LON SLEPICKA
Firehouse.Com News

Inside the FIRE Funds The FIRE Bills HR 1168 S 1941 Discuss the FIRE Bill Firehouse.Com Forums Previously Fire Service Leaders Testify Before Senate Committee on FIRE Act FIRE Act Gets Senate Hearing Senate Moves on $3.1 Billion in Fire Funds Congress' Spending Bill Doesn't Include $100m for Fire Service FIRE Act May Get Senate Hearing Soon Uncertain Future for National Fire Funds Fire/EMS Service Support Flows on Capitol Hill Landslide Vote Approves $100m Step Forward for Fire/EMS Funding Federal Funding Urged For Fire Service FEMA Asks Congress For $3.6 Billion 2001 Budget Online Resources NVFC: About the Bill Bill Overview How to Contact Congress Open Letter to President Congressional E-Mail Directory International Association of Fire Fighters Congressional Fire Services Institute

WASHINGTON -- Congressman Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-NJ) found himself in a difficult position today, defending his FIRE Act bill (H. R. 1168) in the face of opposition from the lead co-sponsor of the bill, Curt Weldon (R-PA)

As an amendment (S.AMDT.3753) to the Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (S2549), the FIRE Act made it through the Senate. It was introduced in November 1999 by Senators Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Mike DeWine (R-OH).

This amendment accompanied the Defense Authorization Act to conference since nothing similar came out of the House. Conference determines a compromise bill for the House and Senate to vote on, which may or may not include the FIRE Act amendment.

Pascrell was invited to speak on behalf of the bill he introduced in the house, in front of the conference committee. Pascrell's legislative director Dana Lewis said he came to urge the conferees to report out a conference a bill that would include the language of the FIRE Act.

Following his lobbying effort, Lewis said, three spoke in dissent of including the FIRE Act. Language, John Hostettler (R-IN), Tillie Fowler (R-FL), and to his surprise, Weldon.

Lewis provided Pascrell's statement as; "It's unfortunate that Congressman Weldon did not remain focused on the issue at hand. We have an opportunity to ensure that it gets done in this Congress."

Spokesman Pete Peterson said Weldon had concerns about the way the funding was attached to the Defense Authorization Act. Since the two are unrelated in scope, Peterson said, the Congressman felt, "it was not a wise way to go about trying to enact our bill."

Weldon, according to Peterson, feels the bill would be more logically attached to authorizations for FEMA or Agriculture. "After talking to conferees, Weldon was concerned the language was not going to be included regardless," Peterson said.

According to Lewis, Pascrell sees the area of defense as a great place to search for authorization and funding for fire protection. "Firefighting will eventually go hand in hand with the armed forces in the defense of the nation," she said. "It is appropriate to get that going now."

Neither Congressman could explain why the two had pushed the bill together early on and were now at odds on which direction it should go. "No one thought it would really get this far," Lewis said. "It kind of caught fire."