[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 34 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H1492-H1494]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS RESOLUTION, 2015
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further
consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 35) making further
continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes,
will now resume.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
Motion to Recommit
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the
desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the joint
resolution?
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Yes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Ms. Roybal-Allard moves to recommit the joint resolution
H.J. Res. 35 to the Committee on Appropriations with
instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith
with the following amendment:
Page 1, line 3, strike ``That the Continuing Appropriations
Resolution, 2015'' and insert the following:
Section 1. The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015
Page 1, lines 5 and 6, strike ``March 19, 2015'' and insert
``September 30, 2015''.
Add at the end the following new section:
Sec. 2. The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2015 is
further amended by inserting at the end (before the short
title) the following:
``Sec. 152. Notwithstanding any other provision of this
joint resolution, funds and other authorities made available
for accounts of the Department of Homeland Security shall be
available to the extent provided in, under the authority and
conditions provided in, and at a rate for operations not to
exceed the rate permitted by, H.R. 861, as introduced in the
House of Representatives on February 11, 2015.''.
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD (during the reading). Madam Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on
the gentlewoman's motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from California is recognized
for 5 minutes in support of her motion.
{time} 1615
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, this motion to recommit will not
kill the resolution or send it back to committee. If adopted, the
continuing resolution will immediately proceed to final passage, as
amended.
Adoption of this motion to recommit will change the date of the
continuing resolution to September 30, 2015, and will incorporate by
reference all the funding levels and provisions of H.R. 861, the clean,
bipartisan, full-year funding bill for the Department of Homeland
Security.
Once again, I ask my colleagues: What is gained by further putting
off a resolution to this crisis of Republicans' own making?
[[Page H1493]]
Circumstances will be no different 3 weeks from now. We will almost
certainly not have any final resolution from the judicial branch of the
President's executive action. Nothing can be gained by further delay,
but much can be lost.
These are the warnings of the Secretary of Homeland Security who has
pointed out, over and over again, that the Department of Homeland
Security is not doing just fine under the current continuing resolution
and that there are significant consequences if we force the Department
to keep living with the uncertainty of a continuing resolution.
As Secretary Johnson has said, the American people are counting on
us, and the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security, so
many of whom risk their health and safety every single day to keep us
safe, are counting on us, too.
What message are we sending them when we continue to leave them in
uncertainty over whether they will get paid 3 weeks from now? What
message do we send them when we take their service for granted by using
this funding bill as a pawn in a political game?
I urge my colleagues to vote for this motion to recommit so we can
put an end to this nonsense and allow the men and women of the
Department of Homeland Security to go about the business of protecting
this country knowing that we are fully behind them.
Madam Speaker, I yield the remainder of my time to the gentlewoman
from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the distinguished ranking member of the
Appropriations Committee.
Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the ranking member of the
Homeland Security Subcommittee for yielding me the time.
I strongly support the Roybal-Allard motion, which gives the House an
opportunity to vote for a full-year Homeland Security funding bill
without any controversial immigration policy riders.
Almost 4:30 Friday afternoon, we have heard lectures all day about
the Constitution. We have heard lectures all day about the process. I
just want to remind my colleagues on the other side of the aisle--and
especially those who may be new to the appropriations process--we can
have a debate about the Constitution any time you want. We even can
come up with amendments to the Constitution.
Right now, we are talking about Homeland Security keeping our country
safe; and, again, because we have had so many debates about authority
and who is doing what and who is obeying the Constitution, for me, it
is a pleasure to work with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle
on appropriations.
We passed the CR/Omnibus because, back in December, we couldn't agree
to include the Homeland Security bill as part of an omnibus. Just to
remind us again about process, Democrats on the Appropriations
Committee and Republicans on the Appropriations Committee debated those
bills.
We came together in a bipartisan way here in the House, and then we
worked with the Senate to make sure we worked together in a bipartisan
way. We had a good Homeland Security Appropriations bill. It may not
have been perfect, but it was a bipartisan bill back in December. Here
it is, almost March.
I just want to conclude by making it very clear, we cannot hold
hostage to this bill and delay the Homeland Security bill anymore. I
urge my colleagues to vote for full-year funding.
Point of Order
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I make a point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I make a point of order
against the motion because it is in violation of section 302(f) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
The adoption of this motion would cause a breach of the 302(a)
allocation of budget authority provided by the Committee on the Budget
and, therefore, is not permitted under section 302(f) of the Act.
I ask for a ruling from the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does any Member wish to be heard on this
point of order?
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, I wish to be heard on the point of
order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California is
recognized.
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, the gentleman asserts that the
motion exceeds the subcommittee's allocation. However, the
Congressional Budget Office cost estimate noted ``our estimate is the
same as H.R. 240 as introduced.''
H.R. 240 was the bill introduced by the chairman of the subcommittee,
Judge Carter, and sent to the Senate.
If I understand the gentleman correctly, he is now asserting that the
bill that he moved through this Chamber violated the rules of the
House. I urge him to withdraw his point of order and allow for the
House to vote on a clean, full-year bill for the Department of Homeland
Security.
Absent that, I urge the presiding officer to overrule the gentleman's
point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule.
The gentleman from Kentucky makes a point of order that the amendment
proposed by the instructions in the motion to recommit offered by the
gentlewoman from California violates section 302(f) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Section 302(f) of the Budget Act precludes consideration of an
amendment providing new budget authority if the adoption of the
amendment and enactment of the bill or joint resolution, as amended,
would cause the pertinent allocation of new budget authority under
section 302(a) of the Act to be exceeded.
The Chair is authoritatively guided by an estimate of the chair of
the Committee on the Budget under clause 4 of rule XXIX. That estimate
shows that the amendment proposed in the motion to recommit provides
new budget authority for fiscal year 2015 in excess of the applicable
section 302(a) allocation.
The Chair therefore holds that the amendment violates section 302(f)
of the Budget Act. Accordingly, the point of order is sustained and the
motion to recommit is not in order.
The question is on the passage of the joint resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. LOWEY. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on passage of House Joint Resolution 35 will be followed by
a 5-minute vote on adoption of the motion to instruct on H.R. 240.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 203,
nays 224, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 104]
YEAS--203
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Ashford
Barr
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blum
Boehner
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks (IN)
Brownley (CA)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Delaney
Denham
Dent
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hill
Holding
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hurd (TX)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Jolly
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
LaMalfa
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Peters
Pittenger
Pitts
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Ruiz
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
[[Page H1494]]
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Womack
Woodall
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NAYS--224
Adams
Aguilar
Amash
Babin
Barletta
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clawson (FL)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSantis
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Duffy
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fincher
Fleming
Forbes
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Franks (AZ)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gohmert
Gosar
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Hunter
Hurt (VA)
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Labrador
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Massie
Matsui
McCollum
McGovern
McNerney
Meadows
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Mulvaney
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Olson
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Poe (TX)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Ratcliffe
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Roe (TN)
Rooney (FL)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Salmon
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sanford
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walker
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wenstrup
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Yarmuth
Yoder
NOT VOTING--6
Hinojosa
Lee
Long
McDermott
Speier
Turner
{time} 1713
Mr. SCHRADER, Mrs. LAWRENCE, and Messrs. CARSON of Indiana, SAM
JOHNSON of Texas, and FINCHER changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
So the joint resolution was not passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated against:
Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, on rollcall vote 104, on passage
related to H.J. Res. 35, had I been present, I would have voted
``nay.''
____________________