amendment No. 62—Rep. Cardoza (D-CA): The amendment would restrict the use of funds made available in this Act from being used to pay the official reception and representation expenses of the Secretary of the Treasury.  Those funds would be used for the purpose of educating the Administration’s staff on the fundamentals of housing policy and its impact on the national economy.

Amendment No. 63—Rep. Gutierrez (D-IL): The amendment would reduce funding for the Navy’s Air Craft Procurement by $21.9 million and the Air Craft Procurement by the Air Force by $393 million.  The funds would be transferred into the Defense spending reduction account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 64—Rep. Thompson (D-CA): The amendment would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, to adopt standards consistent with the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program of the Department of Energy.

Amendment No. 65—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would allow any funds made available by this Act to be used for expenditures that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency determines to be necessary to protect the public health or prevent severe environmental degradation after climate change.

Amendment No. 66—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would allow any funds made available by this Act to be used for expenditures that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency determines to be necessary to protect the public health or prevent severe environmental degradation after Clean Air Act.

Amendment No. 67—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would prevent the rescission of funds used for paying the subsidy and administrative cost of projects eligible for Federal credit assistance under chapter 6 of title 23, United States Code, provided by division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Amendment No. 68—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would change the date for the rescission of stimulus funds from February 11, 2010 to September 30, 2011.

Amendment No. 69—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would not permit the rescission of stimulus funds appropriated or otherwise made available for the creation of jobs.

Amendment No. 70—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would prohibit the rescissions of stimulus funds under section 3001 from applying to the TIGER TIFIA Grant Program of the Department of Transportation.

Amendment No. 71—Rep. Polis (D-CO): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used to enforce section 75.708 of title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, as it relates to section 5025 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

Amendment No. 72—Rep. Rokita (R-IN): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used for doctoral dissertation research grants authorized under title V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970.

Amendment No. 73—Rep. Royce (R-CA): The amendment would reduce by $10.7 million the amount made available to Related Programs, East-West Center.  The amendment would also increase by $10.7 million the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 74—Rep. Garrett (R-NJ): The amendment would move the funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau onto the federal budget.

Amendment No. 75—Rep. Burton (R-IN): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used for roundups and removals of free-roaming wild horses and burros, unless for the purpose of fertility control.

Amendment No. 76—Rep. Royce (R-CA): The amendment would reduce by $17.6 the amount made available to Related Programs, United Institutes of Peace.  The amendment would also increase by $17.6 the State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 77— Rep. Royce (R-CA): The amendment would limit the amount made available to the General Services Administration for the acquisition of new vehicles for the federal fleet, with a baseline for fiscal year 2012 and each fiscal year thereafter at 80 percent of the amount made available for fiscal year 2011.

Amendment No. 78—Rep. Olson (R-TX): The amendment would increase and decrease by an equivalent amount the funding level for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Space Operations.  Often Members will use an amendment of this nature in order to clarify within the Congressional Record that funding shall be directed to a specific purpose.

Amendment No. 79—Rep. Gardner (R-CO): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used to pay the salary of any employee or officer of the Department of Health and Human Services who develops or promulgates regulations or guidance regarding Exchanges under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ObamaCare”).

Amendment No. 80—Rep. Gardner (R-CO):  The amendment would prevent the use of funds made available by this Act from being used to first-class or business-class airfare for federal employees for domestic travel.

Amendment No. 81—Rep. Gardner (R-CO): The amendment would reduce by 50 percent the amount of funds made available by this Act to pay for expenses for official travel.

Amendment No. 82—Rep. Gardner (R-CO): The amendment would rescind the unobligated balance of funds made available by section 1005 (b) of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.

Amendment No. 83—Rep. Emerson (R-MO): The amendment would prohibit funds made available by this Act from being used by the IRS to implement or enforce section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code, section 6055 of such Code, and section 1502 (c) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Amendment No. 84—Rep. Pompeo (R-KS): The amendment would reduce funding for the EPA and Environmental Programs and Management by $8.4 million and increase funding for spending reduction account by $8.4 million.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 85—Rep. Pompeo (R-KS): The amendment would reduce the level of funding for the Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State and Private forestry by $7.4 million and increase the funding to the spending reduction account by $7.4 million.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 86—Rep. Pompeo (R-KS): The amendment would reduce certain Defense Production Act purchases by $3.2 million, the funding level for the Army’s research, development, test and evaluation by $36.3 million, and the Navy’s research, development, test and evaluation funding by $44 million.  The amendment would also reduce funding for the Air Force’s research, development, test and evaluation by $32 million.  The amendment would transfer the $115.2 million in savings into the Defense subcommittee’s spending reduction account. Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 87—Rep. Pompeo (R-KS): The amendment would reduce the funding levels for Army procurements by for procurement of equipment by $15 million; for Navy procurement of equipment by $15 million; for Air Force procurement of equipment by $15 million; for Defense-wide procurements by $15,000,000, and Defense-wide procurement of equipment by $15 million.  The amendment reduces the funding levels for the Army’s research, development, test and evaluations for the Army, Navy, and Air Force by $105 million each and Defense-wide operation of facilities and equipment by $127 million.  The amendment would eliminate the funds $3.2 million in funds made available for program management and oversight of innovative research and development.  The amendment would transfer the $502.4 million in savings into the Defense subcommittee’s spending reduction account. Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 88—Rep. Kind (D-WI): The amendment would prohibit funds made available in division A of the Act to be used to research, develop, test, evaluate, or procure an expeditionary fighting vehicle or surface-launched advanced medium-range air-to-air missile program.

Amendment No. 89—Rep. Kind (D-WI): The amendment would prevent any funds made available in this Act from used to provide payments to the Brazil Cotton Institute.

Amendment No. 90—Rep. Heller (R-NV): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used for the storage of nuclear waste at the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

Amendment No. 91—Rep. Heller (R-NV): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to conduct adjudicatory functions, technical review, or support activities associated with the Yucca Mountain geologic repository license application.

Amendment No. 92—Rep. Heller (R-NV): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used to designate monuments under the “Antiques Act of 1906” (16 U.S.C. 431, et seq.).

Amendment No. 93—Rep. Connolly (D-VA): The amendment would reduce by $200 million the amount made available to Agricultural Programs, Food Safety and Inspection Service.  The amendment would also remove the Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Grants to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority from a list of accounts funded at $0 under section 2203.

Amendment No. 94—Rep. Sullivan (R-OK): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used to implement the decision of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency entitled “Partial Grant and Partial Denial of Clean Air Act Waiver Application Submitted by Growth Energy To Increase the Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline to 15 Percent” published in the Federal Register on November 4, 2010; or the decision of the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency entitled “Partial Grant of Clean Air Act Waiver Application Submitted by Growth Energy To Increase the Allowable Ethanol Content of Gasoline to 15 Percent” published in the Federal Register on January 26, 2011.

Amendment No. 95—Rep. Jones (R-NC): The amendment would reduce by $400 million the amount made available to the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund.  The amendment would also increase by $400 million the amount made available to the Defense Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 96—Rep. DeFazio (D-OR): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Amendment No. 97—Rep. DeFazio (D-OR): The amendment would increase by $5 million the funding to Agricultural Programs, National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Integrated Activities, and would reduce by $5 million the funding to Agricultural Programs, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, Salaries and Expenses.

Amendment No. 98— Rep. DeFazio (D-OR): The amendment would reduce by $24 million the amount made available to the Independent Agencies, Selective Service System, Salaries and Expenses.  The amendment would also increase by $24 million the amount made available to the Financial Services, General Government Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Amendment No. 99—Rep. McDermott (D-WA): The amendment would prohibit any funds made available in this Act from being used to plan for, begin, continue, finish, process, or approve the relocation of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Marine Operations Center-Pacific from Seattle, Washington, to Newport, Oregon.

Amendment No. 100—Rep. Weiner (D-NY):  The amendment would cut funding for the U.S. Institute of Peace ($42.6 million) and transfer the savings to the Spending Reduction Account.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account are designated as savings and lower the 302(b) allocation for a given subcommittee.  Funds transferred into the spending reduction account cannot be allocated elsewhere in the bill.

Please Share Your Thoughts

2 thoughts on “Inside the House: Amendments to the CR

  1. CR Amendment #79 from Rep. Gardner looks good. But why has Rep. Steve King not been allowed to offer his amendment to completely remove Obamacare funding from the CR? Is Heritage Action going to lobby for a change on this? Thank you.

  2. CR Amendment #79 from Rep. Gardner looks good. But why has Rep. Steve King not been allowed to offer his amendment to completely remove Obamacare funding from the CR? Is Heritage Action going to lobby for a change on this? Thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *