[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 139 (Wednesday, September 14, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H5453-H5461]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5351, PROHIBITING THE TRANSFER OF
ANY DETAINEE AT UNITED STATES NAVAL STATION, GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA, AND
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5226, REGULATORY INTEGRITY ACT OF
2016
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 863 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 863
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5351) to
prohibit the transfer of any individual detained at United
States Naval Station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. All points of
order against consideration of the bill are waived. The
amendment
[[Page H5454]]
printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules
accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted.
The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points
of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are
waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered
on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment
thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the
chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Armed
Services; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without
instructions.
Sec. 2. At any time after adoption of this resolution the
Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare
the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R.
5226) to amend chapter 3 of title 5, United States Code, to
require the publication of information relating to pending
agency regulatory actions, and for other purposes. The first
reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of
order against consideration of the bill are waived. General
debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one
hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform. After general debate the bill shall be considered for
amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to
consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment
under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a
substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print
114-63. That amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be
considered as read. All points of order against that
amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. No
amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute
shall be in order except those printed in part B of the
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this
resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the
order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member
designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall
be debatable for the time specified in the report equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent,
shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject
to a demand for division of the question in the House or in
the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such
amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of
the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report
the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been
adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House
on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the
bill or to the amendment in the nature of a substitute made
in order as original text. The previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to
final passage without intervening motion except one motion to
recommit with or without instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for
1 hour.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the
purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Alabama?
There was no objection.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 863 allows for consideration
of two pieces of legislation.
First, H.R. 5226, the Regulatory Integrity Act, would require the
publication of information relating to proposed and pending agency
regulations. Already, in this year alone, the Obama administration has
imposed $63 billion in new regulatory costs and has proposed an
additional $16 billion.
When I tour small businesses back in southwest Alabama, the top
complaint I hear is that they are drowning in red tape and regulations.
They are forced to take time and resources away from running their
business and instead focus them on complying with government
bureaucracy. Regulations don't just hurt businesses. They in turn cause
prices to increase on goods and services, which is felt by American
families all across the United States.
This bill is about transparency and open government. It simply
requires Federal agencies to post, in a central unified location,
information regarding regulatory actions. Americans shouldn't have to
search Web site after Web site looking for this information, if they
can even find it at all.
The bill also would prevent agencies from actively lobbying or
campaigning in support of any proposed rules. This has been an issue in
the past, and it is simply not the role of a Federal agency to act as a
lobbyist or an activist.
Mr. Speaker, I find it hard to believe that anyone will disagree with
making the government more open, transparent, and accessible. I hope
this legislation passes with broad, bipartisan support.
The other bill covered under this rule is very important as it
relates to our Nation's national security. H.R. 5351 will prohibit the
transfer of any individual detained at United States Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This bill would prevent any of the 61 prisoners
remaining at Guantanamo Bay from being brought to the United States or
transferred to a foreign country.
President Obama's pledge to close Guantanamo Bay started as a
campaign promise in 2007. After his election, he signed an executive
order declaring that the prison would be closed in 1 year. Thanks to
bipartisan opposition by Congress and resistance by intelligence
agencies, these efforts have so far proved unsuccessful.
President Obama originally planned to bring the prisoners to a new
facility here in the United States. Not surprisingly, no State wanted
to be the one selected to house terrorists. Members of this body from
both sides of the aisle were up in arms.
Since that plan failed, President Obama has been releasing these
terrorists to foreign countries, most of which are located in the
Middle East. So here we are in the waning days of the Obama
administration, and I fear that the President may try a new trick to
close the prison. In fact, on August 15, President Obama released 15
Guantanamo detainees at once. That is the most detainees he has
released at one time during his entire Presidency.
I think it is also important to remember that most of the remaining
prisoners are very dangerous. Yesterday, in testimony before the Rules
Committee, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, Mr.
Smith, testified that 41 of the remaining detainees are ``considered to
be so dangerous as to be untransferable.'' So this legislation is
necessary and is required in order to keep the American people and our
allies around the world safe.
One of the main goals of Guantanamo Bay is to keep these terrorists
from returning to the battlefield. Sadly, it has become clear that some
of the detainees released have returned to the fight against the United
States.
Information on the status of released detainees is hard to come by.
The White House has released very few details and hidden almost all of
the information out of the eye of the American people by placing it
under extreme classification requirements. But in testimony before
Congress, an Obama administration official admitted that at least 12
individuals released from Guantanamo Bay have gone on to launch attacks
and kill Americans--12 individuals released from Guantanamo Bay have
gone on to launch attacks and kill Americans.
{time} 1300
During testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the
official testified that, ``What I can tell you is unfortunately, there
have been Americans that have died because of Gitmo prisoners.''
Reports have indicated that it was a former Guantanamo detainee who
helped organize and plan the attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in
Benghazi, Libya. Let's not forget that four Americans lost their lives
during that attack.
I want to point out that this problem isn't new under the Obama
administration. In fact, reports show that 111 of the prisoners
released by former President George W. Bush returned to terrorist
activities.
And let's be clear, any life lost at the hands of a former Guantanamo
detainee is one life too many. These are deaths that are preventable,
if we just keep these terrorists locked up.
Mr. Speaker, we ask our servicemembers to put their lives on the line
each day and every day in order to keep the American people safe. How
can we ask them to do that while knowing that we are releasing cruel,
brutal terrorists back to the battlefield? It is reprehensible.
[[Page H5455]]
These releases and efforts to close the prison must stop. It is a
shame that congressional action is even needed, but that is the reality
of the situation.
And let's not forget, the individuals still left in Guantanamo are
the worst of the worst. The Pentagon told Senator Kelly Ayotte that 93
percent of the detainees left at Guantanamo were ``high risk'' for
returning to terrorist activities.
Here is a quick snapshot of the remaining terrorists: Many of them
fought on the front lines against U.S. coalition forces in Afghanistan.
Some of them served as bodyguards for Osama bin Laden and worked as
instructors at al Qaeda training camps. One person is well versed in
explosives and served in an al Qaeda improvised explosive device cell
that targeted coalition forces in Afghanistan. When captured, he had 23
antitank land mines.
These are just a few examples of the people we are talking about
here. We aren't talking about low-level operatives. These are really
bad guys.
So I fear this President may once again put politics above national
security. I fear he is more concerned about keeping a campaign promise
than he is about keeping the American people--especially our
servicemembers fighting in the Middle East--safe.
Ultimately, if we don't keep them in Guantanamo, where exactly do you
want these terrorists to go? Do you want them to be transferred into
the United States? I would ask my colleague on the other side of the
aisle: Would he want them in his home State of Massachusetts? Or do you
want us to send them back to the Middle East, where we can't control
what actions they take and where many of them are returning to
terrorist activity?
To me and a majority of Americans, the choice is clear: We need to
keep these terrorists in Guantanamo Bay where they can do no more harm.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 863 so
we can move forward with consideration of these two very important
bills.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Alabama
(Mr. Byrne) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield
myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule
and to the underlying legislation.
We are only scheduled to be in session for two more weeks before
leaving until after the November election. And instead of considering
legislation to adequately respond to the Zika crisis or address the
water crisis in Flint, Michigan, or deal with the terrible gun violence
plaguing our communities, we are back on the floor with more Republican
messaging bills that are going nowhere.
On these pressing matters, where is the leadership from Speaker Ryan
and the Republican Conference? How can this Congress further delay
action on these issues that are so important to the health and the
safety of the American people?
The rule before us today provides for consideration of two deeply
flawed pieces of legislation. The first, H.R. 5226, imposes overly
burdensome requirements designed solely to hamstring the Federal
rulemaking process. The second, H.R. 5351, prohibits the transfer of
any individual detained at the prison at the U.S. Naval Station,
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Until January 21, H.R. 5351 would prohibit the
transfer of any detainee held at Guantanamo not just to the United
States but also to any foreign country.
The Republican leadership could have chosen to use these final months
to work constructively with the administration on how to transfer to
other countries the approximately 20 remaining detainees who have been
cleared for transfer. The Republican leadership could have chosen to
help build a consensus around the timeframe for transferring to maximum
security facilities in the United States the remaining detainees who
have been charged with crimes or deemed too dangerous to release.
Instead, they chose to bring this bill to the House floor and close
down any and all reasonable avenues to safely and securely reduce the
population at Guantanamo. Mr. Speaker, this is simply crazy.
Continuing the operation of Guantanamo prison is a threat to our
national security of our own making. It damages our relations with key
allies and partners. It provides a rallying cry to violent extremists.
And it undermines our moral authority and credibility in ways large and
small across all aspects of our foreign policy and military policy.
Since it opened in 2002, the prison at Guantanamo has cost the
American taxpayer $4.8 billion. In 2013, U.S. taxpayers spent $454
million on this prison, which now holds just 61 detainees. That is
about $7.4 million for each prisoner, compared to around $70,000 for a
prisoner held in solitary confinement in a maximum security prison here
in the United States.
Mr. Speaker, the Oklahoma City bomber was tried and imprisoned in the
United States. The World Trade Center bomber was tried and imprisoned
in the United States. The Boston Marathon bomber was tried and
imprisoned in the United States. Serial killers, psychopaths,
terrorists, saboteurs--they have all been in custody, tried, and
imprisoned safely and securely in the United States and, I would add,
far more successfully than any trial or tribunal held at Guantanamo and
at a much smaller taxpayer expense. Why not the remaining detainees at
Guantanamo?
There should be a way for both parties to work this out. If only the
leaders of this Congress were willing to work with this administration
and be committed to finding a way to shut down Guantanamo once and for
all. But instead, we are here today throwing up yet another set of
roadblocks.
Eight years ago, Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama
agreed on one issue: it was time to shut down the prison at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba. Former President George W. Bush believes we should shut it
down.
I have a letter dated yesterday and addressed to all Members of
Congress from Marine Corps Major General Michael P. Lehnert, the very
first commander of the detention facility at Guantanamo, asking us to
oppose this bill and to close Guantanamo.
I have another letter here, dated March 1, from retired generals and
admirals who also advocate for the closure of our prison at Guantanamo.
Mr. Speaker, the failure to close Guantanamo is a stain on Congress.
It is Congress that has hindered efforts to release detainees cleared
for transfer to third-party countries. It is Congress that has barred
the Pentagon from moving those who must remain in prison to maximum
security facilities here in the United States. It is Congress that has
undermined America's standing as a champion for human rights.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is going nowhere. It certainly will never be
signed into law. It is a waste of time that could be better spent on
addressing the crisis of clean water in Flint, Michigan, granting real
money to deal with the national opiate crisis and the spread of the
Zika virus in the United States, and responding to the crisis of gun
violence in our cities and communities across America.
Mr. Speaker, in June, when 49 innocent people were ruthlessly killed
in an LGBT nightclub in Orlando, Americans across the country were
heartbroken and looked to their leaders for action. Surely in the face
of such tragedy, House Republicans would put partisan politics aside.
Surely both parties could come together to pass bipartisan legislation
to reduce gun violence by keeping guns out of the wrong hands.
House Democrats tried repeatedly to bring up bipartisan gun reform
legislation that the overwhelming majority of the American people
support. The bills would expand background checks and stop anyone on
the FBI's terrorist watch list from buying a gun. What could be more
common sense than that?
All we wanted was to debate the legislation and have a fair up-or-
down vote, but Republicans continued to put up roadblocks and refused
to even let us consider these bills. So House Democrats held a 25-hour
sit-in on the House floor, raising the voices of millions of Americans
who are sick and tired of seeing their families and neighbors gunned
down in communities all across the country while Congress does
absolutely nothing.
Instead, Speaker Ryan and House Republicans abruptly shut Congress
down
[[Page H5456]]
for summer recess, the longest in modern era. While House Republicans
were on summer vacation, more than 2,300 Americans were killed by guns.
Now Congress is back, and, instead of doing the right thing and
finally bringing bipartisan gun reform legislation to the floor, we
hear through the press that Speaker Ryan and House Republicans are
looking at ways to punish Democrats for our sit-in demanding action to
reduce gun violence.
Really? Congress is only scheduled to be in session for 2 weeks until
we recess again, and this is one of the Republican priorities?
We need real leadership, not more finger wagging. I urge my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle to ask themselves: Is this
really what your constituents want? Is this what they sent you to
Congress to do?
And let me be clear, and let me be crystal clear. If Republicans
think that we will be intimidated or silenced by any legislation that
they bring to the floor to slap us on the wrist simply for asking
Congress to do its job, they are wrong.
The fact that Republicans are appalled by our demand to debate and
the fact that they are appalled by our demand that there be a debate
and a vote on gun safety legislation I find outrageous.
My question is: Why aren't my Republican friends appalled by the
massacres in Orlando and San Bernardino and Aurora and Newtown and
Charleston--and I could go on and on and on and on. Why are they not
appalled by the gun deaths that happen each and every day in these
United States of America? All we get from them is nothing. All we get
from them is silence and indifference and apathy and, oh, legislation
to condemn Democrats for wanting to do something. It is sad, and it is
pathetic, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask my colleagues to defeat the previous
question; and if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an
amendment to the rule to bring up the bipartisan no fly, no buy
legislation that would allow the Attorney General to bar the sale of
firearms and explosives to those on the FBI's terrorist watch list.
Mr. Speaker, the time to act is now. There were more than 2,000 gun-
related deaths during this summer alone while we were on recess. This
country cannot tolerate Republican intransigence any longer. Mr.
Speaker, we are asking and we are demanding that the Republican
leadership and this House do its job.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment in the Record along with extraneous material immediately
prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Womack). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from the State of Washington (Mr. Newhouse), my colleague
from the Rules Committee.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. I would like to thank the gentleman from Alabama for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying
legislation, H.R. 5226, the Regulatory Integrity Act. In recent years,
a disturbing trend has emerged among Federal agencies. In a number of
instances, Federal agencies have used taxpayer dollars to fund public
communication campaigns attempting to lobby for agency regulations.
Despite multiple Federal laws explicitly prohibiting this, agencies
continue to ignore these laws and use taxpayer dollars to lobby on the
very regulations their agencies are developing.
Several months ago, in my own home State of Washington, a campaign
known as What's Upstream came to light. I would like to point your
attention to this poster. Through this broad and unfair ad campaign,
all farmers were demonized as careless polluters. What's Upstream used
billboards, bus and radio ads, and a visually assaulting Web site
depicting dead fish and polluted water to encourage private citizens to
contact their State legislators and push for stricter regulations on
farmers. It is also important to note that it has been discovered that
these images were not even from the State of Washington.
{time} 1315
As a lifelong farmer myself, who has seen firsthand the remarkable
proactive steps farmers have taken to protect our resources, I was
insulted by the blatant lies this campaign has spread about farmers.
What is probably more insulting, though, can be seen by these pictures
of the What's Upstream Web site. What's Upstream encouraged site
visitors to send messages to ``Washington State Senators whose votes we
hope to influence.'' This is lobbying in the truest sense of the word.
The real kicker is when you scroll down to the bottom of the page to
see who it was funded by: ``This message has been funded wholly or in
part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.''
Now, just stop and think about that for just a second. Your hard-
earned taxpayer dollars are being used by the EPA to lie about farmers
and then to lobby State legislators to put in place stricter
regulations against farmers. It is unconscionable, and it violates the
law.
Earlier this year, I was proud to colead a letter with my friend from
Nebraska, Congressman Ashford, to EPA Administrator McCarthy expressing
outrage and demanding an investigation into this campaign. I was
honored to have 145 House Members--fully one-third of the entire body--
join us on that letter demanding accountability.
This campaign exposed us to a very real need for grant and lobbying
reform, which H.R. 5226 takes a good first step in bringing. By
requiring all executive agencies to disclose their public
communications, it will help bring transparency to agency
communications and ensures that these types of activities cannot hide
or go unnoticed. While future steps may be necessary, I was proud to
work with Congressman Walberg to introduce this legislation, and I
thank him for his leadership on this issue.
Our agricultural community and the American taxpayers deserve
accountability, and I look forward to continuing to work for this
bill's enactment.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, so let me get this straight. In response
to 49 people killed in Orlando, 14 in San Bernardino, 9 in Charleston,
27 mostly kids in Newtown, 12 in Aurora, 6 in Tucson, Arizona--and our
former colleagues, Congressman Giffords and Congressman Ron Barber,
were shot there--and 32 in Virginia Tech--I can go on and on and on.
So, in response to all of that, what my Republicans friends are doing
is bringing a bill to the floor, and we are talking about legislation
that is going nowhere. The Senate is not going to take it up. And even
if it did, the White House is going to veto it. That is the response.
That is where the frustration on this side of the aisle is, that
there are real, meaningful things that we need to do in this Congress,
including protect the American people from this epidemic of gun
violence, and instead of bringing legislation to the floor to do that,
instead of working with us, instead of holding hearings, we get press
releases from the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee that are
going nowhere. We are wasting our time. We are wasting the American
taxpayers' money.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Thompson)
for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Kenneth D. Whitaker, a victim of
gun violence who never received a moment of silence on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would advise the minority manager
that the customary 30 minutes of debate time that has been yielded to
him is for debate purposes only.
As a result, the Chair must ask the majority manager if he would
yield for this unanimous consent request.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, during consideration of this resolution, all
time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama does not yield;
therefore, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained.
[[Page H5457]]
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Honda) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. HONDA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Jeanette Hernandez, a victim of gun violence who never
received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Once again, the gentleman from Massachusetts
is reminded that the time yielded is for purposes of debate only. The
gentleman from Alabama has not yielded for purposes of this unanimous
consent request, and it, therefore, cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida
(Ms. Castor) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring
up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to
honor the memory of Martavious Carn, age 3, a Florida victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Once again, the gentleman from Alabama has
not yielded for this unanimous consent request. It cannot be
entertained at this time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Judy Chu) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Justin Lee Sifuentes, a victim of
gun violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has not yielded
for this unanimous consent request. It cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Napolitano) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request
Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up
H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to
honor the memory of Jennie Lou Hawley, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has not yielded
for this unanimous consent request, so it cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Hahn) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. HAHN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1076,
the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, in honor of the memory of
Jennie Marie Keener, a victim of gun violence who never received a
moment of action on this House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has not yielded
for this unanimous consent request; so, therefore, it cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. Esty) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. ESTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217,
the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the
memory of Fredrick Richardson of Bridgeport, Connecticut, a victim of
gun violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama has not yielded
for this unanimous consent request, so it cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Mrs. Capps) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
Lekeshia Moses, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of
action on this House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Eshoo) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan close-the-loophole-on-background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Jeffrey Adams, a victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of action on the floor of this
House.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Nevada
(Ms. Titus) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. TITUS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
Megan, Liana, Mark Jr., and Willow Short, who never received a moment
of action on this House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Speier) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
a constituent, Teqnika Moultrie, a school bus driver who at age 30 was
gunned down outside a doughnut shop, and never received a moment of
action on the House floor on her behalf.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
As the Chair advised on January 15, 2014, and March 26, 2014, even
though a unanimous consent request to consider a measure is not
entertained, embellishments accompanying such requests constitute
debate and will become an imposition on the time of the Member who
yielded for that purpose.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Brownley) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. BROWNLEY of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor
the memory of Officer Michael Krol, a victim of gun violence who never
received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Swalwell) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. SWALWELL of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Miguel Angel Leon Bravo, a victim
of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the House
floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Brendan F. Boyle) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. BRENDAN F. BOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent to bring up H.R. 1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy
legislation, to honor the memory of Jordan Ebner, a victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Illinois
(Ms. Schakowsky) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Kayana Armond, a victim of gun violence who never
received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Lee) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217,
the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor the
memory of Lakeith Hurd, a victim of gun violence who never received a
moment of action on the House floor.
[[Page H5458]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
Massachusetts (Ms. Clark) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Aimee Kirst, a victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Cartwright) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
41-year-old Officer Matthew Gerald, a victim of gun violence who never
received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Michigan
(Mrs. Lawrence) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Christopher Jerome Smith, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Jersey
(Mrs. Watson Coleman) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up
H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to
honor the memory of Rosemond Octavius, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Meeks) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Tyreke Borel, who was 17 years old, a victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York
(Ms. Slaughter), the distinguished ranking member of the Rules
Committee, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Bobbie Odneal, III, 23 years old, Cincinnati, Ohio, who
died a victim of gun violence and never received a moment of action on
the House floor.
{time} 1330
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would like at this time to yield to the
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) for the purpose of a
unanimous consent request.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is advised that time will be
deducted from the gentleman's time for the last unanimous consent
request.
The gentlewoman from Connecticut is recognized.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire why?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As was advised earlier, embellishments
constitute debate, and as such, the time will be deducted from the
gentleman's time.
The gentlewoman from Connecticut.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Officer Montrell Jackson, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Crowley) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. CROWLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Ana Solis, 46 years of age when she was a victim of gun
violence, who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida
(Ms. Frankel) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring
up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to
honor the memory of Donald Stoney Boatman, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Huffman) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
Alex Freeman, a victim of gun violence who never received a moment of
silence on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New
Hampshire (Ms. Kuster) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. KUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy legislation, to honor the memory of
Paula Nino, age 20, of Houston, Texas, a tragic victim of gun violence
who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Colorado
(Mr. Perlmutter) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Sheree Barker, age 24, from Colorado Springs, Colorado, a
victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the
House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Michael F. Doyle) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. MICHAEL F. DOYLE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background
checks legislation, to honor the memory of Chelsea and Justin Reed from
Citronelle, Alabama, killed in their sleep, who never received a moment
of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut
(Mr. Larson) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Daquarius Tucker, who was a victim
of gun violence who never received a moment of action on this House
floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New York
(Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
[[Page H5459]]
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous
consent to bring up H.R. 1076, the bipartisan no fly, no buy
legislation, in honor of the memory of Lisa Ann Fabbri, 38 years old, a
victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the
floor of the United States Congress.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield to the distinguished
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), a leader on issues of justice and
nonviolence, for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, in the
memory of Billy Talley from Union, Mississippi, a victim of gun
violence who never, ever received a moment of action on the House
floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman
from Alabama (Ms. Sewell) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring
up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, in
honor of Robert Lee Brown from Alabama, age 26, who was killed in his
sleep by a friend of an abusive boyfriend, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of silence on the floor of the House of
Representatives.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
The time consumed by the gentlewoman from Alabama will be charged to
the gentleman from Massachusetts' time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Blumenauer) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of James ``JJ'' Hurtado, a victim of gun violence killed at
age 14 in Hermiston, Oregon, by his mother's ex-boyfriend, who never
received a moment of silence or moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. As previously announced, the unanimous
consent request cannot be entertained.
Time consumed by the gentleman from Oregon will be deducted from the
gentleman from Massachusetts' time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. Esty) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Ms. ESTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217,
the expanded background checks legislation, in honor of Anna Bui, a
victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the
House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from New Mexico
(Ms. Michelle Lujan Grisham) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Ms. MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded
background checks legislation, to honor the memory of Corey Bishop, a
victim of gun violence who never received a moment of action on the
House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman
from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline) for the purpose of a unanimous
consent request.
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Kiesha Betton, a victim of gun violence who never
received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman
from California (Mrs. Davis) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of Abner B. Garcia, age 23, an Army
veteran who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up
H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to
honor the memory of Charles Jackson, age 28, Houston Texas, killed on
the Fourth of July and a father of 3, a victim of gun violence who
never received a moment of silence or action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
The gentleman from Massachusetts is advised that the time consumed by
the gentlewoman from Texas will be charged to the time of the
gentleman.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota
(Mr. Ellison) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.
Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Mary Matzke and Birdell Beeks, victims of gun violence
who never received a moment of action on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman
from California (Mr. Thompson) for the purpose of a unanimous consent
request.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to
bring up H.R. 1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks
legislation, to honor the memory of John Comer, a victim of gun
violence who never received a moment of silence on the House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to bring up H.R.
1217, the bipartisan expanded background checks legislation, to honor
the memory of Jennifer Rooney, age 44 from Bristol, Virginia, who was
shot by a stray bullet while driving. She is a victim of gun violence
who never received a moment of action on this House floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unanimous consent request cannot be
entertained, and the gentleman's time will be charged.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I mean, I don't know what it is going to take to compel my Republican
colleagues to do something, to do more than just have a moment of
silence in the aftermath of every massacre. I mean, these are real
people. They had families. They were loved, and now they are gone, and
we need to do something.
For the life of me, I can't understand the inaction in this House,
the silence and the indifference. It is appalling. I would suggest to
my colleagues, rather than trying to bring legislation to the floor to
slap us on the wrist for having the audacity to come to the floor and
demand that this House of Representatives do its job, my Republican
friends ought to do their job and bring these bills to the floor.
Let's have a debate and let's have a vote, and let's try to save some
lives. This is real. This is meaningful. It is a heck of a lot more
important than the message bills that are going nowhere that are being
brought to this floor.
I urge my colleagues to vote to defeat the previous question so we
can have a vote on the no fly, no buy legislation, and I plead with my
Republican colleagues: Do your job. Do something. Enough of this
silence. Enough of this indifference. Too many people in this country
are dying.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
[[Page H5460]]
Let's see, where were we? We were talking about a rule that covers
two bills. One bill would stop Federal departments and agencies from
using their money to spread falsehoods against innocent Americans. The
gentleman from Washington gave a very good, very clear statement of a
precise fact situation that happened in the State of Washington where a
Federal agency was using its money to spread falsehoods about farmers.
That is what we were talking about. And I think that is a very
important piece of legislation for us to deal with and deal with right
now.
And the other piece of legislation, the other piece of legislation
would protect the people of the United States from a President who
wants to let very dangerous people out of Guantanamo Bay. As I said
before, at least 12 individuals who have already been released from
Guantanamo Bay have gone on to launch attacks and kill Americans. That
is what we were talking about. That is what we are talking about. That
is what this rule and the underlying legislation is all about.
This House is here to do its work and do its job to defend the people
of the United States and also to protect the people of the United
States from their own government preying on them. So I think this
legislation is completely appropriate. I am glad to bring this rule
before the House.
I, again, urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 863 and the
underlying bills.
The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:
An Amendment to H. Res. 863 Offered by Mr. McGovern
At the end of the resolution, add the following new
sections:
Sec. 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the
Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare
the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R.
1076) to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney
General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of
firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected
dangerous terrorist. The first reading of the bill shall be
dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of
the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
All points of order against provisions in the bill are
waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for
amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the
House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The
previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill
and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening
motion except one motion to recommit with or without
instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports
that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the
next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the
third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV,
resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further
consideration of the bill.
Sec. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the
consideration of H.R. 1076.
The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means
This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous
question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote.
A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote
against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow
the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a
vote about what the House should be debating.
Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of
Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the
previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or
control the consideration of the subject before the House
being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous
question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the
subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling
of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the
House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes
the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to
offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the
majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated
the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to
a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to
recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said:
``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman
from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to
yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first
recognition.''
The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous
question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an
immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no
substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.''
But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the
Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in
the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition,
page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous
question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally
not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member
controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of
offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by
voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the
motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the
time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering
the previous question. That Member, because he then controls
the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for
the purpose of amendment.''
In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of
Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special
Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on
such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on
Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further
debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues:
``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a
resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control
shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous
question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who
controls the time for debate thereon.''
Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does
have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only
available tools for those who oppose the Republican
majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the
opportunity to offer an alternative plan.
Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question on House
Resolution 863 will be followed by 5-minute votes on adopting House
Resolution 863, if ordered; and agreeing to the Speaker's approval of
the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 232,
noes 172, not voting 27, as follows:
[Roll No. 505]
AYES--232
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peterson
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
[[Page H5461]]
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--172
Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--27
Barletta
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Brady (TX)
Crawford
DesJarlais
Deutch
Fincher
Gohmert
Granger
Guinta
Jeffries
Johnson, Sam
LaHood
Lofgren
McDermott
Murphy (PA)
Norcross
Palazzo
Payne
Price (NC)
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Visclosky
Waters, Maxine
Welch
Young (IN
{time} 1403
Mr. ENGEL changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 505, I was
unavoidably detained and missed the vote on the previous question. Had
I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 238,
noes 171, not voting 22, as follows:
[Roll No. 506]
AYES--238
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOES--171
Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Lawrence
Lee
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--22
Barletta
DesJarlais
Deutch
Doyle, Michael F.
Fincher
Granger
Guinta
Jeffries
Johnson, Sam
Larson (CT)
Levin
Lofgren
Maloney, Carolyn
McDermott
Norcross
Palazzo
Payne
Rush
Schrader
Titus
Visclosky
Welch
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.
{time} 1410
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated against:
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 506.
____________________