[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 76 (Friday, May 13, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H2346-H2354]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF S. 524, COMPREHENSIVE ADDICTION AND 
                          RECOVERY ACT OF 2016

  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on 
Rules, I call up House Resolution 725 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 725

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 524) to 
     authorize the Attorney General to award grants to address the 
     national epidemics of prescription opioid abuse and heroin 
     use. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     consisting of the respective texts of the bills specified in 
     section 2(a) of this resolution shall be considered as 
     adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill, as 
     amended, are waived. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate equally divided among and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce and the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to commit with 
     or without instructions.
       Sec. 2. (a) The bills referred to in the first section of 
     this resolution are as follows: H.R. 4641, H.R. 5046, H.R. 
     4063, H.R. 4985, H.R. 5048, H.R. 5052, H.R. 4843, H.R. 4978, 
     H.R. 3680, H.R. 3691, H.R. 1818, H.R. 4969, H.R. 4586, H.R. 
     4599, H.R. 4976, H.R. 4982, H.R. 4981, and H.R. 1725, in each 
     case as passed by the House.
       (b) In forming the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     referred to in the first section of this resolution, the 
     Clerk--
       (1) shall assign appropriate designations to provisions 
     within the amendment in the nature of a substitute;
       (2) shall conform cross-references and provisions for short 
     titles within the amendment in the nature of a substitute; 
     and
       (3) is authorized to make technical corrections within the 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute, to include 
     corrections in spelling, punctuation, page and line 
     numbering, section numbering, and insertion of appropriate 
     headings.
       Sec. 3.  Upon passage of S. 524 the title of such bill is 
     amended to read as follows: ``To authorize the Attorney 
     General and Secretary of Health and Human Services to award 
     grants to address the national epidemics of prescription 
     opioid abuse and heroin use, and to provide for the 
     establishment of an inter-agency task force to review, 
     modify, and update best practices for pain management and 
     prescribing pain medication, and for other purposes.''.
       Sec. 4.  If S. 524, as amended, is passed, then it shall be 
     in order for the chair of the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce or his designee to move that the House insist on its

[[Page H2347]]

     amendments to S. 524 and request a conference with the Senate 
     thereon.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hardy). The gentleman from Georgia is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, 
I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
Polis), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on House Resolution 725, currently 
under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Georgia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring this rule 
forward on behalf of the Rules Committee. The rule provides for 
consideration of S. 524, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act.
  The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided among and 
controlled by the chairs and ranking minority members of the Energy and 
Commerce Committee and the Judiciary Committee.

                              {time}  0915

  The rule also provides for an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
that consists of the 18 bills passed by the House this week to combat 
the opioid epidemic. Under the rule, if S. 524 is passed, it will be in 
order for the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee to request 
a conference with the Senate on the House-passed package of bills.
  Let me just emphasize this again for Members so they will understand 
the process. What we will do under the rule, if S. 524 is passed, it 
will then be made in order for the chairman of the Energy and Commerce 
Committee to request a conference with the Senate on the House-passed 
package of bills.
  Each of these 18 bills included in the House package passed the House 
with strong bipartisan support. The level of support for these bills is 
a sign of the recognition that something must be done about the opioid 
epidemic.
  You have seen Members who represent urban areas, Members who 
represent suburban areas, and Members like me who represent more rural 
areas support these bills. This problem does not discriminate. It is a 
nationwide issue, and it is taking a toll on communities all over our 
country. We need to act. With the passage of these bills, we are taking 
decisive action.
  The Senate bill, the Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, 
received unanimous support in that Chamber. I want to thank Senators 
Portman and Whitehouse for their leadership on that bill.
  The House bills include elements of the Senate bill as well as 
additional measures. It is my hope that the conference provided for by 
these bills will yield the strongest possible measure. We need strong, 
swift, and decisive action to address the growing crisis of the opioid 
epidemic.
  In the United States, more people die every year from drug overdoses 
than car accidents. As the debate has taken place here on the floor 
this week, I think the numbers have just been amazingly stark.
  When you realize that a statistic like that, when the deaths from 
drug overdoses surpass car accidents, then we are dealing with 
something that begins to put it in perspective.
  My home State of Georgia has 159 counties. In 2012, prescription drug 
overdoses led to deaths in 152 of those 159 counties, totaling 592 
deaths. The opioid bills in the House package before us today help 
implement measures to prevent these tragedies.
  Addiction is happening far too often with devastating consequences. 
Further, it is shown that prescription opioid abuse often leads to 
heroin abuse, compounding the problem. In fact, according to the 
Centers for Disease Control, 45 percent of people who used heroin were 
addicted to prescription opioid painkillers.
  I mentioned this earlier in the week, but it is worth mentioning 
again now. I have had many conversations with sheriffs in my area in 
the Ninth District, which really runs on the I-85 corridor out of 
Atlanta and up into the northeast, and I keep in contact with them 
regularly.
  My background with my father being in State Patrol, I know the law 
enforcement community very well. One of the first questions I always 
ask them--and in my 10 years, I was in the State House for over 6 
years, and I have been up here now into my second term--I always ask: 
What is the biggest thing that you are seeing? What is the epidemic or 
what is the issue you most see?
  Early on, it was methamphetamine. Especially in my rural area, my 
mountain area, methamphetamine still is very prevalent. But due to many 
of the restraints that were put in in Georgia--and I notice my friend 
here from Georgia as well--we worked in the State legislature to 
control the methamphetamine problem, and then the prescription opioid 
problem has developed.
  Now what my sheriffs will tell me and my law enforcement community 
and my city police and others will tell me is that heroin is by far 
their fastest growing issue that they are seeing. It is hitting not 
just urban areas, it is hitting suburban areas, it is hitting very 
rural areas, and it is hitting across the income gap. Those who have 
been addicted to prescription opioids now find that heroin is cheaper 
to purchase and is cheaper to access.
  The problem is, unlike many of the prescription opioid painkillers, 
the heroin issue is one in which they can take the first dose and it 
would be their last. This is something we cannot continue to look away 
from.
  In Georgia, heroin deaths have increased 300 percent. That statistic 
alone should be a call to action. Nationwide, the number of people it 
affects is staggering. CDC statistics on opioid abuse show 18,893 
overdose deaths related to prescription painkillers, and 10,574 
overdose deaths related to heroin in 2014.
  The opioid epidemic affects everyone. I believe that most people 
could tell you of a family member or friend who has suffered in some 
way because of this problem. And these problems aren't only affecting 
adults. They are affecting college-age students, high schoolers, 
children, and even the littlest among us, babies.
  Every 25 minutes in our country babies are born with a dependency. 
This is tragic. Babies born addicted to opioids often struggle to 
survive, have dangerous health complications, and suffer from serious 
withdrawals.
  These innocent children don't deserve this. They deserve a life full 
of promise. Instead, they face life-threatening challenges from the 
moment they are born. We can do better, and should do better. In fact, 
they suffer not only from the moment they are born, they are also 
suffering in the womb as well. This is an epidemic we have got to 
address.
  Importantly, several of these bills in the House-passed package will 
help address this problem. For example, Congressman Lou Barletta 
introduced H.R. 4843, the Infant Plan of Safe Care Improvement Act.
  This bill requires the Department of Health and Human Services to 
distribute information to States on best practices to develop safe care 
plans for infants affected by substance abuse and withdrawal symptoms.
  H.R. 4978, the NAS Healthy Babies Act, introduced by Congressman Evan 
Jenkins, requires a report on neonatal abstinence syndrome.
  Another bill in this package deals with the problems that youth 
athletes may face if they are prescribed opiates for a sports-related 
injury. H.R. 4969, the John Thomas Decker Act of 2016, introduced by 
Congressman Pat Meehan from Pennsylvania, requires the CDC to study 
information and resources available to youth and families regarding the 
dangers of opioid use and abuse.
  Still other bills relate to veterans and how we can help them. For 
example, the Comprehensive Opioid Abuse Reduction Act, introduced by 
Mr. Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin, authorizes investments in veterans 
courts.
  I believe there is another conversation that is going on in Congress 
right now concerning our criminal justice and criminal justice reform 
and things that we need to do to make sure that not only are we not 
using our jails as mental health facilities, but we are getting people 
the help that they need.

[[Page H2348]]

  Some of the ways that you do that is found in treatment courts. Many 
of those are found in newer treatment courts, not just simply the 
substance abuse, but in veterans courts as well. We are going to 
continue to look at that.
  In doing so, H.R. 4063, the Jason Simcakoski PROMISE Act, introduced 
by Congressman Gus Bilirakis, directs the Department of Defense and the 
Department of Veterans Affairs to jointly update the VA/DOD Clinical 
Practice Guideline, Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The 
bill also requires the VA to expand opioid safety initiatives.
  I am a chaplain still in the Air Force Reserve. I served in Iraq. I 
saw firsthand the scars that the battlefield can leave, both physical 
and mental. We need support systems for our veterans like the ones 
provided for in H.R. 5046 and H.R. 4063.
  We need to address their pain, and we need to ensure they have an 
avenue to get the help they need. I believe the bills this rule 
provides for will take steps to make that happen. Our veterans deserve 
our very best.
  We cannot discuss this package without mentioning the resources that 
this bill provides for law enforcement. As the son of a Georgia State 
Trooper, this component is critically important to me.
  The bill provides for law enforcement training. These measures also 
provide for the expanded use of naloxone by law enforcement. Naloxone 
can effectively reverse opioid overdoses, so it is a valuable tool to 
have on hand.
  Through the establishment of a comprehensive grant program that will 
provide resources to law enforcement, communities, and States, and 
combined with other bills, we have a real chance to make a difference 
here today.
  Mr. Speaker, addiction issues are often related to other co-occurring 
disorders, including mental health issues. Addiction claims victims, 
and addiction is a disease. We must not turn a blind eye to those in 
need.
  We must work to halt the opioid epidemic. We must act to prevent more 
deaths and to stop the growth and spread of this problem. The Senate 
bill, the House-passed bill, and the motion to go to conference are 
steps towards doing that.
  These bills were brought forward due to the hard work of many 
Members. Over the course of this week, we have seen Members from every 
walk of life, representing people from every walk of life, come to the 
floor to speak on the opioid epidemic.
  Each and every one of these Members have made statements to show the 
depth and breadth of this problem to the real people that we are sent 
here to represent. Through the 18 House-passed bills and the conference 
with the Senate, we have a chance to ease that problem, to actually 
combat it.
  These bills call for further studies to examine the response of the 
opioid crisis, provide support for doctors' treatment of abusers, and 
also to help law enforcement efforts to combat drug trafficking.
  Neighborhoods and families are being torn apart by heroin addiction 
and opioid abuse. Communities like my home in northeast Georgia need 
help to address this problem.
  Through these bills, we are helping to provide that. Importantly, we 
are also providing enough flexibility so that States can determine what 
will work best for their specific populations and communities.
  Many communities, many Members, and many staffers have worked hard to 
bring together these important reforms. I want to thank them for their 
dedication and hard work. These reforms are a step in the right 
direction.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding me 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule today that provides 
for consideration of S. 524.
  As has been discussed on the floor this week, Mr. Speaker, our Nation 
is in the midst of an epidemic. While opioid abuse is nothing new, the 
numbers are getting more and more alarming. Addiction claimed over 
28,000 lives in 2014 and drastically altered many more for the worst.
  All week we have heard stories from both sides of the aisle speaking 
to how addiction is breaking apart families and communities. Today we 
are considering a package of bills that will hopefully take some 
meaningful steps towards addressing this crisis.
  Prescription drug addiction is a very complex issue. There is no 
simple solution. It is a subject that deserves comprehensive debate and 
full consideration of ideas that Democratic and Republican Members have 
to be able to address: this public health crisis.
  While I and many of my Democratic colleagues are supportive of the 
underlying legislation, there are problems with the process that have 
locked out ideas that can save lives that are being prevented from 
coming to the floor under this rule.
  Of the 18 bills included under this rule, all but 2 were brought to 
the floor on suspension. What does that mean? It means no Members--
Democratic or Republican--were allowed to amend or improve 16 of these 
18 bills.
  The scope of the two bills that were brought forward in a manner that 
allowed amendments was so narrow that it closed out many of the 
amendments that we considered in the Rules Committee because they 
weren't germane to these two particular bills. I find that very 
frustrating. It limits discussion on a major public health crisis, 
something that is an issue that is not at all partisan.
  Many bipartisan amendments that I will talk about in a moment, many 
ideas from Republicans and Democrats, were simply not even allowed to 
be considered in this process. Amendments that would save lives, 
amendments that families would be grateful for, and amendments that 
would reduce opioid abuse in our country are not even allowed to be 
considered here on the floor of the House.
  These were not amendments with an ideological agenda. Sometimes we 
are down here on a bill that is highly ideological and there are 
amendments that are locked out that would change it drastically or gut 
it. No, these are good faith efforts and ideas from the experiences 
that many of us have had back in our own districts as to how we can 
address this opioid abuse crisis that we are facing nationally.
  Among the amendments that should have been allowed this week and why 
I am urging my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule--one amendment 
that was locked out was a bipartisan amendment by Representatives Ann 
Kuster and Frank Guinta, my colleagues from New Hampshire, which is 
really one of the ground zero areas for this crisis, offered a 
bipartisan amendment to H.R. 4641 that would have allowed HHS to award 
grants to recovery community organizations.
  Their amendment acknowledges that recovery is a long road. For any of 
us, including myself, who have known people who have been in recovery 
from drug addiction, they know it is difficult. It is a real test of 
internal fortitude for them. Of course, their community and family need 
to rally around and support their sobriety.
  We need to be supporting not only prevention and initial treatment, 
but also lifetime support for the lifetime struggle to pull people out 
of the vicious cycle of addiction. This amendment that was blocked 
under this rule took the long view that, to address this crisis, we 
need the long-term support of recovery community organizations.

                              {time}  0930

  Now, we know how pressing this issue is for our New Hampshire 
colleagues, Republican and Democratic. So why not open up this process 
to allow their idea to be debated on its merits?
  If Members of Congress found it lacking merit, of course, it would be 
the prerogative of Members of this body to vote it down; but at least 
have that debate, and I honestly think that it likely would have 
passed.
  Representatives Katherine Clark and Evan Jenkins offered a bipartisan 
amendment to H.R. 4641--again, locked out under this rule. We are not 
allowed to debate it, and we are not allowed to vote on it.
  Their proposal, very simply, would have authorized grants for the 
creation of comprehensive systems to provide support for prescribers 
with regard to patient pain and substance abuse. According to a study 
in the Journal of Opioid Management, fewer than half of primary care 
providers felt sufficiently

[[Page H2349]]

trained in prescribing opioids. This would have helped address that 
training gap of prescribers so that they would less often use opioids 
and more frequently use alternative pain reduction prescriptions. It is 
our doctors and nurse practitioners and nurses who are on the front 
lines. They need to be adequately prepared to deal with patients in 
pain and with patients who are in the throes of addiction.
  Again, unfortunately, under this rule, Katherine Clark and Evan 
Jenkins' amendment is not allowed to be considered by this body.
  I, personally, offered a bipartisan amendment with Mr. Rohrabacher of 
California that would have required the Pain Management Task Force, 
created in H.R. 4641, to take into consideration the potential for 
marijuana to serve as an alternative to opioids for pain management.
  Several private studies have yielded promising results. In 2014, the 
Journal of Pain found that those who suffer from chronic pain reduced 
their use of opioids by a significant margin when using marijuana for 
medicinal purposes. Marijuana likely won't work in every instance where 
somebody has chronic pain, but, where it does, you have a far less 
harmful, less addictive option with much more limited side effects than 
opioids and painkillers. We shouldn't be taking an option with limited 
side effects off the table when it could help free millions of 
Americans from excruciating pain and crippling addiction.
  Unfortunately, that amendment--simply an amendment to take into 
consideration and study the issue--was also blocked under this rule.
  Those are some of the many examples. As I mentioned, none of the 
amendments made it out of the Rules Committee, and our colleagues will 
not have the opportunity to weigh in on the House floor. A wide variety 
of amendments were blocked.
  From a process perspective, this is really irresponsible of this 
body, when responding to an epidemic of this complexity, to not debate 
and solicit ideas--bipartisan ideas, Republican ideas, and Democratic 
ideas--from Members of this body and to find creative solutions that 
can actually save lives and would be of great comfort to families who 
are affected.
  My other concern is that the majority has authorized, but has not 
funded or appropriated any of the programs under these bills. In 
February, the President submitted a proposal that would have provided 
$1.1 billion in new funding to address this epidemic in enforcement and 
treatment. Despite that, this bill has no funding for these efforts.
  Combating addiction is truly a bipartisan effort. When close to 100 
Americans are dying from drug overdoses every day, we have to work 
together to change that. I think that, unfortunately, under this rule, 
while this might be some baby steps forward, we are falling short of 
the mark of really being able to put our very best thinking and very 
best solutions forward.
  According to the CDC, since 1999, the number of prescription opioids 
sold in the United States has quadrupled despite no discernible change 
in the pain that Americans are reporting. So in a 15-year period, 
opioids are used four times as much. That is the precursor to this 
opioid addiction problem, and we need to do more to address that 
overprescription of opioids.
  In my home State of Colorado, the statewide rate of drug overdose 
deaths increased from 9.7 percent per 100,000 residents to 16.3 percent 
per 100,000 residents. Opioids were a major component of that.
  Nationally, there have been even larger increases. Since 1999, deaths 
from prescription opioids, like oxycodone, hydrocodone, and methadone, 
have quadrupled. So it is no surprise the number of prescription 
opioids sold in the United States have quadrupled and deaths have 
quadrupled. It is no coincidence that those numbers are similar.
  In 2014, almost 2 million Americans had some level of dependence on 
prescription pain relievers. This trend has especially dire 
consequences during pregnancy, which one of our bills addresses. In the 
last decade alone, over 130,000 infants were born with newborn drug 
withdrawal symptoms.
  Given the extremity of circumstances surrounding opioid abuse in this 
country, I am glad that this body is devoting some effort towards 
casting a critical eye on what we can do; and I am saddened that this 
body didn't have a more open process to include many of the ideas, 
which I mentioned earlier, from bipartisan Members of this body and 
others that are simply locked out under this rule.
  The Committee on Energy and Commerce reported out 12 bills. The 
Committee on Foreign Affairs considered a bill to allow the Treasury 
Department to block international drug traffickers from using the U.S. 
financial system. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs passed out a bill. 
I was also pleased that the committee that I serve on, the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce, took up a bill that I coauthored along 
with Representatives Barletta and Clark and Chairman Kline and Ranking 
Member Scott and Representative Walberg--the Infant Plan of Safe Care 
Improvement Act--which directs child protective service agencies to 
develop a safe care plan to closely monitor the health outcomes for 
infants who are born with this syndrome.
  The scourge of opioid addiction has touched families in my district 
and across the country. No State has managed to avoid it. I stand in 
opposition to this rule because, truly, we need to do everything we can 
to address this emergency, including debating good ideas, creative 
ideas from both sides of the aisle, and letting the Members decide, 
based on their own experiences, their own creative solutions as to what 
we can do to help combat this scourge that has affected our country.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter), our only pharmacist 
in Congress, who, I think, has a very good insight into this.
  Mr. CARTER of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
thank him for his long-time support of these types of issues, both as a 
member of the Georgia State legislature and as a Member of this august 
body. Representative Collins has consistently and very diligently 
worked on these issues. As the son of a law enforcement officer, he 
understands all too well the importance of making sure that our 
communities are safe, and I thank him for his support of this.

  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and of the House 
amendment to S. 524. This week, the House has worked hard to pass 18 
bills that address almost every facet of the opioid abuse epidemic.
  We called for the creation of a task force to develop best practices 
for pain management and prescribing pain medication. We have authorized 
grants for local and State agencies to better fight this epidemic 
through better resources. We have expanded care for newborn infants who 
are affected by illegal substance abuse. We have improved comprehensive 
opioid abuse treatment to pregnant and postpartum women. We have also 
created safety measures for the use of opioids when treating veterans 
who have chronic pain.
  I am proud of the measures this body has passed that make up the 
House amendment to S. 524.
  Mr. Speaker, our Nation is facing an opioid epidemic, and no 
community is safe. It affects all communities across the Nation whether 
they be urban, suburban, or rural.
  Serving more than 30 years as a community pharmacist, I have 
witnessed and participated in some of the greatest advances in the 
history of medicine. I have seen diseases that once required 
hospitalization become illnesses that are treated from home with 
medication. I have seen an antibiotic regimen that once required four 
tablets each day for 10 days replaced with six tablets over 5 days. I 
have seen a deadly disease, like hepatitis C, cured by medication in 
just 90 days. The advances that I have witnessed in medicine can truly 
be called nothing more than miraculous, and that is important.
  We need to recognize that this fight against the opioid epidemic is 
going to have to be a team effort. We are going to have to have 
everyone--all healthcare professionals--involved in this. Whether they 
be doctors, nurses, pharmacists, PAs, APRNs--whoever--they have to be 
involved. Families

[[Page H2350]]

have to be involved. Our communities have to be involved. Our 
legislature has to be involved. This week, our Congress has taken the 
lead. I am very proud of that. I am very proud of the work that it has 
done.
  It is also going to take tools like the Prescription Drug Monitoring 
Programs. While a member of the Georgia State legislature, I had the 
honor of sponsoring the legislation that led to the creation of the 
Georgia Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. That program has been a 
great tool in our toolbox to fight the opioid epidemic. Since that 
time, we have tweaked that program and have made it even better, and it 
continues to get better. It continues to help us in our fight against 
the opioids.
  I mentioned the advances that I have witnessed in medicine. I am a 
big fan of the pharmaceutical industry--a big fan, perhaps its biggest 
fan. What I have witnessed, again, has been miraculous. I call on the 
pharmaceutical companies because right now there exists a gap, a gap in 
treating pain. Right now we have available to us medication such as 
ibuprofen and acetaminophen, and then we go to the opioids. There are 
very few alternatives in between there in that gap--in that void, if 
you will. Very few. Once you get past tramadol and a couple of others, 
there is nothing else for us to use, there is nothing else for us to 
prescribe. I have confidence in the pharmaceutical manufacturers, and I 
call on them to fill in that gap, to fill in that void. We need more 
alternatives, more choices.
  Whether it is true or untrue, I can tell you that many patients don't 
believe that ibuprofen or acetaminophen, which you can buy without a 
prescription, will work as well as something that you can buy with a 
prescription. That is something we have to overcome, but there is 
definitely a void there that needs to be filled. Again, I am very, very 
confident that the drug manufacturers and that the pharmaceutical 
companies can help us fill this void, and I call on them to do just 
that.
  Mr. Speaker, as a lifelong pharmacist, I have seen the struggles 
firsthand that Americans face with opioid addiction. I have witnessed 
my colleagues in the pharmacy profession, some who just could not 
overcome that weakness and who succumbed to prescription drug abuse. I 
have witnessed that. I have witnessed it with patients. I have 
witnessed it with customers who have ruined their careers, who have 
ruined their families, and who have ruined their lives because of 
opioid abuse. This is an epidemic. Certainly it is something that has 
to be addressed in our country.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to support this measure so we can 
improve our efforts to raise awareness while working towards solutions 
to solve this health crisis. I encourage my colleagues to support this 
bill, and I applaud my colleagues.
  This has been a very, very proud week for me to be a Member of the 
United States Congress. To see what my colleagues in this House have 
done this week--as a pharmacist, as a healthcare professional--has made 
me very, very proud. We did good this week, and I am very proud to be a 
Member of this House.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici), a member of the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce.
  Ms. BONAMICI. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the critical legislative efforts on 
the House floor this week to begin fighting the opioid crisis--an 
addiction crisis that has swept our country. There is much more work to 
be done to combat this epidemic. This is an encouraging start, but we 
must do more.
  Too many communities in Oregon and across the Nation have seen the 
destruction that is caused by addiction, and too many have experienced 
the heartbreak of losing a child, a neighbor, a friend, or other loved 
one to overdose. Last year, just in Portland, Oregon, there were an 
average of two opioid deaths per week.
  I think about Kerri, who is a mom from Knappa, in northwest Oregon. 
She lost her son, Jordan, after a 7-year struggle. Jordan's addiction 
began when he had a football injury in high school, and his doctor 
prescribed Vicodin. My own family has not been immune to this 
devastation. My brilliant and talented sister-in-law, Valerie, 
struggled with chronic pain and struggled in her life with the many, 
many opioids that were way too available. She relied on them to dull 
that pain until she lost her life a few years ago.
  Countless families and doctors and nurses and public safety officers 
have all pleaded with us here in Congress to please act, to please save 
families from this loss and heartbreak.
  I am glad we have come together today to answer this call, but these 
are only the first steps. Healthcare and treatment providers must have 
the resources they need to effectively curtail opioid abuse and 
addiction, and that means robust funding and better research and better 
education. We have all stood on this floor today and called this an 
epidemic. Let's treat it as such. Let's continue building on this 
progress.
  I thank the chairman and the ranking member for their leadership.

                              {time}  0945

  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, some of the things also we have 
talked about today are education and prevention. It is also looking at 
things that we can be a part of and do.
  As I have said earlier today, the things that have stuck out to me 
are some of the statistics that have jumped out. I mentioned the one 
earlier that more are dying from prescription overdoses than in car 
wrecks.
  Also, there are other practical ways that we can be a part. If you 
are suffering out there--and, Mr. Speaker, if there is someone who is 
going through this with either prescription opioid abuse or through 
heroin abuse and addiction--there are toolkits available.
  In fact, we have posted on our social media a place where people can 
go. It is from the Bipartisan Task Force to Combat the Heroin Epidemic. 
There are places where they can go to find a parent toolkit, where they 
can help their young children, also the young adults in their house, 
from middle school up through their 20s, on how we can best address 
some of these real issues.
  It was very disturbing to me recently in a magazine article that I 
read that someone who was addicted, not only to heroin but was going 
through it, made the statement--and this just shows you the concern 
that is here--made the general statement that they were--there was this 
adrenaline rush when they were getting ready to shoot the heroin--is 
that this may be the last time I shoot up. That was almost driving them 
to do that.
  To think about how that plays out, think about a young person who is 
so addicted and who is so wrapped to a drug that they really, when they 
go to put it in their body, knowing full well it could be the very last 
time they do anything, and yet that was part of the reason that they 
were doing it, that is just disturbing as we look at this.
  There are also many other things that have come out. I think, as we 
go through this--we had a constituent who, knowing what we are doing 
here today, had looked to the pharmaceutical industry and who found 
ideas that are out there, such as this one from a pharmaceutical 
company that is looking at abuse-resistant opioids that don't have the 
same problems as we see in some of the others, such as OxyContin and 
some of the others that we have out there.
  I think this is about proper management. I appreciate what Mr. Carter 
from Georgia said on dealing with this and finding that balance. I 
think when we have the study, especially on how doctors prescribe how 
pain medication is used, these are all the kinds of things that get us 
to a point in which we limit the good uses that they may have, but also 
of preventing the addiction and the preventative steps that are putting 
us in the situation that we currently have.
  So there are a lot of issues out here, and I think this is why this 
rule is effective. This rule is a good first step. It is something we 
move forward on. In doing so, I think we make a statement to the 
American people that we are looking to the problems that they are 
experiencing. We are addressing those needs, and we are going to 
continue to do so.
  If there is any indication that this was the last step, I think that 
is a misperception that is out there. This is

[[Page H2351]]

a first step toward continuing this process. It will continue into the 
appropriations, I am sure, process as well. But these are the tools 
that we need to get into the toolbox right now and to be a part of 
that.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, this package before us cannot be the final 
word. Congress needs to approve funding to develop a comprehensive 
response to this epidemic and save lives.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to bring up legislation that, in addition to 
including all of the opioid bills passed this week, which I do support, 
will also provide $600 million in funding to address the opioid 
epidemic.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from New Hampshire (Ms. Kuster) to discuss our proposal.
  Ms. KUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Colorado for 
yielding, and I also thank the Representative from Georgia (Mr. 
Collins) for his words.
  In New Hampshire, right now, we have a four-times-greater chance of 
dying from a heroin or opiate overdose than a car accident, as you have 
pointed out in national statistics.
  This morning, I rise to say that I am proud of what the House has 
been able to accomplish this week in a bipartisan way by working to 
address this critical challenge of substance use disorder that is 
devastating communities in my home State of New Hampshire and all 
across the country.
  Last year, I had the honor to cofound with my colleague from New 
Hampshire (Mr. Guinta) the Bipartisan Task Force to Combat the Heroin 
Epidemic to address the critical problems that heroin and opioid 
addiction are bringing to every corner of my district and most parts of 
the country. The membership of the task force now includes 83 members, 
about half Republicans and Democrats, who are dedicated to fighting 
this problem.
  Last month, we unveiled a legislative package of 15 bills to fight 
this epidemic, and we are pleased that many of these bills and 
provisions have been included in the package this week.
  To mark the start of opioid week, we held a Special Order on Tuesday 
evening, when over 20 Members from both sides of the aisle came to the 
floor to share personal stories of friends and family who had been 
affected by the heroin epidemic.
  As part of the Special Order, I told the story of Carl, the son of a 
constituent and friend of mine, Sue Messinger. Carl, at 24 years old, 
was working hard in college. He wanted to become a dentist. He was a 
recent graduate. He earned good grades, and he had his eye set on 
applying to dental school.
  But it turned out, unbeknownst to his family, Carl had been using 
heroin. His was another face of addiction.
  When he finally spoke to his parents, they began the long journey 
with him to recovery. They were able to secure a place in a detox 
program, and they then moved toward his recovery. He was passing every 
drug test. He remained resolutely committed to avoid drugs and alcohol, 
and his family was overjoyed to see him get better.
  But when Carl came down with an upper respiratory infection shortly 
thereafter, a fatal error occurred. Unaware of Carl's history of 
addiction and his recent completion of detox, the doctor who he saw for 
the upper respiratory infection prescribed a narcotic cough 
suppressant.
  Triggered by the codeine in the cough syrup, Carl's addiction to 
heroin was instantly reawakened, and he could not resist the craving. 
He injected heroin and died that day of pure fentanyl, 50 times more 
powerful than heroin, in his own home.

  There were no labels on the bottle that indicated that the cough 
medicine could trigger drug-seeking behavior. There was no way for Carl 
or his mother or his parents to know that the cough medicine could pose 
a fatal danger.
  Since his death, his mother, Sue, has spoken out about the need to 
reform labeling requirements. And I am pleased to be a sponsor of 
Representative Walberg's bipartisan bill seeking to ensure that medical 
professionals have full knowledge of a patient's previous opioid 
addiction.
  Sadly, that bill is not in the package of bills this week, and it is 
one among many that we will need to address at a later date. So I am 
hopeful that I can continue to work with the chair of this committee 
and so many others on the other side of the aisle to bring forward 
bills such as this that will make a difference in people's lives.
  Earlier this week, I introduced the Drug Abuse Crisis Act that will 
provide $600 million in critical funding to finally address this heroin 
epidemic.
  I want to close my remarks by talking about hope. So many of the 
bills that we have passed will finally bring hope for recovery, for 
treatment, for long-term recovery to the families, to the users, and to 
our communities. This legislation will build and expand upon the work 
that we have done this week by dramatically increasing resources for 
medication-assisted treatments, funding competitive programs for law 
enforcement and for those hardest hit by this drug crisis.
  I am opposing this rule before us today and the previous question so 
that we can move to consider my Drug Abuse Crisis Act.
  Let's bring hope to our families and communities, and please oppose 
the previous question.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, as I went through in my opening statement, I mentioned a 
good many of the bills that were part of the House package this week. I 
want to go back through just a few more that we went through just to 
let people know the breadth and scope of what we have been doing.
  H.R. 4982, Examining Opioid Treatment Infrastructure Act, is a bill 
that requires the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the 
inpatient and outpatient treatment capacity, availability, and needs in 
the United States. And that was by Mr. Foster of Illinois.
  We also have H.R. 4599, Reducing Unused Medications Act of 2016, from 
Representative Clark of Massachusetts.
  We also have H.R. 4586, Lali's Law, sponsored by Representative Dold 
of Illinois.
  H.R. 3691, Improving Treatment for Pregnant and Postpartum Women Act 
of 2016, sponsored by Representative Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico.
  H.R. 3680, Co-Prescribing to Reduce Overdoses Act of 2016, sponsored 
by Representative Sarbanes of Maryland.
  We also have H.R. 1818, Veteran Emergency Medical Technician Support 
Act of 2016, sponsored by Mr. Kinzinger of Illinois.
  Again, as you see the breadth of what we are doing here and why I 
believe moving forward on this rule is important and going through, 
many times what we have said is: look, these issues all address 
specific needs. They all are encompassing of our body, as a whole, all 
435 of us, because, as I read here, these were a mix of both Republican 
and Democrat bills that have been passed on this floor this week.
  So, as we look ahead, we look to the serious nature of what we are 
doing, it also really looks at the breadth and the scope of what we are 
dealing with here. This is why this needs to move forward today, why 
this package needs to be approved and also go to conference so we can 
continue to move forward with these ideals and with the things that 
have been put before us this week.
  We can do that by making a positive step and acknowledging the good 
work that has gone on here. I appreciate all of the speakers today on 
both sides of the aisle who have come forward to talk about this issue 
and talk about the real problems that we see that are occurring, really 
unfortunately, in kitchens and living rooms all across our country 
every day. So this is something that so many people can relate to.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  I rise today to honor a constituent of mine, Mr. Timothy J. Gagen of 
Breckenridge, Colorado. Tim is retiring from 40 years of civil service 
in municipal government. He has served towns

[[Page H2352]]

and cities across Colorado, Illinois, and Indiana and recently received 
the Colorado City and County Management Association's Lifetime 
Achievement Award.
  During his tenure in Colorado, Tim was instrumental in working with 
various entities, including the EPA, U.S. Army, Colorado State Health 
Board, and the U.S. Attorney General on two Superfund sites.
  Tim was influential in the formation and success of our Highway 70 
Coalition, an organization of governments that works with the Colorado 
Department of Transportation to improve safety and reduce congestion 
along our important Highway 70, the main artery to our mountain 
communities.
  He spearheaded a crucial land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service 
that provided for much-needed workforce housing, and we were able to 
get a bill passed here and signed into law to get it done.
  Tim's steadfast focus on the most important elements to our 
community--the people who live and work in the area--resulted in the 
Breckenridge Vision, developed by citizens. Tim's accomplishments are 
highlighted by two early learning centers, a scholarship program to 
assist parents from the county, and nearly 1,000 workforce affordable 
housing units in the town with a population of 4,500.
  Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise to pay tribute to Mr. 
Timothy J. Gagen on behalf of the residents of the Second Congressional 
District. His contributions to the town of Breckenridge will remain his 
legacy for many years to come.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I inquire of the Chair how much 
time remains.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Georgia has 7\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Colorado has 10 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Colorado 
is prepared to close, I am prepared to close as well.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, there have been harrowing tales told here on the floor 
of the House, and there is no doubt opioid addiction is a segment of 
that. It is a public health crisis in this country that is hurting 
communities, hurting families, killing people.
  In 2012, enough prescriptions were written for opioids to give every 
single adult in this country their own bottle. Prescriptions for 
opioids have increased four times in the last 15 years. That is four 
times as many prescriptions.

                              {time}  1000

  We need to do something. It is a start today. It is not enough. It is 
not enough.
  Unfortunately, these rules block out and prevent many creative and 
effective ideas from both sides of the aisle from coming to the floor. 
We also have missed the opportunity to provide funding to address 
treatment and enforcement.
  The fact that both parties in both Chambers have come together to 
tackle opioid addiction is a testament to how far the reach of this 
epidemic is. Every district has been affected; every Member of this 
body has taken note. I and many of us know families and individuals 
whose lives have been devastated or ended prematurely from the opioid 
crisis.
  It is crucial that we approach the problem from every possible angle: 
support for providers, training for law enforcement, well-funded 
treatment centers, thoughtful policies for addicted parents, education 
for our youth, innovative dispensing technologies, alternative pain 
management therapies. There are so many ideas to consider.
  This rule packages 18 bills that address part of the problem 
together. Unfortunately, 16 of them don't allow amendments, and the 2 
that do, many amendments were ruled out for lack of being germane. 
Given the rate of deaths from prescription opioid abuse, we should 
allow a full debate of amendments and ideas on the floor of the House 
to address this issue.
  Yes, we are taking a first step today, but there is a lot more work 
to do to save lives and help families across our country. We need to 
fund these programs so they are not just words on a page.
  This is a very real issue with real implications for American 
families, and we owe it to American families across the country to have 
a more open and thorough process to do more to combat the opioid 
scourge.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we 
can bring forward Ms. Kuster's amendment, ``no'' on the underlying 
rule, and ``yes'' on the underlying bills.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, just the other day I had an opportunity to speak to a 
longtime friend, and there was a general discussion about what was 
going on up here and the steps that were being taken.
  During this time, my friend began to list and talk about folks close 
to him that either had addiction to prescription pain medications or 
were dealing with the aftereffects of that problem. This came, frankly, 
out of nowhere and even to my friend, who basically said, ``I had no 
idea.'' And yet, within just the matter of a few weeks, he had found 
out within just his own sphere of influence that there were a number of 
people in his family and in his friendship connection who were dealing 
with this abuse.
  That tells you that this is something that a lot of times is hidden 
just below the surface, unfortunately dealt with in very private, very 
concerning ways, because so many times they are trapped in a cycle of 
addiction in which the addiction is found and then treated and it comes 
back again and it reexpresses itself in many different ways.
  As a pastor and as a chaplain, I have dealt with these issues before, 
and there is nothing more heartbreaking than to see someone who wants 
to break free from an addiction and break free from the abuse that they 
are perpetrating basically on their own body and to see progress made 
and then get a call or not see them for a week or two and then find out 
that they fell back into their old pattern or they unfortunately found 
a new addiction that has taken over.
  But when we come to the floor of the House--and we have spoken this 
week on 18 bills and the promise of the Senate bill and the promise of 
a conference committee going forward--it is saying that we have heard 
these sometimes silent screams, these sometimes silent tears of those 
who may not know how to deal with it but yet they are looking for ways.
  We have heard the anguish of law enforcement officers and first 
responders who come to scenes, and if they have the proper medication, 
if they have the proper treatments, then they can reverse some of these 
disastrous effects. Now we are making sure that we can get that to 
them, we can look for better ways of helping them do their job that 
they so heroically do every day.
  We are looking at ways of looking at a task force so that we can look 
at how we prescribe and how we treat pain and those things in people's 
lives that are chronic and ongoing, how do we treat them better so that 
we don't have to deal maybe with this addiction side and we don't have 
to deal with possible aftereffects of that.
  We have to also look at our ways on how we deal with folks who are 
addicted and how we deal with them in treatment, not only from the 
veterans' perspective, from the son or daughter perspective, from the 
mom or dad perspective, the aunt or uncle, even the grandparent 
perspective. How do we do that? How do we do it effectively?
  How do we make sure that when we get to our spending and we get to 
our appropriations and we make sure that these appropriations are going 
out that they are done so in appropriate ways? That is the function, I 
believe, of the Republican majority.
  That is why we are bringing this forward today as we are, is to make 
a difference in the lives of people but do so in a way that is 
constructive and ongoing. As we have heard today and over the course of 
the week, the opioid epidemic is out of control, but we have an 
opportunity to start addressing the problem.
  Again, the rule provides for consideration of legislation that will 
enact measures to address this problem through multiple avenues to 
ensure that we are taking a comprehensive approach to stopping this 
scourge. It

[[Page H2353]]

takes important steps to address the serious and growing threat of 
opioid abuse. It keeps a promise that we won't sit idly by while people 
continue to battle addiction and die.
  For that reason, I would urge my colleagues to support this rule, the 
Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act, and the motion to go to 
conference on the House-passed amendment in the nature of a substitute.
  This is something we can do. This is a very positive step in a week 
in which, for the most part, we have come to the floor to hear 
bipartisan unity in saying, ``We will act.''
  Do not let this day go by because we may not have gotten everything 
that everybody wanted. It is the time to vote ``yes'' on the previous 
question, it is the time to vote ``yes'' on the rule, and it is the 
time to vote ``yes'' to move forward so that we can conference with the 
Senate and put together a product that can make not only this body 
proud but make the American people know that we have heard their voice.
  We agonize with them, many of us who have felt it firsthand. And in 
doing so, we are doing the people's business.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Polis is as follows:

            An Amendment to H. Res. 725 Offered by Mr. Polis

       On page 2, line 2, strike ``the respective text of the 
     bills specified in section 2(a) of this resolution'' and 
     insert ``the text of H.R. 5189, as introduced,''.
       Strike section 2 and redesignate subsequent sections 
     accordingly.
                                  ____


        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a 
     vote about what the House should be debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous 
     question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an 
     immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no 
     substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' 
     But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the 
     Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in 
     the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, 
     page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous 
     question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally 
     not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member 
     controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of 
     Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special 
     Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on 
     such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on 
     Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further 
     debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: 
     ``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a 
     resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control 
     shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous 
     question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who 
     controls the time for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. COLLINS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. 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, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on adopting the resolution, if ordered; and 
agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 232, 
nays 172, not voting 29, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 190]

                               YEAS--232

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     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
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     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
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NAYS--172

     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     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
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney

[[Page H2354]]


     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--29

     Adams
     Bishop (UT)
     Bridenstine
     Cardenas
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Forbes
     Garamendi
     Hastings
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Johnson (GA)
     Kennedy
     Kirkpatrick
     Knight
     Latta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pitts
     Richmond
     Roskam
     Rush
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Speier
     Stutzman
     Titus
     Whitfield

                              {time}  1029

  Messrs. CICILLINE and DeFAZIO changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Mr. POE of Texas changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 240, 
noes 165, not voting 28, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 191]

                               AYES--240

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Eshoo
     Farenthold
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters
     Pittenger
     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
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NOES--165

     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Heck (WA)
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--28

     Adams
     Bridenstine
     Cardenas
     Diaz-Balart
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Forbes
     Garamendi
     Hastings
     Herrera Beutler
     Himes
     Kennedy
     Kirkpatrick
     Knight
     Latta
     Olson
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pitts
     Richmond
     Rush
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Speier
     Stutzman
     Titus
     Whitfield


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hultgren)(during the vote). There are 2 
minutes remaining.

                              {time}  1037

  Mr. CARTWRIGHT changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Ms. DUCKWORTH changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________