[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 148 (Tuesday, October 22, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H6647-H6651]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       PROTECTING STUDENTS FROM SEXUAL AND VIOLENT PREDATORS ACT

  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 2083) to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 to require criminal background checks for school employees, as 
amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 2083

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Students from 
     Sexual and Violent Predators Act''.

     SEC. 2. BACKGROUND CHECKS.

       (a) Background Checks.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, each State educational agency 
     that receives funds under the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) shall have in 
     effect policies and procedures that--
       (1) require that a criminal background check be conducted 
     for each school employee that includes--
       (A) a search of the State criminal registry or repository 
     of the State in which the school employee resides;
       (B) a search of State-based child abuse and neglect 
     registries and databases of the State in which the school 
     employee resides;
       (C) a Federal Bureau of Investigation fingerprint check 
     using the Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification 
     System; and
       (D) a search of the National Sex Offender Registry 
     established under section 19 of the Adam Walsh Child 
     Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (42 U.S.C. 16919);
       (2) prohibit the employment of a school employee as a 
     school employee if such employee--

[[Page H6648]]

       (A) refuses to consent to a criminal background check under 
     paragraph (1);
       (B) makes a false statement in connection with such 
     criminal background check;
       (C) has been convicted of a felony consisting of--
       (i) homicide;
       (ii) child abuse or neglect;
       (iii) a crime against children, including child 
     pornography;
       (iv) spousal abuse;
       (v) a crime involving rape or sexual assault;
       (vi) kidnapping;
       (vii) arson; or
       (viii) physical assault, battery, or a drug-related 
     offense, committed on or after the date that is 5 years 
     before the date of such employee's criminal background check 
     under paragraph (1); or
       (D) has been convicted of any other crime that is a violent 
     or sexual crime against a minor;
       (3) require that each criminal background check conducted 
     under paragraph (1) be periodically repeated or updated in 
     accordance with State law or the policies of local 
     educational agencies served by the State educational agency;
       (4) upon request, provide each school employee who has had 
     a criminal background check under paragraph (1) with a copy 
     of the results of the criminal background check;
       (5) provide for a timely process by which a school employee 
     may appeal, but which does not permit the employee to be 
     employed as a school employee during such appeal, the results 
     of a criminal background check conducted under paragraph (1) 
     which prohibit the employee from being employed as a school 
     employee under paragraph (2) to--
       (A) challenge the accuracy or completeness of the 
     information produced by such criminal background check; and
       (B) establish or reestablish eligibility to be hired or 
     reinstated as a school employee by demonstrating that the 
     information is materially inaccurate or incomplete, and has 
     been corrected;
       (6) ensure that such policies and procedures are published 
     on the website of the State educational agency and the 
     website of each local educational agency served by the State 
     educational agency; and
       (7) allow a local educational agency to share the results 
     of a school employee's criminal background check recently 
     conducted under paragraph (1) with another local educational 
     agency that is considering such school employee for 
     employment as a school employee.
       (b) Transfer Prohibition.--A local educational agency or 
     State educational agency that receives funds under the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6301 et seq.) may not knowingly transfer or facilitate the 
     transfer of any school employee if the agency knows, or has 
     substantive reason to believe, that such employee engaged in 
     sexual misconduct with an elementary school or secondary 
     school student.
       (c) Fees for Background Checks.--
       (1) Charging of fees.--The Attorney General, State Attorney 
     General, or other State law enforcement official may charge 
     reasonable fees for conducting a criminal background check 
     under subsection (a)(1).
       (2) Administrative funds.--A local educational agency or 
     State educational agency may use administrative funds 
     received under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) to pay any reasonable fees 
     charged for conducting such criminal background check.
       (d) Definitions.--In this Act:
       (1) In general.--The terms ``elementary school'', 
     ``secondary school'', ``local educational agency'', 
     ``State'', and ``State educational agency'' have the meanings 
     given the terms in section 9101 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       (2) School employee.--The term ``school employee'' means--
       (A) an employee of, or a person seeking employment with, a 
     local educational agency or State educational agency, and 
     who, as a result of such employment, has (or will have) a job 
     duty that results in unsupervised access to elementary school 
     or secondary school students; or
       (B) any person, or an employee of any person, who has a 
     contract or agreement to provide services with an elementary 
     school or secondary school, local educational agency, or 
     State educational agency, and such person or employee, as a 
     result of such contract or agreement, has a job duty that 
     results in unsupervised access to elementary school or 
     secondary school students.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Indiana (Mr. Rokita) and the gentleman from California (Mr. George 
Miller) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on 
H.R. 2083.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Indiana?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2083, the Protecting Students 
from Sexual and Violent Predators Act.
  A report released by the Government Accountability Office in December 
2010 examined 15 cases where individuals with histories of sexual 
misconduct were hired or retained as teachers, support staff, 
volunteers, and contractors. In 11 of these 15 cases, those individuals 
had previously targeted children.
  Despite the fact that States have varying policies intended to 
protect children from sexual predators in schools, the GAO determined 
the policies were largely inconsistent and insufficient. According to 
the report, States don't consistently perform preemployment background 
checks, and when they do conduct these checks, they are not always 
fingerprinted or connected to the national criminal database.
  There is widespread agreement on both sides of this aisle that more 
must be done to protect students. We have worked with our colleagues to 
advance legislation that will ensure that every school employee--from 
the cafeteria workers, Mr. Speaker, to the administrators, to the 
janitors, to the teachers, principals, and librarians--that everyone is 
subject to a complete background check that includes the FBI 
fingerprint identification system and the National Sex Offender 
Registry.
  Today, we have an opportunity to finish the fight by sending this 
bill, the Protecting Students From Sexual and Violent Predators Act, to 
the Senate.
  H.R. 2083 will require States that receive funds under the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act to have policies and practices in place 
that ensure each school employee is subject to a complete national 
criminal background check. Mr. Speaker, a similar provision was offered 
by two of my colleagues and good friends, both from Pennsylvania, Mr. 
Fitzpatrick and Mr. Meehan. That provision was included in the House-
passed Student Success Act from last month.

                              {time}  1715

  The Protecting Students from Sexual and Violent Predators Act is 
commonsense legislation that will help ensure students in schools 
across the country are safe from sexual criminals. So all that being 
said, Mr. Speaker, I simply urge at this time my colleagues to support 
H.R. 2083.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  I want to thank Mr. Rokita for presenting the bill and Mr. 
Fitzpatrick for his work on the legislation. I appreciate their 
assistance.
  Mr. Speaker, when parents send their children to school each morning, 
they expect them to come home safe from harm. Day in and day out, 
millions of teachers, staff, and administrators do their utmost--
sometimes in downright heroic ways--to put their students' safety 
first. But despite these efforts, there remains a steady stream of 
stories from across the country involving students who have been abused 
by someone in a position of trust in their schools.
  Just this past summer, a music teacher in a Silver Spring, Maryland, 
elementary school was found to have sexually abused 15 minors over an 
8-year period.
  In my home State of California, a teacher was convicted of throwing a 
5-year-old boy with a disability onto a classroom floor and kicking him 
and was transferred to another school for the following year, but was 
not fired due to legal limitations. The superintendent of the school 
district acknowledged that police were not informed after that horrible 
incident. To make matters worse, even after her conviction, this person 
was allowed to keep a desk job through the rest of the school year, 
still had her credentials, and could simply move to a new school to 
teach, putting more children at risk.
  We should be doing everything we can to prevent these abuses. A very 
fundamental place to start is to not employ predators in our schools in 
the first place.
  After I requested an investigation in 2010, the Government 
Accountability Office uncovered a wide range of cases in numerous 
States of convicted sex offenders who had previously targeted children, 
working in schools side by

[[Page H6649]]

side with children. In some cases, these schools had unknowingly hired 
sex offenders. This happened because State laws are inconsistent in how 
they require schools to conduct background checks of their employees 
and what types of crimes are covered.
  In other cases, the Government Accountability Office found that 
districts knowingly passed on a potential predator and abuser to 
another school or school district, allowing the offender to resign 
instead of reporting him. Although every State requires some background 
checks, the checks are not always thorough. GAO found that some States 
only require checks for licensed teachers, but not other employees. And 
some States don't require criminal history checks for contractors at 
public schools.
  The GAO also found that at least half of the States lack any rules to 
ensure that child abuse allegations are not suppressed by school 
officials, and only a few States require schools to conduct recurring 
background checks on employees.
  The significant differences in the ways schools screen prospective 
employees lead to gaps in student protection, but a child's safety 
shouldn't depend on the State in which they reside. A patchwork of 
State laws fails to protect all children, and that simply is not good 
enough. We need minimum national standards to keep children safe from 
sexual predators and other violent adults.
  That is why I am proud to be the author of the Protecting Students 
from Sexual and Violent Predators Act, along with my cosponsors.
  This bill closes the loopholes. It would create consistency across 
States in background-check policy, requiring public schools to conduct 
comprehensive background checks for any employee or applicant for 
employment with unsupervised access to children, using State criminal 
and child abuse registries and the FBI's fingerprint database, as well 
as to periodically update these checks.
  Contractors in public schools with unsupervised access to students 
are also subject to these same background checks under this bill. It 
would prohibit school districts from hiring or retaining anyone who has 
been convicted of certain violent crimes, including crimes against 
children, crimes involving rape or sexual assault, or child 
pornography.
  Schools must be places where faculty and students can focus on 
teaching and learning, without fear of emotional or physical harm. 
Keeping students safe requires a coordinated effort from teachers, 
principals, superintendents, community partners, and parents. The vast 
majority of school staff is trustworthy and works hard every day to 
support students' learning needs. I honor and respect their work, which 
is so central to the success of this Nation.
  The criminal background checks required in H.R. 2083 are essential to 
ensuring that schools and school districts are doing everything they 
can to protect children.
  Mr. Speaker, keeping children safe isn't a partisan issue; it is a 
moral obligation. And that is why I am pleased to see the strong 
bipartisan support from my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for 
this legislation. I want to thank the cosponsors in particular: Mr. 
Fitzpatrick, Mr. Stivers, Mrs. McCarthy, Ms. Slaughter, Ms. Wilson, Mr. 
Rangel, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Cohen.
  Working with Chairman Kline's and Mr. Rokita's staff, we clarified 
several provisions from the original bill that I introduced in May, 
including that States must periodically repeat or update background 
checks on employees, based on State and local policy that is publicly 
transparent; school districts may share background check results with 
each other for the same employee; and school employees could appeal the 
results of a background check if it is inaccurate or incomplete and 
establish their employment eligibility if the check was corrected.
  This bill is only as good as the quality of the background checks, 
and I will work with my colleagues to address issues related to 
ensuring that the checks are complete and accurate. Congressman Ellison 
and Congressman Bobby Scott have introduced legislation that seeks to 
support this goal, and I will work with them and others on these 
important worker protections if the bill moves forward in the Senate.
  I want to thank again Chairman Kline for working with us on sensible 
solutions that will protect children across the country. I also want to 
thank the respective staffs for their diligence and thoughtfulness in 
helping us to develop and move this legislation. I urge my colleagues 
to support this bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Rokita, and I rise in 
strong support of the legislation on the floor today. This bill, if 
passed by the House and Senate and signed by the President, will go a 
long way toward protecting students in our Nation's schools. I thank 
the ranking member, Mr. Miller, for bringing this bill up today and for 
bringing to light an issue that is compromising student safety 
throughout our country.
  H.R. 2083, the Protecting Students from Sexual and Violent Predators 
Act of 2013, will ensure consistent and comprehensive school employee 
background checks in all States. The bill also includes language from a 
bill that I introduced, the Jeremy Bell Act. This piece of the larger 
bill blocks Federal funding to schools that knowingly hire or transfer 
teachers involved in sexual misconduct.
  The Jeremy Bell Act is named after a 12-year-old West Virginia 
elementary school student who was sexually abused and murdered by his 
principal, a man that had a long record of sexual misconduct, but who 
was allowed to transfer and leave schools without punishment and 
without informing new districts.
  In a 2010 Government Accountability Office investigations report, it 
was found that inconsistent State laws regarding background checks 
facilitated the hiring and transferring of sexual predators in our 
schools. If, by cutting off funds to schools that knowingly ``pass the 
trash,'' we can save one student from Jeremy's fate, then this bill has 
succeeded. Overall, this bipartisan bill includes student safety 
measures, including requiring background checks for school employees, a 
commonsense method to better protect our children in their schools.
  In testimony submitted at a field hearing I held in Philadelphia last 
Congress, Roy Bell, Jeremy's father, expressed his outrage and his 
sadness that our education system had failed to protect the life and 
innocence of his 12-year-old son. Unfortunately, Jeremy's father passed 
away this weekend. It is on his behalf and on behalf of all parents and 
students that I will continue to work to pass legislation that protects 
our students.
  Today, I ask my colleagues to consider this legislation and its 
impact on families across our Nation. Mr. Speaker, I encourage quick 
passage of H.R. 2083 by both Chambers and for it to be signed into law 
by the President. I thank the chairman and Mr. Miller for their work on 
this bill.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I want to thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick) for his comments and for his support of 
this legislation.
  I had a couple more speakers who were supposedly coming to the floor, 
but at this time, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
to reclaim the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to recognize that 
all of us who are parents or Members of Congress, no matter what walk 
of life we may travel in, want to make sure that our children are safe, 
are well taken care of, and that the people who care for them at their 
schools are qualified to do so and don't present a danger to them.
  At the same time, I think it is important that we recognize that when 
we

[[Page H6650]]

put barriers to employment that are lifetime bans, that are not 
sensitive to certain realities as relates to people overcoming criminal 
backgrounds, and when we put prophylactic rules that don't account for 
particular offenses in a nuanced way, we do run the risk of doing a 
good thing, but doing too much of a thing, and thereby leading to some 
unexpected and unwanted results.
  I have had the privilege of talking to Ranking Member Miller about 
some concerns I have about the bill before us today. I think that the 
concerns are well within Mr. Miller's frame of mind, and he and I have 
talked and he has indicated to me that he is willing to work with me to 
refine the bill to the degree that we can ensure the protection and 
safety of our children in school, but at the same time make sure that 
we don't set up precedents that create unwarranted and unnecessary 
barriers to employment.
  At this time I don't think I need to go into the details of each of 
those. Suffice it to say that if the gentleman would agree that we did 
talk and we are going to work together on refining the bill as best we 
can, I would appreciate that.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ELLISON. I yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I would say that I spoke to you this 
morning, and we will obviously continue to work with you. We have tried 
to draw the line at serious felony violent crimes that people have 
participated in with respect to the ban. In terms of drug arrests or 
whatever, there is a 5-year window that we have started, and we will be 
glad to continue that conversation.

  Mr. ELLISON. Thank you very much.
  I also just want to point out that we have talked about inaccurate 
information, and it is important that we make sure that the records 
that we are using are the right records and accurate records.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. If the gentleman will continue to 
yield, that is why an appeals process is included in this legislation.
  Mr. ELLISON. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Today's debate has only underscored again the importance of moving 
forward with this sensible and responsible legislation. Not only will 
the Protecting Students from Sexual and Violent Predators Act ensure 
all school employees undergo a complete background check; it will also 
help States implement policies and practices that prohibit the hiring 
of anyone who refuses to consent to a background check, makes a false 
statement in connection with the check, or has been convicted of a 
violent or sexual crime against a child.
  There is absolutely no reason we shouldn't all stand united in 
support of this critical legislation. So once again, I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2083.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, in 2010, the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) found that some school districts had unknowingly hired sex 
offenders due to inconsistent state laws that do not require 
comprehensive background checks for all adults who have contact with 
children in schools. In other cases, the GAO found that districts 
knowingly passed a potential predator to another school district by 
allowing the offender to resign instead of reporting him. Significant 
differences in the ways schools screen prospective employees lead to 
gaps in student protection. A child's safety should not depend on where 
that child resides.
  The 2010 GAO report investigated a number of cases across the 
country, including one in my home state of New York. In this case, a 
public school employed a maintenance worker for five months until the 
results of a criminal history check conducted after he had already 
reported to work revealed that he had been convicted of raping a 21-
year-old woman at knifepoint behind a school.
  In 1982, the offender had been sentenced to 12 to 25 years in prison 
and classified as a level 3 sex offender, meaning that the offender is 
at high risk for repeat offenses and is a threat to public safety. In 
2008, the school hired him ``conditionally,'' meaning he was allowed to 
report to work prior to the completion of a state criminal history 
check. School officials told GAO investigators they do not always 
perform these checks prior to employment because they considered the 
process both cost and time prohibitive.
  The school fired the offender in November 2008 when the state 
criminal history check was completed; within two years he was 
incarcerated for failure to comply with sex offender registration 
requirements. The Protecting Students from Sexual and Violent Predators 
Act would have prevented this potentially disastrous hiring from ever 
taking place thanks to its prohibition of hiring or retaining anyone 
who has been convicted of certain violent crimes, including crimes 
against children, crimes involving rape or sexual assault and child 
pornography.
  In many of the cases GAO investigated, previously convicted sex 
offenders working in schools eventually used their access to children 
in school to once again commit crimes against children. Although the 
New York maintenance worker was terminated after five months and did 
not abuse children in the school during that time, there is no 
acceptable amount of time for our children to be exposed to such 
horrific risk.
  Children have the right to a safe school environment where they can 
learn and thrive. There is so much more that this body must do to 
ensure this right--most importantly the enactment of legislation to 
prevent gun violence--but passage of the Protecting Students from 
Sexual and Violent Predators Act is a necessary step towards securing 
students' safety in school.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in support of this legislation.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as Co-Chair of the Congressional 
Children's Caucus and a proud co-sponsor of the legislation, I rise in 
strong support of H.R. 2083, the ``Protecting Students from Sexual and 
Violent Predators Act.''
  I support this legislation because it is a focused and targeted 
measure which ensures student safety in public schools against violent 
adults by implementing full background checks.
  A deficiency in background checks for screening prospective employees 
poses a threat to the safety of children in schools.
  Inconsistent state laws and regulations that do not require 
comprehensive background checks for all adults who have contact with 
children in schools has led to some districts unknowingly hiring 
offenders.
  This is unacceptable. As a nation, we owe it to our kids and to 
ourselves to prevent our children from being exposed to an unsafe 
learning environment.
  This legislation directly affects the communities I represent as 21% 
of all paroled sex offenders in Texas reside in Harris County. Failure 
to screen those we permit to interact with our children in schools 
allows violent or sexual predators the opportunity to abuse our 
children.
  We have a responsibility to protect children and ensure them a safe, 
healthy learning environment.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2083 seeks to reduce the inconsistencies in state 
laws and regulations by requiring comprehensive background checks for 
all adults who have contact with children in schools.
  The bill makes clear that best practices for reducing the prevalence 
of sexual and violent predators must include prohibiting public schools 
from hiring or retaining anyone who has been convicted of certain 
violent crimes.
  Additionally, the bill requires periodic updating of background 
checks for all current employees, and ensuring that schools report to 
local law enforcement when offenders apply for a position.
  Approximately 1.8 million adolescents in the United States have been 
victims of sexual assault. Risks posed by predators on on campus put 
children at risk and are barriers to their academic and social growth 
and development.
  Students have a right to feel safe, and parents have a right to 
expect that the individuals they entrust their children with will 
protect them from physical harm.
  Mr. Speaker, my constituents in the 18th Congressional District of 
Texas, which I am proud to represent, understand the value and 
importance of a safe environment for students to learn and grow.
  So do I. That is why I strongly support H.R. 2083. I urge my 
colleagues to join me in support of this important legislation.

                [From the Huffington Post, June 3, 2013]

 Kelly Ann Garcia Allegedly Had Sex, Went to Sex Shop With Student She 
                        Claimed To Be Mentoring

                           (By Steven Hoffer)

       An English teacher in Texas is accused of having sex with a 
     pupil she claimed to be mentoring.
       Kelly Ann Garcia, 29, appeared in court on Thursday to face 
     charges surrounding her alleged sexual relationship with a 
     16-year-old Hastings High School student, KHOU reports.
       Police say Garcia would meet the victim after school 
     dismissal, despite not being her assigned teacher.

[[Page H6651]]

       On March 21, Garcia allegedly took the victim to Starbucks 
     and revealed an erotic dream she had about her. One week 
     later, the Houston-area teacher texted the teen to say that 
     she had broken up with her boyfriend. The following day, the 
     pair met and ``kissed passionately,'' according to the New 
     York Daily News.
       The intimacy of the alleged relationship escalated over the 
     following weeks. On one day, authorities say Garcia took the 
     student to a sex shop.
       ``The allegation is that they did in fact drive to a store 
     and purchase a sex toy and drive back to the defendant's 
     apartment where they engaged in sex,'' said prosecutor Markay 
     Stroud, according to KHOU.
       The student bragged to classmates about her alleged sexual 
     encounters, which led another student to notify school 
     administrators, according to reports.
       ``She seemed nice at the time. She said she wanted to 
     mentor my daughter, and I took her for her word. Now I'm just 
     not as trusting in people,'' the teen's mother told KHOU last 
     week.
       Garcia is charged with sex assault of a child and indecency 
     with a child, according to CBS Houston.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 2083, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to require 
State educational agencies that receive funding under the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to have in effect policies and 
procedures on background checks for school employees.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________