[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 138 (Monday, October 7, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H6326-H6334]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2014
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 371, I call
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 77) making continuing appropriations
for the Food and Drug Administration for fiscal year 2014, and for
other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 371, the joint
resolution is considered read.
H.J. Res. 77
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That the
following sums are hereby appropriated, out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and out of
applicable corporate or other revenues, receipts, and funds,
for the Food and Drug Administration for fiscal year 2014,
and for other purposes, namely:
Sec. 101. (a) Such amounts as may be necessary, at a rate
for operations as provided in the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013 (division A of Public Law
113-6) and under the authority and conditions provided in
such Act, for continuing projects or activities (including
the costs of direct loans and loan guarantees) that are not
otherwise specifically provided for in this joint resolution,
that were conducted in fiscal year 2013, and for which
appropriations, funds, or other authority were made available
by such Act under the heading ``Department of Health and
Human Services--Food and Drug Administration''.
[[Page H6327]]
(b) The rate for operations provided by subsection (a) for
each account shall be calculated to reflect the full amount
of any reduction required in fiscal year 2013 pursuant to--
(1) any provision of division G of the Consolidated and
Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (Public Law 113-
6), including section 3004; and
(2) the Presidential sequestration order dated March 1,
2013, except as attributable to budget authority made
available by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013
(Public Law 113-2).
Sec. 102. Appropriations made by section 101 shall be
available to the extent and in the manner that would be
provided by the pertinent appropriations Act.
Sec. 103. Unless otherwise provided for in this joint
resolution or in the applicable appropriations Act for fiscal
year 2014, appropriations and funds made available and
authority granted pursuant to this joint resolution shall be
available until whichever of the following first occurs: (1)
the enactment into law of an appropriation for any project or
activity provided for in this joint resolution; (2) the
enactment into law of the applicable appropriations Act for
fiscal year 2014 without any provision for such project or
activity; or (3) December 15, 2013.
Sec. 104. Expenditures made pursuant to this joint
resolution shall be charged to the applicable appropriation,
fund, or authorization whenever a bill in which such
applicable appropriation, fund, or authorization is contained
is enacted into law.
Sec. 105. This joint resolution shall be implemented so
that only the most limited funding action of that permitted
in the joint resolution shall be taken in order to provide
for continuation of projects and activities.
Sec. 106. Amounts made available under section 101 for
civilian personnel compensation and benefits in each
department and agency may be apportioned up to the rate for
operations necessary to avoid furloughs within such
department or agency, consistent with the applicable
appropriations Act for fiscal year 2013, except that such
authority provided under this section shall not be used until
after the department or agency has taken all necessary
actions to reduce or defer non-personnel-related
administrative expenses.
Sec. 107. It is the sense of the Congress that this joint
resolution may also be referred to as the ``Food and Drug
Safety Act''.
This joint resolution may be cited as the ``Food and Drug
Administration Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2014''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for
40 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.
The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt) and the gentleman from
California (Mr. Farr) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama.
General Leave
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 77, and that I may include
tabular material on the same.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Alabama?
There was no objection.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Joint Resolution 77, which
would continue the funding for the Food and Drug Administration. I
think everyone here in the House agrees that funding for the FDA is
necessary to this critical operation in order to support our Nation's
public health and the millions of jobs associated with FDA activities.
Most Members of this body may not realize it, but FDA-regulated
industries account for almost 25 percent of the consumer spending in
the United States of America.
Fiscal year 2013 ag appropriation included total funding of $4.2
billion; $2.5 billion came from discretionary funds and $1.7 billion
from user fees. Of greatest importance is the need to ensure that our
constituents continue to consume safe foods and use safe and effective
drugs and medical devices. Despite reduced funding levels overall for
FY 2013, we were able to provide a strategic increase of $12.5 million
for food safety activities and $10 million for food and drug safety
inspections in China. These funding increases will continue under a CR.
In addition to the funds appropriated for the FDA, this resolution
that we are debating this afternoon would allow FDA to collect and
spend drug and medical product user fees. Of course, the fees are
charged to the industry to support such lifesaving activities for the
review and approval of new and generic drugs as well as medical
devices.
This House has already passed a resolution to fund the public health
activities at the NIH, and it awaits the Senate's approval. Also, USDA
meat and poultry inspectors were deemed critical to our Nation's food
supply and have stayed on duty during this temporary delay in funding.
It is now time for this body to continue funding one more critical
component of our public health infrastructure.
The Food and Drug Administration touches every Member of this House,
either directly or indirectly, and we need the entire Agency back at
work. We need to also limit any damage to the millions of jobs impacted
by FDA's work in the food and bioscience industries.
Now is the chance for my colleagues here in the House to join me in
keeping this important program fully operational. I would ask that my
colleagues support this resolution that we're debating this afternoon.
It will ensure that all critical elements of our Nation's food and drug
supply will be protected.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My colleague and chair, Mr. Aderholt, just said that this bill is
necessary because funding for the FDA is necessary. He's absolutely
right, but this bill doesn't do all that. You cannot just fund one
component of government and not have the rest of government. FDA is the
Food and Drug Administration. It relies heavily on the Centers for
Disease Control. You do nothing to fund the Centers for Disease
Control. So as just one critical component of the Federal Government,
it isn't the Federal Government, and that's what has been shut down,
and so I adamantly oppose this legislation.
We have been here a number of days now with the government shut down
because people are trying to use the appropriations process, which is,
as every schoolchild knows, the process where the President asks and
then the Congress disposes, and we use the Appropriations Committee to
dispose; that is, we make the decisions on how much is going to be
spent by each agency.
The President came to Congress asking for $1.2 trillion in
expenditures. The Republicans rejected that in their budget and came up
with a much less budgeted number of $967 billion. This bill on the
floor, the big bill, has the Democrats agreeing to $986 billion. That's
a $200 billion reduction. That's just amazing. I don't think this has
ever been done before where that big of a cut has been made to the
Federal Government, and yet we can't pass it.
The Senate has passed it because, as everyone knows, it's a bicameral
process, and whatever the President signs has to be passed by both
Houses. The Senate has passed over here a clean bill, as we say, which
means without all kinds of conditionality. That would go to the
President if this House had voted for it. It could go forward tonight.
This whole thing--this charade of shutting down government--could be
over tonight. All we would have to do is pass what the Senate sent
over.
But no, here we go again. Now we're going to take it in piecemeal
fashion. Tonight, we bring up the FDA; it's a wonderful organization. I
want to point out to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that,
since I've been here, in 20 years, we've passed 111 CRs--enacted. In
fact, under President Bush, we passed 56. And I'm sure every one of the
Republicans passed those; 56, without conditionality. Democrats didn't
try to bring down the House. And even under President Obama, so far,
we've passed 19 CRs. So why can't we do that now? Why can't we do what
we've been doing, this House has been doing for decades, passing a CR
to keep government open?
It's certainly not the responsible thing for our committee, and we're
very proud of our committee, but a CR is giving up because we haven't
passed the appropriation bills that are really the mechanics of how we
ought to be spending money. In fact, my distinguished colleague, Mr.
Aderholt, has, 94 times, voted for a CR. So I cannot support this
piecemeal specialty of the day, just voting for one segment of the
Federal Government and ignoring all the rest.
I reserve the balance of my time.
[[Page H6328]]
Mr. ADERHOLT. I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr.
Rogers), the chairman of the full Appropriations Committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, this bill makes sure that, even
during this shutdown, the Food and Drug Administration's critical
safeguards remain in place to protect our food and drug supply. The
health of our people should not be jeopardized. This legislation
provides funding for the FDA at the current post-sequestration annual
rate of $2.3 billion. This will provide funding to maintain protections
for food, drugs, and medical devices, and allow the FDA to collect and
spend user fees.
The length of this authority will last until December 15 or until we
enact year-long appropriations that address the funding of the Federal
Government in full.
As with each of the other individual bills we have considered this
week, the language in H.J. Res. 77 is nearly identical to what was
included in my clean continuing resolution filed back in September.
This bill moves us a step closer to the finish line, but we've got to
remember that we can get there much faster if we find a way to fund the
entire Federal Government. This will require cooperation and
conversation from both the Senate and the House.
This will be the ninth bill the House has sent to the Senate to
reopen the Federal Government. The ninth bill, Mr. Speaker. The House
has voted to provide nearly one-third of the funding to reopen the
government; but, unfortunately, the Senate won't even consider these
bills, and so the government is still shut down. Our colleagues in the
Senate say they want a clean CR, but when we've sent them these bills--
pieces of a clean CR with clean funding mechanisms, nonetheless--they
won't even bring them up for a vote.
This is not my first choice of how to fund the Federal Government. My
preference would be to have passed full-year appropriations bills for
all the government before September 30. The House made great strides
toward that goal with our committee approving nearly all of our annual
bills and with the full House passing four of them, yet the Senate
would not even pass a single bill off the floor of the Senate. But I
still hope and believe that we can find a path forward. It will require
both parties, both bodies, to find ways we can work together to end
this shutdown.
As we work toward that end, we can pass this bill to ensure that
nearly all of the Federal Government's food safety activities are
funded during the shutdown. I urge support of the bill.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New
York (Mrs. Lowey), the distinguished ranking member on the
Appropriations Committee.
Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the reckless
Republican shutdown. I wish my colleagues had shown this same level of
concern for the Food and Drug Administration over the last 3 years.
Since Democrats passed the landmark Food Safety and Modernization Act,
Republicans have done nothing but stand in the way of its
implementation by underfunding the critical needs in the FDA bill.
This bill is nothing more than a Republican ploy, and the claim that
Democrats are not negotiating is absolutely false. House Republicans
wrote a bill and sent it to the Senate. The Senate adopted the most
important part of it, the funding level, and the President agreed to
sign it even though the Democrats want greater investment to support
economic growth. The only thing Democrats say ``no'' to are
irresponsible efforts to put health care decisions back in the hands of
insurance companies, which has nothing to do with keeping the
government open. That is democracy. That is negotiation. We have done
more than meet in the middle, but the Republicans now say ``no'' to
their own bill. We could end the shutdown today if the majority would
only support a reasonable solution to allow a vote on the Republican-
written, Senate-passed bill.
Vote ``no,'' and demand a House vote to immediately end the reckless
Republican shutdown.
{time} 1800
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Upton), who chairs the full committee of Energy and
Commerce.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight in strong support of the Food
and Drug Safety Act.
As we try to work out our fiscal differences, it is imperative that
the Food and Drug Administration does have the resources that it needs
to ensure the safety and quality of our Nation's food and drug supplies
and medical devices. This bill will help ensure that the FDA can focus
on that very important mission.
Over the past week, the House has acted to reopen major parts of
other government. The legislation before us is yet another piece of
that important effort to continue critical programs for the American
people.
From food inspections to approvals of breakthrough new drugs and
devices, Members on both sides of the aisle indeed understand and
appreciate the important role of the FDA. This essential work should
continue as we wait at the negotiating table for the President to join
in a conversation to resolve our differences.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill to ensure that the FDA has
the resources to get the job done. Let's stand together in support of
food safety and drug approvals.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan, Congressman Levin, the ranking member of the Ways and Means
Committee.
(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, we should not be debating a bill that's going
nowhere. We should be debating a bill that will end this shutdown.
Yesterday, the Speaker said this: There are not enough votes in the
House to pass a clean bill to fund the government and end the shutdown.
The truth of the matter is, if the bill will come up, it will pass.
On Saturday, 195 Democrats wrote to the Speaker and said, Bring up
the bill. Informed reports say there are 22 Republicans who will also
vote ``yes.'' That is a majority of the House.
I say to the Speaker: Let all of us speak.
The President today said this:
The truth of the matter is there are enough Republican and
Democratic votes in the House of Representatives right now to
end this shutdown immediately, with no partisan strings
attached. The House should hold that vote today. If
Republicans and Speaker Boehner are saying there are not
enough votes, then they should prove it. Let the bill go to
the floor, and let's see what happens. Just vote.
Then he continued:
There's no reason that there has to be a shutdown in order
for the kind of negotiations Speaker Boehner says he wants to
proceed. Hold a vote. Call a vote right now, and let's see
what happens.
We say to the Speaker: Let democracy prevail. Bring the Senate bill
up for a vote now.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Pitts), the chairman of the Health Subcommittee of
the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Mr. PITTS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Food and Drug
Safety Act.
Since the Senate will not negotiate with us about opening up the
entire government, we will continue proposing commonsense bills to
reopen critical functions as soon as possible.
This bill funds the FDA and ensures that it performs important
duties, including inspections of food, medical devices, and
pharmaceutical facilities. It makes sure that reviews of lifesaving new
devices and drugs continue and that the government doesn't stand in the
way of innovation.
We have the most dynamic and productive medical research firms in the
world. American companies and universities are paving the way to
incredible new cures. In fact, three American scientists were just
honored with this year's Nobel Prize in medicine for their research
into how our cells function. Americans can continue leading the world
in this field, but we have to make sure that the FDA conducts reviews
promptly.
Let's get the FDA back open and performing their important work.
Patients, young and old, are counting on it.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the former
[[Page H6329]]
ranking member of the Agriculture Committee and now the ranking member
of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies.
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, we are almost a full week into this self-
inflicted government shutdown because the Speaker refuses to stand up
to a vocal minority in his own party. There is no end in sight.
Instead, we sit here watching the Republican majority talk out of both
sides of their mouths and pretend to hold positions they have been
voting against from the first day that they took power.
This bill is today's daily exercise in cynicism. I served as
chairwoman of the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee, the body
that oversees funding for the Food and Drug Administration. We worked
hard to increase the resources at FDA so that more food could be
inspected, more outbreaks prevented.
We also passed the Food Safety Modernization Act in 2010 to improve
FDA's ability to respond quickly and efficiently in a proactive,
science-based fashion to contaminated food outbreaks.
Since taking office in 2011, this Republican majority has tried to
undercut and hamstring the FDA at every step. In 2011, the first bill
this majority passed included a $241 million cut to the FDA. In 2012,
they tried to slash salaries by 21 percent, hampering the agency's
ability to implement the Food Safety Modernization Act. In 2013, they
tried to cut FDA by another $16 million. They rejected an amendment
that I offered to increase funding by $50 million for monitoring
foodborne pathogens and implementing the new food safety law.
For years, we've been trying to get the Republican majority to be
serious about the FDA and food safety funding. Food illnesses account
for 48 million illnesses, 128,000 hospitalizations, and 3,000 deaths
each year, and particularly affect children, pregnant women, and older
adults.
Meanwhile, over 80 percent of the seafood and 30 percent of the fruit
and nuts consumed in the United States are produced elsewhere, yet less
than 1 percent of imported food is inspected by the FDA.
The Republican majority has refused to fund these food safety
initiatives. Now they are bringing up this disingenuous bill for
political show. The health of American families is not a game. These
are people's lives.
Over 13 Federal agencies have important food safety responsibilities.
The Centers for Disease Control identifies food safety pathogens in
sources, and they are not funded in this bill. The Department of
Justice prosecutes food contaminators, but they are not funded in this
bill. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration carries out
seafood inspections for the FDA, but they are not funded in this bill.
USDA is responsible for a whole host of critical safety measures, but
they are not funded in this bill.
Now, if you think there should be only one food safety agency, that's
something that we can talk about.
This bill does not protect our families from contaminated food. It
doesn't adequately fund the FDA. It's another in a series of purely
political bills put forward by the Republican majority.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Indiana (Mrs. Brooks), who sits on the Homeland Security Committee.
Mrs. BROOKS of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the
Food and Drug Safety Act.
Right now, moms and dads across this country have too many worries.
They worry about whether or not they'll have enough money to pay their
rent, their mortgage, and even fill up their gas tanks. They worry
about whether or not their hours are going to be cut at work next
month. Why should we add to their worry the list of the safety of the
food that they're feeding their children at dinner tonight?
One of my constituents from Fishers, Indiana, Elizabeth Armstrong,
has experienced firsthand a child becoming ill due to contaminated
food. Several years ago, Elizabeth's young daughter fell very ill after
eating spinach contaminated with E. coli. This brave little girl
luckily survived, but she now lives with kidney disease.
Isn't food safety a core function of our government? Is it
responsible to stop routine inspections of food processors and place
our constituents at risk of developing foodborne illness.
Mr. Speaker, our parents are worried, but this is one worry they
should not have. FDA needs to keep food inspectors on the job. I urge
passage of this resolution.
Mr. FARR. Mr Speaker, how much time do both sides have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 9 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Alabama has 11 minutes remaining.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Mrs. Miller), who currently chairs the House Administration
Committee.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in very strong support of the Food and Drug
Safety Act. The bill we are debating this afternoon would provide
immediate funding for the Food and Drug Administration, which is, of
course, the agency in charge of the safety and stability of our
Nation's food supply and our medicine supply as well.
Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve an answer to a couple of
simple questions. First of all, will Congress actually take action now
to secure and to inspect our Nation's food supply? Secondly, will
Congress take action now to secure our Nation's medicine supply?
I know that many on the other side of the aisle will once again
oppose this legislation because they say they need to have an entire
government funding bill or else nothing will be funded. Yet, they call
Republicans ``absolutists.'' However, many on the other side of the
aisle will recognize these legitimate concerns and will help us pass
this important funding. It's time for the Senate to act on this and the
other important funding bills that have passed with broad bipartisan
majorities.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate majority leader and the President cannot
continue to say that they will not negotiate on ending this government
shutdown. They must stop holding so many important issues hostage to
their absolutist demands. I say let's go to a conference committee now,
let's negotiate in a bipartisan way, and let's stop this government
shutdown.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
Congresswoman from Texas, Sheila Jackson Lee, the ranking member on the
Border and Maritime Security Subcommittee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. I thank the distinguished gentleman from California,
and I thank him for his leadership.
Mr. Speaker, what baffles me is that our Republican friends are
seemingly acting like there's business as usual, that we are quietly on
the floor of the House, just passing a food safety initiative.
Our House is on fire, and there's nobody here to put the fire out.
We're in the middle of a government shutdown. Of course I'm committed
to the principles of this legislation, as my colleagues, as the ranking
member, as the ranking member of the full committee, as Ms. DeLauro and
Mr. Waxman are. We are all committed to this.
May I remind my friends that 45 percent of the FDA employees, they
are on furlough. Just today, four people in Texas were arrested because
of FDA criminal investigators. They were trying to sell stem cell
packages to sick people, devastated people, that were fraudulent and
diseased and inappropriate to terminally ill people. It was the FDA
criminal investigators that were able to make this case and the U.S.
Attorney in my district said ``thank you.'' But right now there are
U.S. Attorneys across the Nation getting ready to lay off their
attorneys.
The House is on fire, and my friends don't seem to understand.
{time} 1815
Let me just share with you that there are usually 80 inspections on
food facilities a day. They're not going on right now. Up to October
17, there will be some 960 facilities not inspected, and the only
reason is that we will not come to the floor, put the clean CR on the
floor, and have 195 plus 21 people vote in the majority to open the
doors of this government.
But more importantly, have you heard the stories of families whose
husbands or wives are laid off, struggling to make ends meet, calling
on relatives to be able to help them? You've heard
[[Page H6330]]
of the young woman who came to my attention who had to be carried away
to a shelter because she was suffering domestic abuse because of the
financial crisis; or maybe you haven't heard that 70 percent of
Americans and 51 percent of Republicans are saying, We don't like what
you're doing, Republicans. We want this government to open.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. FARR. I yield the gentlewoman from Texas an additional 15
seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Or maybe you haven't heard from the Democratic
Governor of Kentucky, Governor Beshear, who says that right now 7,000
are already enrolled in the Affordable Care Act. He is saying that he
has a report that says that if this Affordable Care Act works, he'll
have 17,000 more jobs, $15 billion in the economy.
Let's stop this foolishness with ObamaCare. It's working. Let's get
back to work and pass a clean CR. Too many people are hurting. Enough
is enough. We need to do what is right for America.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.J. Res. 77, a piece-meal
``mini-CR,'' which woefully underfunds the Food and Drug
Administration, FDA.
Mr. Speaker, this bill would be unnecessary if only the House
majority would allow a vote on the clean Continuing Resolution, passed
by the Senate. The House would easily pass the measure and the
President will sign it, as he reaffirmed today.
H.J. Res. 77 is the latest attempt by the House Republicans to
extricate themselves from the mess they created by shutting down the
government. But they should have learned by now that it would not work.
It is inefficient, unfair, and costly. The shutdown needlessly disrupts
the lives of Americans who provide benefits and services and those who
depend upon them. These reckless mini-CRs will have the effect,
intended or not, of sowing division when unity is needed. It is not
surprising, therefore, that responsible leaders of organizations that
would benefit from these mini-CRs are united in opposing this piece-
meal approach to appropriating.
Veterans groups opposed the `Republican mini-CR for veterans'
affairs. Similarly, leading research and consumer protection
organizations oppose the FDA mini-CR before us.
For example, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, CSPI,
opposes H.J. Res. 77. Although the organization is a health advocacy
nonprofit that promotes food safety, the CSPI does not support the
piecemeal approach by government that would make funding the FDA a
partisan issue because ``the irresponsible shutting down of government
and particularly public health agencies like FDA and Center for Disease
Control places families at risk from food borne diseases. But opening
FDA alone would not solve the problem. Food safety is a joint
governmental effort involving 13 different agencies often working
collaboratively?''
The FDA is an essential federal agency with the life-saving mission
of protecting all Americans from unsafe drugs, devices, biologics, and
food.
For example in Texas, three men were arrested and a fourth is being
sought by the FBI in connection with what investigators say was a $1.5-
million Texas-based scheme to illegally market and sell stem cell
treatments to patients with terminal diseases. ``Protecting the public
from unproven and potentially dangerous drug and medical procedures is
very important,'' said Kenneth Magidson, U.S. attorney for the Houston-
based southern district of Texas. ``This office will continue to
prosecute violations involving threats to the public health.''
``This indictment demonstrates the commitment of the FDA to protect
the American public from the harms inherent in being exposed to
unapproved new drugs,'' said Patrick J. Holland, special agent in
charge of the FDA Office of Criminal Investigations, according to the
statement. Due to the shutdown, the FDA is now unable to continue to
aggressively pursue perpetrators of such acts and ensure that they are
punished to the full extent of the law.
It is important that the FDA is funded as it plays a vital role in
protecting consumers from contaminated and misbranded food.
But it is even more important that the entire government be reopened
to serve all the needs of the American people.
Due to the shutdown, the FDA will have to cease most of its food-
safety operations. That includes ``routine establishment inspections,
some compliance and enforcement activities, monitoring of imports,
notification programs (e.g., food contact substances, infant formula),
and the majority of the laboratory research necessary to inform public
health decision-making.''
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety Inspection Service
will continue manning every meat facility with full-time inspectors,
even as many government programs are halted. But the FDA also oversees
the safety of the vast majority of the country's food industry.
According to a memo released by the Department of Heath Human Services,
the bulk of FDA food inspectors have been deemed non-essential, so few,
if any, food facilities will be inspected until the shutdown is over.
This past December, the FDA shut down a nut processor in New Mexico
after records showed that the facility was shipping products infected
with salmonella. This sort of monitoring and enforcement could become
much harder because of the shutdown.
In fiscal 2011, the FDA coordinated or conducted inspections of about
20,000 food facilities for compliance with safety regulations. The
number of past inspections suggests FDA officials normally inspect
about 8o facilities per business day. So, for every day the government
doesn't work, approximately 80 food facilities will go without federal
inspections. If the shutdown lasts until October 17, 960 facilities may
go without U.S. inspections.
A spokesman from the FDA contacted The Huffington Post on Wednesday
to note that a portion of these inspections would be conducted by the
agency's partners in state agriculture and public health departments.
But he couldn't say how big a portion, or whether the FDA would
continue, during the shutdown, to pay state agencies their normal fee
for inspections conducted on the FDA's behalf.
To get a sense of what this means, we must understand that the FDA
sends letters to food facilities that failed inspections. They reveal
gnarly conditions at major food manufacturing facilities, including
cooking implements covered in mold and stored in brown, soiled water at
a Detroit donut faculty; high levels of illegal drug residues in veal
were found from a farm in upstate New York; and flies infesting a
tortilla factory in Hagerstown, Maryland.
The warning letters give the facilities in question a chance to
correct sanitation mistakes before they cause serious outbreaks of food
borne illness. If the commands in a warning letter are not obeyed, the
FDA has the authority to punish, or even shutdown, the facility in
question.
These warning letters are sent to just a small fraction of all
facilities that are inspected, and not all of these facilities have
infractions that lead directly to illness. That means, it is impossible
to say whether cancelled food safety inspections will directly lead to
food consumers getting sick. However, fewer inspections can have a
direct correlation to more contamination in the marketplace.
For these reasons, we must end the government shutdown as soon as
possible, or, barring that, to fund food safety programs with a
separate bill.
The following leading research and consumer groups have urged
Congress to end the shutdown completely since they cannot support a
legislative approach that shuts down some essential public health
agencies while temporarily funding others: American Medical Student
Association, Breast Cancer Action, Community Access National Network,
Connecticut Center for Patient Safety, Jacobs Institute of Women's
Health, National Consumers League, National Research Center for Women &
Families, National Women's Health Network, Our Bodies Ourselves, The
TMJ Association, WomenHeart: The National Coalition for Women with
Heart Disease, WoodyMatters.
It is not responsible to fund the FDA at the same time that the
Center for Disease Control and Prevention is unable to fully function
to examine the cause of epidemics caused by unsafe food or defective
medical products.
Mr. Speaker, if Congress fails to pass a ``clean'' continuing
resolution before month's end, FDA inspections will continue to
decrease across the nation and the likelihood of consumers becoming ill
will increase.
This would be unconscionable.
Normally I would be pleased to be here today to talk about the
funding for this program, but this is different. What the majority is
doing is playing games with safety of the food supply and the lives of
real people--the lives of our families, our friends, and our
constituents.
For these reasons, we should be working to pass H.J. Res. 59 as
amended by the Senate. That is the best way to keep faith with all
persons who serve the American people as employees of the federal
government, and the people who depend upon the FDA program.
October 4, 2013.
Hon. John Boehner,
Speaker, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Democratic Leader, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Speaker Boehner and Leader Pelosi: We are writing as public
health, patient, consumer, and scientific nonprofit
organizations to oppose H.J. Res 77 and any other efforts to
single out the Food and Drug Administration for funding. Our
organizations represent millions of patients, consumers,
health professionals, and scientists who strongly support
[[Page H6331]]
the work of the FDA and urge Congress to provide the level of
appropriations the agency needs throughout FY 2014.
We appreciate the recognition that the FDA is an essential
federal agency with the life-saving mission of protecting all
Americans from unsafe drugs, devices, biologics, and food. We
are very concerned that the current shutdown is curtailing
the agency's work, which will inevitably delay the approval
of new medical products and the inspection of medical
products and food. The shutdown also harms scientists and
other employees who have dedicated their careers to public
service, and will make it even more difficult for the agency
to attract the scientific expertise it needs now and in the
future. And, the shutdown will also have a devastating impact
on some of the companies that rely on FDA reviews to get
their new products to market, and their workers.
Nevertheless, we cannot support a legislative approach that
shuts down some essential public health agencies while
temporarily funding others. For example, it is not
responsible to fund the FDA at the same time that the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention is unable to fully
function to examine the cause of epidemics caused by unsafe
food or defective medical products.
We strongly urge Congress to do its job: immediately open
up all federal agencies and then quickly work together to get
the FY 2014 appropriations bills enacted into law, based on
the funding levels needed to do their jobs well. These
appropriations bills should not include a sequester or
arbitrary across the board cuts, but rather should give
agencies the authority to cut ineffective programs and
adequately fund those that are essential.
American Medical Student Association; Breast Cancer Action;
Community Access National Network; Connecticut Center for
Patient Safety; Jacobs Institute of Women's Health; National
Consumers League; National Research Center for Women &
Families; National Women's Health Network; Our Bodies
Ourselves; The TMJ Association; WomenHeart: The National
Coalition for Women with Heart Disease; WoodyMatters.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), one of our physicians here in the
House.
Mr. BURGESS. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, the Food and Drug Administration historically has been
one of the bipartisan efforts that this House has enjoyed. In fact, a
little over a year ago, the Food and Drug User Fee Reauthorization Act
passed both the House and the Senate, went to a conference committee,
was signed by the President of the United States on July 9, 2012, in
the middle of an election year when partisanship was at its fever
pitch, and yet this House came together and passed that reauthorization
bill.
You've heard the chairman of the full Appropriations Committee say
that he hoped this bill would pass today to allow the Food and Drug
Administration to utilize those user fees that have been remitted by
the companies that are actually looking to have their products approved
by the FDA. I support him in that, and I hope he's correct.
One of the most important missions of the government, one of the
premier agencies of the Federal Government is the Food and Drug
Administration. Its job is to ensure that medical drugs and medical
devices are safe and effective. The FDA is also a gateway for patients
who are suffering disease and disability with the hope of one day
getting past that disease and disability. The FDA is the gateway for
those patients.
We've taken legislative steps to fix some of the issues with the FDA.
They aren't always functioning in a perfect manner, but I know one
thing for sure: keeping FDA employees away from their jobs is not the
way to accomplish those goals.
This is a good bill today, the Food and Drug Safety Act. I hope the
Senate will take this up. The House is going to pass it in a bipartisan
manner in just a very short period of time. We will send it over to the
Senate, as we have many other bills last week, and we'll continue to
send bills. This is the way the process should work. Appropriations
shouldn't be done in one large lump. They should be done in the
individual departments.
I support this bill today. I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman has voted for CRs 19 times since
President Obama has been in office, with the whole enchilada, passing
them without rancor, without asking the President to negotiate. So
there's no reason we can't do that tonight.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, Henry Waxman, the
distinguished ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Speaker, we're on the seventh day of a government
shutdown caused by the reckless actions of House Republicans; and we
are now considering the sixth piecemeal bill that reopens a few
government activities, but still continues the shutdown for everybody
else.
Now, I support the FDA. Who doesn't support the FDA? It's very
important that they do their job. But you know what's also important?
What's also important is the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, which responds to disease outbreaks and works to prevent
the spread of seasonal flu. They're not going to be reopened. There's
no funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration, which limits its ability to improve mental health
across the country.
There are things this government does--and I'm pleased my Republican
colleagues are starting to understand why government is so important.
And that's why we shouldn't have this closing down of government and
then reopening it piece by piece.
This is an effort to hold the government hostage until the
unreasonable demand to deny health insurance for American families is
met, and that is a demand that we will not give in to. Let the House
vote on a clean bill to fund the whole government, not the piecemeal
approach we're considering today. It's a gimmick, and it's also poor
policy.
And you should understand something else, Mr. Speaker, they're not
giving FDA the full funding. What they're doing is still continuing the
draconian sequestration cut which took over $200 million out of FDA's
budget. If they love FDA so much, fund it where it should be funded,
not with $200 million less.
Mr. Speaker, there is no funding for hundreds of the Nation's tribes.
There is no funding for meals for millions of seniors. There is no
assistance to more than 1 million families in need.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. FARR. I yield the gentleman from California an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. WAXMAN. I think we're all supporters of the FDA; but if the
Republicans were truly interested in FDA, they would work with
Democrats. We would have a conversation about it to lift the sequester
and restore funding for FDA and all other critical programs as well.
I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time.
Mr. ADERHOLT. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Maryland, Mr. Chris Van Hollen, our distinguished leader.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my friend from California.
Mr. Speaker, I have the privilege of representing the congressional
district that is home to the Food and Drug Administration. Those
individuals do great work for our country; and I can tell you, Mr.
Speaker, nobody--and I mean nobody--is being fooled by this ridiculous
stunt that the Republicans in this House are pulling, trying to cherry-
pick little pieces of government to fund when they know they're not
going anywhere, when the American people know that this House is in
possession of a piece of legislation that, if we were allowed to vote
on it, would go to the President's desk tonight; he would sign it; and
we would open up all of government immediately--FDA, NIH, the VA,
everything.
The position Republicans are taking is made even more ridiculous by
what we did on Saturday. On Saturday, we said, We're going to pay all
Federal employees--not just employees at FDA, not just at NIH--all
Federal Government employees. That was the right thing to do.
Now you're saying you only want to keep some of those agencies open,
not all of them open. So what our Republican colleagues are telling the
American people is, we want to pay all the employees in the Federal
Government; but we don't want to allow a lot of them to go to work. We
want to pay for everybody in the Federal Government, but we don't want
to allow everybody to go to work. What kind of policy is that?
Now, Mr. Speaker, just this weekend, the Speaker of this House
admitted on
[[Page H6332]]
national television that he had reached an agreement with the
Democratic leader in the United States Senate, Senator Harry Reid,
where Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats said, We will agree on a
temporary basis to the lower funding levels in the sequester in
exchange for making sure we have a clean continuing resolution, that we
keep the government open. That's what the Speaker agreed to.
But then he came back to this House, and he couldn't hold his caucus.
Why? Because Senator Cruz and a radical reckless faction said, No, we
can't do that. We have to close the government unless we shut down the
Affordable Care Act. And that position hasn't changed. That's why today
we can't open the government, because our Republican colleagues want to
continue to shut down the Affordable Care Act.
Let's vote today to open the whole government. Let's have a vote, Mr.
Speaker, on the bill that's in our possession.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FARR. I yield to the distinguished Congressman from Arizona, Ron
Barber, for a unanimous consent request.
Mr. BARBER. Mr. Speaker, while Congress recessed this weekend, I
stayed here in Washington to work with my colleagues to end this
shutdown. I talked with southern Arizonans to hear from them about the
shutdown and how it's impacting their families. Mr. Speaker, I can tell
you that the people I talked with don't care who is to blame. They want
us to reopen their government.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is out of order.
Mr. BARBER. On behalf of my constituents in southern Arizona, I ask
unanimous consent that the House bring up the Senate amendment to the
continuing appropriations resolution, H.J. Res. 59. We must come
together, and we must put the American people first. We cannot allow
this stalemate to continue for one more day.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. It is out of order for the gentleman to make
a speech when seeking recognition for a unanimous consent request.
Under guidelines consistently issued by successive Speakers, as
recorded in section 956 of the House Rules and Manual, the Chair is
constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by
the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships.
Mr. FARR. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this piecemeal bill to nowhere
that continues to delay and shut down government when we could be
passing a bill right now that would keep government open, and it would
open it up tomorrow morning; but the Speaker refuses to allow that
legislation to come to the floor. He tells the press there aren't the
votes.
Let's try it. I dare you. I dare you. Bring it to the floor. Let's
see if there are enough votes. I think there are because I think the
majority of this body wants to keep the government open and not play
these games.
These are games. Never done before. Never done before. Congress has
never shut down the government. Yes, it was shut down under Clinton,
but it was by a veto. It wasn't for a failure to get them a bill.
They're saying, Well, the President has to negotiate. He doesn't have
to negotiate.
Under President Bush, we passed 56 CRs with no negotiation. Under
President Obama, so far, 19. Almost every Member here voted for those.
So you've been voting for CRs continuously for years and years without
rancor. What's the difference now? You don't like a bill that passed 3
years ago, and you have to come and break the rules here by getting a
waiver so you can bring up these issues on the appropriations bill
because you don't want to do it in regular order? This is just insane.
This is insane. We've never done it like this. And the country is
wondering what the heck is going on. Well, what's going on is we've
just become children in this fight. This is nuts. This is not the way
to run a government.
By God, let's get government open. We can do it tonight. Let's bring
the bill to the floor and vote on it. Vote against this bill to
nowhere.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ADERHOLT. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would hope that all of my colleagues would join me
tonight in supporting House Joint Resolution 77 that has been discussed
here over the last hour.
I understand that many of my friends across the aisle would disagree
with the majority's decision to immediately fund the most critical
function of government during the delay that we have in current
funding.
I recognize your preferences for a vote on all the government at one
time; but you must recognize the truth of the matter is we don't have
consensus in the House. Until the White House and the Senate are
willing to sit down and negotiate a quick solution to this stalemate, I
ask that my friends across the aisle join me in supporting the Food and
Drug Administration, an agency that is on the front lines for our
public health on a day-to-day basis.
There are a number of us who would question why nearly half of the
FDA is furloughed when nearly all of their work impacts the safety and
protection of human life. However, the administration has chosen to
cease activities related to food, to medical devices, and to human drug
establishment inspections, infant formula notifications, and to
laboratory research that are tied to public health decision-making.
{time} 1830
Most importantly, I would want to think that the administration is
not playing politics with the safety of our Nation's food supply; but
why is it that 87 percent of the Food Safety and Inspection Service is
on the job while only about half of FDA's food safety staff are
actually working, especially when FDA is responsible for 80 percent of
the food supply?
As I noted in my opening remarks a few minutes ago, I would speculate
that many of our colleagues don't realize how the FDA impacts every
single one of our constituents in one way or the other. From formula
fed to babies, to blood transfusions needed during emergencies and
routine surgeries, to drugs that extend the lives of the sick, to the
domestic or imported foods we feed to our families, on every occasion,
the FDA is there.
Just 2 days ago, this body voted 407-0 to approve a measure that will
provide backpay to furloughed Federal workers. This vote did not impact
the critical needs of public health, yet an important vote,
nonetheless. I would ask that each of the 407 Members who voted on
Saturday for the backpay for Federal workers to now vote in favor of a
bill that provides for urgent needs for our public safety and our
welfare across the United States of America.
Again, I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 371, the previous question is ordered.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third
time, and was read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. FARR. I am opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Farr moves to recommit the joint resolution H.J. Res.
77 to the Committee on Appropriations with instructions to
report the same back to the House forthwith with the
following amendment:
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
That upon passage of this joint resolution by the House of
Representatives, the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 59) making
continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2014, and for other
purposes, as amended by the Senate on September 27, 2013,
shall be considered to have been taken from the Speaker's
table and the House shall be considered to have (1) receded
from its amendment; and (2) concurred in the Senate
amendment.
Mr. FARR (during the reading). I ask unanimous consent to dispense
with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the
gentleman's motion.
[[Page H6333]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California is recognized for
5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, this is the eighth time we've made this motion
to bring the clean CR to the floor. And what could be simpler than a
clean appropriations bill? No riders, no earmarks, no policy changes. I
know it's something that my friends on the other side of the aisle have
done over and over and over again. In this case, it's even with no
increase in spending. It's clean; it's simple; it's the right thing to
do.
So why are we here today, day after day, tinkering at the margins?
Today we fund one agency; tomorrow it's something else; last Friday it
was several others. This isn't any way to run a government, and no one
who votes for this bill should think that it is. All this bill does is
play favorites, pitting one agency against another for meager
government funding.
So I offer this motion to recommit with the hope that our colleagues
on the other side of the aisle will join me in funding, not part of
government, not piecemeal government, all of government. Why? Because
all Americans deserve a complete government at their service, a full-
time government, not a partial government or a sometimes government.
This motion will allow us to pass the Senate version, which is a
clean, what we call, continuing resolution, and it would reopen
government within 24 hours. Very simple. Just bring it to the floor.
Let the vote be what it is.
We've had, as I said earlier, 111 CRs since President Clinton was
elected to office. In fact, I have the breakdown right here. We had 36
CRs, continuing resolutions, passed without this kind of
conditionality, without the government shutting down--36. Under
President Bush, we had 56 CRs passed without shutting down the
government. With President Obama, in the years that he has been here,
we've already passed 19 CRs without shutting down the government,
without rancor, without conditions.
So why are we doing it now? It doesn't make any sense. Nobody can
explain this. All Americans want all of their government back, and we
can do that. Voting on this motion to recommit, we can get government
open.
So I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this
motion to recommit. Support our ability to get government back, working
for all the people for all the time, not part-time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Point of Order
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order that the
instructions that are contained in the motion violate clause 7 of rule
XVI, which requires that an amendment be germane to the bill under
consideration at the time.
As the Chair recently ruled on October 2, 3, and 4 of 2013, the
instructions contain a special order of business within the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules, and, therefore, the amendment
is not germane to the underlying bill.
Mr. Speaker, I insist on my point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member wish to be heard on the
point of order?
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I request to be heard on the point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
on the point of order.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, doesn't this bill before us fund a portion of
the Federal Government?
My motion to recommit would open the entire Federal Government so
that all the consumer protections that our Nation provides are
guaranteed. We need to open up not just food safety, but we also need
to open up the Centers for Disease Control. We need to open up consumer
hotlines. Can the Chair explain why it is not germane to open up all
the Nation's consumer protections?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman have argument confined to
the point of order?
Mr. FARR. Last Saturday, we agreed to pay our workers furloughed
during the shutdown. I supported that bill. But what sense does it make
to have workers paid to sit at home and not be able to do their jobs?
What kind of strange House is this that would force this situation on
our fellow workers? You've got to sit at home, but don't worry, you'll
get paid?
Mr. Speaker, if you rule this motion out of order, does that mean we
will not have a chance to keep the entire Federal Government open
today? Can the Chair please explain why we can't keep the entire
Federal Government open tonight, now?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule on the point
of order raised by the gentleman from Alabama.
The gentleman from Alabama makes a point of order that the
instructions proposed in the motion to recommit offered by the
gentleman from California are not germane.
The joint resolution extends funding relating to the Food and Drug
Administration. The instructions in the motion propose an order of
business of the House.
On October 2, October 3, and October 4, 2013, the Chair ruled that a
motion to recommit proposing an order of business of the House was not
germane to various measures on the basis that the motion failed the
committee jurisdiction test of germaneness.
Here, the joint resolution falls within the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Appropriations. The instructions in the motion fall within
the jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules.
The instructions, therefore, propose a non-germane amendment. The
point is of order is sustained.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Shall the decision of the
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I move to lay the appeal on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to table.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on the motion to table will be followed by a 5-minute vote
on passage of the joint resolution, if arising without further
proceedings in recommittal.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217,
nays 182, not voting 32, as follows:
[Roll No. 527]
YEAS--217
Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
[[Page H6334]]
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NAYS--182
Andrews
Barber
Barrow (GA)
Beatty
Becerra
Bera (CA)
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Edwards
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Garamendi
Garcia
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matheson
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moran
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--32
Bass
Blackburn
Buchanan
Castro (TX)
Clay
Davis, Danny
DesJarlais
Ellison
Forbes
Gallego
Gosar
Gutierrez
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Hoyer
King (NY)
Lipinski
Lucas
McCarthy (NY)
McKeon
Meeks
Moore
Poe (TX)
Polis
Richmond
Rogers (AL)
Rush
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Simpson
Welch
Young (FL)
{time} 1906
Messrs. CLYBURN and SIRES changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the motion to table was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the joint resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 235,
nays 162, not voting 34, as follows:
[Roll No. 528]
YEAS--235
Aderholt
Amash
Amodei
Bachmann
Bachus
Barber
Barletta
Barr
Barrow (GA)
Barton
Benishek
Bentivolio
Bera (CA)
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Broun (GA)
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Conaway
Cook
Cotton
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Daines
Davis, Rodney
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
Diaz-Balart
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garcia
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
Latta
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lynch
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McHenry
McIntyre
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Peters (CA)
Peters (MI)
Petri
Pittenger
Pitts
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Radel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Royce
Ruiz
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Scalise
Schneider
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stewart
Stivers
Stockman
Stutzman
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
NAYS--162
Andrews
Beatty
Becerra
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Duckworth
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Engel
Enyart
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Garamendi
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heck (WA)
Himes
Hinojosa
Holt
Honda
Horsford
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Maffei
Maloney, Carolyn
Matsui
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meng
Michaud
Miller, George
Moran
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Negrete McLeod
Nolan
O'Rourke
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--34
Bass
Blackburn
Buchanan
Castro (TX)
Clay
Davis, Danny
DesJarlais
Ellison
Forbes
Gallego
Gosar
Gutierrez
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Hoyer
King (NY)
Lipinski
Lucas
McCarthy (NY)
McKeon
Meeks
Moore
Poe (TX)
Polis
Rangel
Ribble
Richmond
Rogers (AL)
Rush
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Simpson
Welch
Young (FL)
{time} 1914
So the joint resolution was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________