[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 55 (Thursday, April 16, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H2286-H2290]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1045
GENERAL LEAVE
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks and to include extraneous materials on H.R. 622, the State and
Local Sales Tax Deduction Fairness Act of 2015.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I want to thank my colleagues, Jim McDermott and Marsha Blackburn,
for joining me in leading the fight to make this middle class tax
provision permanent.
This provision is about tax fairness and equal treatment. If
taxpayers in income tax States can deduct their State and local income
taxes, so should residents of sales tax States. That, in America, is
just fair.
This provision helps hard-working taxpayers keep a little more of
what they earn, which is even more important to families, given their
stagnant paychecks over the past number of years. More than 10 million
American taxpayers in nine States depend on this commonsense deduction,
and the dollars that stay in the local community help grow their
community rather than grow Washington's economy.
A permanent State and local sales tax deduction provides certainty to
American families, makes Federal budget scorekeeping more honest, and
removes the asterisk from this temporary provision so the progrowth tax
reform can advance.
It is certainly important to Texas. Since it has been restored, my
neighbors have saved more than $10 billion, which buys a lot of school
clothes, gas for your car, and helps with rising college costs.
To be sure, this provision isn't reserved just for sales tax States.
It allows all American taxpayers to choose whether they deduct their
State and local income taxes or their State and local sales taxes,
whichever is greater. That is fair. That is equal treatment.
Let's be honest. Extending this provision temporarily year after
year, which is exactly what has been done since 2004, that won't cost
any more than making it permanent today and creating that certainty and
fairness for taxpayers.
I want to urge my colleagues to join me in supporting middle class
families by making this provision permanent.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
The State and local sales tax deduction is an important tax provision
for Americans living in States without a State income tax who cannot
take advantage of the State and local income tax deduction.
Although I support this deduction as an important alternative for
taxpayers in States without income taxes, H.R. 622 is fiscally
irresponsible, given that it permanently extends this deduction without
any offsets.
Frankly, I am quite surprised that the Republican leadership is
advancing this bill that would add $42 billion to the deficit. Just
last year, then-Chairman Dave Camp proposed eliminating the State and
local sales tax deduction in the Republican tax reform draft. At that
time, current Chairman Ryan said he approved of eliminating the sales
tax provision before us.
Further, just last month, the Republican leadership presented a
budget that requires offsetting the cost of any tax extenders that are
made permanent with other revenue measures. Indeed, the GOP budget
principle is in line with the Republican tax reform draft last year,
which adopted a fiscally responsible approach.
I am at a loss to understand why the Republican leadership is adding
$42 billion to our deficit to permanently extend a provision it thinks
should be repealed. This bill coupled with the next bill under
consideration would add over $300 billion to our deficit, almost half
of the amount the Republican budget said we must cut from domestic
discretionary spending.
The Republican budget said that we had to cut $759 billion over the
next 10 years in domestic discretionary spending in the name of fiscal
prudence but can throw $300 billion to the wind for a provision that
they have proposed eliminating in tax reform.
We need to provide certainty to taxpayers in affected States that the
sales tax deduction will be available to them this year, and then we
need to focus on comprehensive reform. This bill moves us farther away
from tax reform, not closer.
In addition to being fiscally irresponsible, this bill coupled with
the next one under consideration reflect misplaced priorities for this
House; rather than pushing a piecemeal, deficit-inflating agenda, we
should be helping hard-working American families by raising the minimum
wage, ensuring equal pay for equal work, making college more affordable
by increasing the Pell grants and improving student loans, helping low-
income families afford quality child care, encouraging
[[Page H2287]]
work via effective tax programs, improving investment in low-income
communities, and strengthening the research innovation and
competitiveness of our Nation, just to name a few critical efforts on
which we should focus.
I am ready to work with the majority on tax reform. However, I cannot
support this piecemeal, fiscally irresponsible approach, and I urge my
colleagues to oppose this bill.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1\1/2\
minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Reichert), the leader of
our tax reform subcommittee and a champion in restoring the State and
local sales tax deduction.
Mr. REICHERT. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for
allowing me time to speak, recognizing that Texas is also affected--one
of the States affected by this bill, as well as Washington State, which
is the State where I come from, and several other States.
I rise to support H.R. 622, the State and Local Sales Tax Deduction
Fairness Act. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this legislation.
Madam Speaker, this bill is really about two things. It is about
fairness, and it is about certainty. Fairness because Washington is one
of, as I said, several States without an income tax--and by allowing
this deduction of State and local taxes, this legislation will put
Washingtonians on the same level as those people who live in States
that have an income tax. That is all. It is plain and simple. It is
fairness. That is all we are asking for in this bill.
Certainty because people work hard, they pay their sales taxes, and
at the end of the year, they want to know for sure that they can deduct
their sales taxes.
That is all it is, fairness and certainty. Fairness puts us on parity
with the rest of the States across the country and certainty in
allowing those people in the State of Washington, Texas, and others to
know that, when they spend and pay their sales taxes, they can deduct
those from their Federal income taxes at the end of the year. That is
it.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Madam Speaker, I am proud to honor and yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), one of the key
leaders of the Ways and Means Committee who has been in this fight to
successfully restore and extend the sales tax deduction for many years.
Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank my good friend and
Texan, Mr. Brady, for yielding to me.
Madam Speaker, today, we are voting on a bill that is long overdue, a
bill that would permanently allow taxpayers, including most especially
my constituents, to permanently deduct the State and local sales taxes
that they pay.
Back in 2004, I was part of the effort that brought back this
important tax deduction. Unfortunately, as many of my constituents know
too well, this deduction is not permanent. Because it is not permanent,
Congress has had to renew it almost every year. This creates
uncertainty for taxpayers.
That is why this bill is so important. By making this deduction
permanent, we can provide taxpayers with the certainty that they
deserve, but this bill isn't just about providing certainty; it is
about providing fairness.
Right now, taxpayers in States with income taxes can permanently
deduct their State and local income taxes; but, in States without an
income tax, like Texas, taxpayers can't permanently deduct their State
and local sales taxes. That is wrong, and that is unfair.
It shouldn't matter what type of State and local taxes we are talking
about. If the IRS allows folks to permanently deduct their income
taxes, it ought to also allow so for sales taxes. The IRS shouldn't
discriminate against hard-working taxpayers in other States like Texas.
With many hard-working Americans, taxpayers are trying to make ends
meet. Every dollar in the pocketbook makes a difference.
In closing, I would like to thank my good friend, Mr. Brady, for his
work on this important bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Again, I emphasize my surprise at Republican priorities before us.
This week, the Joint Economic Committee issued a report on the economic
challenges facing the African American community. The findings are
stark and detail the significant racial inequities in employment,
earnings, wealth, and poverty.
The report shows that the median income of African American
households is $34,600, nearly $24,000 less than the median income of
White households. Black Americans are nearly three times more likely to
live in poverty than White Americans.
At 10.1 percent, the current unemployment rate for Black Americans is
more than double that for White Americans. In my congressional
district, the rate of Black unemployment is 24.5 percent compared to
only 5.1 percent for White unemployment.
These facts exemplify the extraordinary growth of inequality in
recent years. Massive inequality and the injustices which flow from the
great imbalance grips so many of our neighborhoods, so many of our
towns and villages, so many of our people who need and deserve the
opportunity to share in all of our Nation's potential and all that it
has to offer.
These are the topics on which policymakers should focus, not hundreds
of billions of dollars in piecemeal tax cuts for the wealthiest
corporations and heirs to estates over $10 million. The Republican
budget proposes to raise taxes on 26 million working families and
students by discontinuing important improvements to the earned income
tax credit, the child tax credit, and education tax credits.
The Republican budget proposes making college more costly by freezing
the maximum Pell grant award, eliminating mandatory Pell funding,
reducing eligibility for Pell grants, eliminating the in-school
interest subsidy, and cutting the Public Service Loan Forgiveness
Program.
The Republican budget would end Medicare as we know it and proposes
undermining the retirement and employee benefits of Federal workers and
postal workers. It cuts funding for the Internal Revenue Service, which
results in less revenue for our government, undermines taxpayer
assistance, and encourages fraud.
We should focus on repairing our Tax Code and enacting policies to
help hard-working Americans share in the economic opportunity enjoyed
by the wealthiest Americans and most profitable companies.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to
the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Herrera Beutler), a distinguished
Member of the House who has been fighting for the State and local sales
tax deduction and, as a new mom, understands just how expensive it is
to raise families these days.
{time} 1100
Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER. I thank the gentleman for his leadership on this
issue, Mr. Speaker, which is so important to the residents in my State,
the people whom I serve. I encourage folks to support permanently
extending the State and local sales tax deduction.
I was listening to the previous speaker, and I don't think he was
really focused on this bill. This bill is about ensuring that residents
of Washington and of seven other States are treated equally, that their
income taxes are treated equally by the Federal Tax Code. It is a
fairness issue. It is also about eliminating the uncertainty that comes
at the eleventh hour every year when Congress reauthorizes this as a 1-
year deal.
Residents from 40 other States get to deduct their State income taxes
from their Federal taxes, but residents of Washington State don't have
that option. We pay one of the highest sales taxes in the country, and
without the option to deduct our State sales tax, we are forced to
carry a higher amount of the Federal burden. Mr. Speaker, that is not
right.
Since it is my job to fight for the residents of Washington State,
let me also mention that folks in the Evergreen State have been the
highest
[[Page H2288]]
beneficiaries of the State and local sales tax deduction. More
Washingtonians use it than any other State. My predecessor, who was a
Democrat, was a big proponent of this bill as well.
At a time when several counties in southwest Washington are still in
economic recovery, we need to make sure that families who have already
dutifully paid their fair share of taxes get to keep a little bit more
of their money. $602 is the average claim from a State sales tax
deduction. A mom in Chehalis, Washington, can make $602 go a long way.
When she spends it on groceries, on gas, or on new soccer cleats for
the kids, that money is going back into the local economy, and it is
generating more economic activity.
We often hear about ``fairness'' when it comes to the Tax Code, and I
believe in fairness for hard-working taxpayers and for job-creating
businesses. What better way to provide fairness than to seize this
opportunity before us today to permanently etch this provision into our
Tax Code. This bill helps families, and it helps local economies. I ask
my colleagues to support it.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of
my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Black), one of our key members of the
Ways and Means Committee who has been fighting for this as a
Representative from Tennessee, and as a small business owner, she knows
how expensive it is for families who work and live along Main Street.
Mrs. BLACK. I want to thank my good friend and colleague for leading
this effort.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the State and Local
Sales Tax Deduction Fairness Act.
My home State of Tennessee is proud to be one of the eight States
without a State income tax. In fact, such a tax is, actually,
explicitly banned in our constitution. We do, however, have a State and
local sales tax, which could be as high as 9.75 percent in parts of my
district.
Taxpayers in other States are able to deduct their State income taxes
on their Federal returns, and it only makes sense that Tennesseans
should be able to do the same when it comes to their State and local
sales tax. In 2012, more than 18 percent of Tennesseans did exactly
that, getting an average deduction of $404; but too often, my
constituents haven't been able to count on this tax credit being
available to them from one year to the next. So, today, let's do
something different.
Let's ensure that this tax provision for families, which they rely
upon, is not subject to a political tug of war here in Washington.
Let's help our small businesses plan for tomorrow by giving them peace
of mind that this credit will be there for them now and in the future,
and let's make the State and local sales tax deduction permanent by
passing this bipartisan bill.
Mr. Speaker, this is, after all, a matter of fairness. I urge a
``yes'' vote on H.R. 622.
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I have no further
requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I rise today to thank the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee,
Mr. Paul Ryan, for bringing this measure to the floor and for offering
hope to taxpayers in States across the country that they will be
treated fairly.
Mr. Ryan is making tax reform--fixing this broken Tax Code and
reining in the IRS--a top priority. This measure actually helps take us
a step toward that by creating certainty for taxpayers in sales tax
States by creating more honest scorekeeping in budgeting. Because we
are going to extend this temporarily, it makes no difference in our
doing it permanently, but it helps create that honest scorekeeping, and
it removes the asterisk from this provision so we can do tax reform,
which creates a much healthier economy.
If you support fairness for taxpayers in sales tax States as well as
those that have income taxes, if you believe we ought not to
discriminate depending on where you live, and that we ought not force
States into income taxes that believe a sales tax is the right way to
go, this measure is for you.
I acknowledge the President has threatened a veto on this bill. I
guess my question is: Why turn your back on hard-working taxpayers?
Middle class economics means helping families keep more of what they
earn, especially those who are living paycheck to paycheck.
Today, we will stand for families and fairness in making sure they
can keep a little bit more of what they earn. I urge support for a
permanent extension of the important State and local sales tax
deduction.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Collins of Georgia). All time for debate
has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 200, the previous question is ordered on
the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
Mr. NEAL. I am opposed to the bill in its current form.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. A point of order is reserved.
The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Neal moves to recommit the bill H.R. 622 to the
Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith with the following
amendment:
Strike section 2 and insert the following:
SEC. 2. NO INCREASE IN DEFICIT OR DELAY OF COMPREHENSIVE TAX
REFORM.
Nothing in this Act shall result in--
(1) an increase in the deficit, or
(2) a delay or weakening of efforts to adopt a permanent
extension of the election to deduct State and local sales
taxes, so long as such extension is accomplished in a
fiscally responsible manner.
SEC. 3. ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF DEDUCTION STATE AND LOCAL
GENERAL SALES TAX.
(a) In General.--Section 164(b)(5)(I) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``January 1,
2015'' and inserting ``January 1, 2016''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2014.
Mr. NEAL (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
to dispense with the reading.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Massachusetts is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, my friend Mr. Brady spoke eloquently, as
always, about the notion of fundamental tax reform. I mean, a
reasonable mind in this Chamber might ask: When? The chairman is not
even here this morning. He sends out as the starting pitcher his ace
reliever, Mr. Brady, to defend what we all know in the end is going to
be a 1-year extension of this tax provision.
Friends, this is a messaging amendment. By the way, after they get
done today with repealing the estate tax, perhaps we could move in this
Chamber to call this now the ``House of Lords,'' where it might be
peerage and peer review that brings us here.
Mr. Speaker, it is April. The birds are chirping; the flowers are
blooming; the days are getting longer; and the nights are getting
warmer. Spring has sprung. The onset of spring brings with it a new
baseball season--that time of year when hope springs eternal and every
fan thinks his team has a fair shot of claiming baseball glory and
immortality.
However, for the fans of bipartisan tax reform, the Republicans are
saying here in April: wait until next year.
Yesterday was the 100th day of the 114th Congress. It is 100 days up,
100 days down, and we are no closer to making tax reform a reality. Our
Republican friends have wasted 4 months of valuable time and have
nothing to show for it. They have whiffed on the 10 permanent tax
extender bills that they have passed this year. Not one of these bills
has become law nor will any
[[Page H2289]]
become law. The President has made that clear, and he has issued a veto
threat on every one of these bills.
Contrast this with the Senate Finance Committee. Rather than pursuing
a minor league strategy of passing one partisan, unpaid-for, permanent
tax extender bill after another on party-line votes, adding to the
deficits, they are working together to move forward on bipartisan tax
reform.
Democrats have no quarrel with the bill that is before us today but
for one exception: State and local sales tax deduction promotes tax
fairness for the States that do not impose a State income tax. It only
makes sense that, if taxpayers in income tax States can deduct their
State and local taxes, so should the residents of sales tax States. We
support making State and local sales tax deductions eventually
permanent but not at the cost of $42 billion a year being added to the
deficit. This is how they have done all of these tax extenders--the
party, by the way, that frequently will have us believe that they are
champions of fiscal responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, we are prepared to step up to the plate as Democrats and
pass a bipartisan tax reform bill that really hits it out of the park
for middle class people, that creates jobs, that gives special
interests a little chin music--or, as we call it, the ``brushback''--
and that ushers in lasting economic growth, much the same as we
experienced during the Clinton years here in America: surpluses for
years, growth unprecedented. There were 23 million new jobs created
during those years. That is the experience that we should be talking
about today.
The chairman of our committee, my friend, Mr. Ryan, is always saying
that this committee can walk and chew gum at the same time. Guess what?
I believe him.
So, Mr. Chairman, do we prefer Wrigley's, Hubba Bubba, or, maybe, the
classic Big League Chew?
Let's get on to the third inning and get tax reform done, and let's
stop procrastinating in front of the American people.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of a point
of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The reservation of the point of order is
withdrawn.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to
the gentleman's motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this motion is what people sort of
hate about Washington.
We say we stand for fairness for taxpayers in sales tax States but
only for a few more months. We say we don't want to discriminate
between you and people who are in income tax States but only for a few
more months. Up here, Washington says, Look, we think you ought to keep
more of what you have earned because it is expensive to raise a family
but only for a few more months because we in Washington, they say, have
the power to yank this any time we want.
The truth of the matter is it is so expensive to raise families these
days, and our Tax Code picks winners and losers all the time. What this
provision does is make permanent the fairness to ensure taxpayers
across America are treated equally, that this Tax Code doesn't
discriminate, that you can keep a little more of the money it takes to
raise your family, to buy that gas, to buy the school clothes, to pay
the utilities. That is all that this law does.
{time} 1115
It is a step toward tax reform and reining in the IRS because it
removes the asterisks from this temporary provision we extend year
after year at the same cost. It is really about honest budgeting,
because those who claim there is a huge cost of this, they are going to
vote and have voted to extend this. So there is no difference there. It
is just a talking point. At the end of the day, this creates a
certainty for our taxpayers, removes that asterisk from a temporary
provision, and moves us forward to progrowth tax reform that creates a
much healthier economy and creates a Tax Code that is fair, flatter,
and simpler.
I urge support for permanently helping families with their costs and
lowering the cost of their taxes. I urge support for this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule XX
and the order of the House of today, this 15-minute vote on the motion
to recommit will be followed by 5-minute votes on passage of H.R. 622,
if ordered; the motion to recommit on H.R. 1105; and passage of H.R.
1105, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 179,
nays 243, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 158]
YEAS--179
Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutieerrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (MS)
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NAYS--243
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Black
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
[[Page H2290]]
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NOT VOTING--9
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Duncan (SC)
Gosar
Perry
Ruiz
Schrader
Smith (WA)
Welch
{time} 1145
Messrs. PALMER, WALKER, Mrs. LOVE, Messrs. STUTZMAN, BRIDENSTINE and
THOMPSON of California changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. ASHFORD, DeSAULNIER, FATTAH, Mrs. KIRKPATRICK and Mr. GENE
GREEN of Texas changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. NEAL. 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 272,
nays 152, not voting 7, as follows:
[Roll No. 159]
YEAS--272
Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Ashford
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duffy
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Graham
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Hinojosa
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Hurt (VA)
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
Kilmer
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Kuster
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Larsen (WA)
Latta
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perlmutter
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Ruppersberger
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Swalwell (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Veasey
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke
NAYS--152
Adams
Aguilar
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Caardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Grijalva
Gutieerrez
Hahn
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujaan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Saanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Velaazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--7
Blackburn
Duncan (SC)
Gosar
Perry
Ruiz
Smith (WA)
Welch
Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.
{time} 1154
Mr. CUMMINGS and Mrs. LAWRENCE changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 159 on
H.R. 622, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``no'' when I should have
voted ``yes.''
____________________