[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 18 (Thursday, February 2, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H894-H907]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE 
                     SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 71, I call 
up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 40) providing for congressional 
disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 
submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to 
Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007,

[[Page H895]]

and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 71, the joint 
resolution is considered read.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 40

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves the rule submitted by the Social Security 
     Administration relating to Implementation of the NICS 
     Improvement Amendments Act of 2007 (published at 81 Fed. Reg. 
     91702 (December 19, 2016)), and such rule shall have no force 
     or effect.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees.
  The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Conyers) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials to H.J. Res. 40.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today I rise in strong support of H.J. Res. 40, a joint 
resolution providing for congressional disapproval of the rules 
submitted by the Social Security Administration relating to 
implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.
  On December 19, 2016, in the waning days of the previous 
administration, the Social Security Administration published a rule 
finalizing the criteria for sending the names of certain Social 
Security beneficiaries to the National Instant Criminal Background 
Check System, NICS.
  Under the rule, an individual's name will be sent to the NICS if they 
receive disability insurance or supplemental security income benefits 
based on having a mental disorder, the person is between age 18 and the 
full retirement age, and the SSA determines that the person needs a 
representative payee to manage their benefits. Individuals who meet 
these criteria would be prohibited from exercising their Second 
Amendment right to possess firearms.
  This rule is a slap in the face of those in the disabled community 
because it paints all those who suffer from mental disorders with the 
same broad brush. It assumes that simply because an individual suffers 
from a mental condition, that individual is unfit to exercise his or 
her Second Amendment rights. No data exists to support such an 
egregious assertion. In fact, studies show that those who suffer from 
mental disorders are more likely to be victims of crime rather than 
perpetrators of crime.
  Furthermore, there is a total absence of any meaningful due process 
protections under the rule. Currently, citizens lose their right to 
possess a firearm when they have been convicted by a judge or jury of a 
felony or misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, when they have been 
dishonorably discharged after given a hearing, or when they have been 
deemed a fugitive after being given an option to appear and avail 
themselves of their due process rights, among other reasons.

                              {time}  1345

  All of these have one thing in common: they all provide due process 
to the affected individual.
  Under the SSA rule, the affected party has no ability to defend 
himself or to even introduce evidence before the SSA denies his right 
to possess a firearm. Additionally, at no time during the process 
during which the SSA is seeking to deny someone his Second Amendment 
rights must the Social Security Administration make a determination 
that the individual poses a risk to himself or others. This is the 
standard that has long been used to determine if the right to possess a 
firearm should be prohibited.
  Some may point to the rule's appeals process as providing a form of 
due process. However, the appeals process is severely flawed because it 
puts the burden on individuals to prove that restoring their Second 
Amendment rights would not pose a danger to public safety or be 
contrary to the public interest. In every other instance in which 
someone is facing a loss of his ability to possess a firearm, the 
burden is on the government to prove that the individual should have 
his right taken away. Under this flawed system, the individual bears 
the burden against the government. This is not what due process looks 
like.
  During debate on the rule for this joint resolution, I heard a number 
of reasons from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle as to why 
they opposed this joint resolution. Quite frankly, I am shocked at what 
little regard they have for the disabled community. The gentleman from 
Massachusetts claimed that this joint resolution was done at the 
bidding of the National Rifle Association. Yes, the National Rifle 
Association does support H.J. Res. 40. However, what my colleague from 
Massachusetts failed to mention during the debate yesterday was who 
else supports the joint resolution.
  Supporters include the American Association of People with 
Disabilities, the National Disability Rights Network, the Autistic Self 
Advocacy Network, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, the Arc of 
the United States, the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, the 
Disability Law Center of Alaska, the National Council on Independent 
Living, and the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery. Even the 
National Council on Disability--an independent Federal agency that 
makes recommendations to the President and Congress to enhance the 
quality of life for all Americans with disabilities and their 
families--has called on Congress to utilize the Congressional Review 
Act in order to repeal this rule.
  It was also mentioned--and will, undoubtedly, be mentioned here later 
today--that this rule received over 91,000 comments. What they didn't 
tell you, and what I am guessing they won't tell you today, is that the 
overwhelming majority of the comments opposed the rule. Opposition 
wasn't based on small, technical issues. It was based on the 
fundamentally flawed concept of the rule. Many of the organizations I 
mentioned earlier provided comments to the agency. Rather than listen 
to the organizations advocating for the rights of the disabled, the 
previous administration decided to ignore them.
  I thank the gentleman from the State of Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson) for 
his hard work on this important issue that affects law-abiding citizens 
in every congressional district in America.
  I ask my colleagues to support this resolution--to stand with the 
disabled community and to stand with the Constitution. Support H.J. 
Res. 40.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time, and I ask unanimous 
consent to yield the control of the balance of my time to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), the sponsor of this resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Virginia?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 40, a measure that would vacate an 
important rule issued by the Social Security Administration to help 
reduce gun violence.
  This resolution of disapproval is particularly problematic because, 
pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, it would not only invalidate 
this rule but prohibit the agency from adopting substantially the same 
rule in the future, even an improved version of the rule. How unusual.
  As we consider this resolution today, I ask my colleagues to 
consider, for just a moment, how we arrived at this point and, more 
precisely, what is at stake.
  In 1968, after a decade of assassinations and gun violence, Congress 
worked to pass the Gun Control Act. That law lists certain categories 
of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing and possessing 
firearms, including felons, fugitives, those who

[[Page H896]]

have renounced their citizenship, those who have been dishonorably 
discharged, and also those ``adjudicated mentally defective.'' Today, 
we don't commonly use that outdated and unfortunate terminology. 
Instead, we refer to the ``Federal mental health prohibitor,'' which 
remains an important--although challenging--feature of our Federal gun 
laws.
  Because it was common sense that we needed a system to help prevent 
guns from getting into the hands of those who were legally prohibited 
from possessing them, Congress took bipartisan action to enact the 
Brady Act in 1993. That statute established a National Instant Criminal 
Background Check System--some call it NICS--and it requires federally 
licensed gun dealers to conduct checks on prospective purchasers in 
order to verify that they are not prohibited on the basis of the 
statutory categories.
  Although unwisely limited only to sales conducted by licensed gun 
dealers, the NICS system is extremely beneficial as far as it goes. 
Critically, however, this background check system is only as good as 
the completeness of the records it includes. This fact was tragically 
underscored in 2007, when a student on the campus of Virginia Tech shot 
and killed 32 people. The shooter had a mental health record that was 
serious enough that it should have been reported to the system, but it 
was not.

  As a result, Congress enacted the bipartisan NICS Improvement 
Amendments Act that same year in order to provide incentives for States 
to do a better job of submitting disqualifying mental health records to 
the system. The law also requires Federal agencies to submit any such 
information that they have. While some States have done a great job of 
complying with the law, others have not, which remains a critical 
challenge. As we expect States to do more to comply, we must also 
ensure Federal agencies are doing their part.
  The rule under consideration, which was finalized last December after 
an extensive rulemaking process that considered more than 91,000 
comments from the public, is intended to impact only a very narrow 
range of individuals whom the agency determines should be prohibited 
from possessing firearms under the statutory mental health prohibitor, 
which has been the law for decades. The rule applies only to those 
individuals who have a very severe, long-term mental disorder that 
makes them unable to do any kind of work in the American economy, 
including even part time or at very low wages.
  These individuals must have been determined through an evaluation of 
all of the evidence that they are not capable of managing their own 
benefits and must be assigned a representative payee. This designation 
is given only after an individual is notified orally and in writing at 
the outset of the process that the gun eligibility determination would 
be the result of the assignment of a representative payee. After the 
determination is made, the affected individuals may appeal the decision 
to the agency and then, ultimately, to a Federal court.
  Of course, we must avoid taking actions that would unfairly 
stigmatize individuals who suffer from mental illness or a disability. 
This is true in many respects, but, with regard to issues of public 
safety, we must recognize that people who suffer from mental illness 
should not be assumed to be dangerous. In fact, they are much more 
likely to be victims of crime than to be perpetrators. With those 
considerations in mind, my colleagues, it can be difficult to apply the 
mental health prohibitor, but, still, we must apply and enforce the 
law.
  If I were proposing such a rule, I cannot say whether this process 
would be exactly what I would recommend. We have not held hearings on 
this issue, and we have not had the chance to examine all appropriate 
considerations. I can say that the agency has undertaken a commendable 
effort in accordance with President Obama's directive to ensure that 
the NICS background check system has the information that it believes, 
after a thorough rulemaking process, corresponds to a longstanding 
category of firearms prohibition.
  Accordingly, we should not completely disregard the agency's efforts, 
and I urge my colleagues to strenuously oppose H.J. Res. 40.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Former President Obama was never a champion of the Second Amendment 
right to keep and bear arms. He fought to deny Americans their 
constitutional rights throughout his whole 8 years in office. In fact, 
on his way out the door, former President Obama finalized a rule that 
discriminates against individuals with disabilities and that deprives 
law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights. Under this 
rule, certain Social Security disability beneficiaries, who also need 
help, would be stripped of their Second Amendment rights. More 
specifically, their names would be reported to the National Instant 
Criminal Background Check System.
  Mr. Speaker, just because someone has a disability does not mean he 
is a threat to society. Furthermore, needing help to manage your 
benefit does not make you dangerous; but you don't have to take my word 
for it as the disability community has also raised serious concerns 
with regard to this rule.
  The National Council on Disability, which is the independent agency 
that is charged with advising Congress and the President on disability 
policy, said:
  ``There is, simply put, no nexus between the inability to manage 
money and the ability to safely and responsibly own, possess or use a 
firearm.''
  In addition, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record many letters of 
support I have received for my bill from one of the disability 
community's Second Amendment groups and civil rights groups and others.

                               National Council on Disability,

                                 Washington, DC, January 24, 2017.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan: I write on 
     behalf of the National Council on Disability (NCD) regarding 
     the final rule the Social Security Administration (SSA) 
     released on December 19th, 2016, implementing provisions of 
     the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) 
     Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, 81 FR 91702. In 
     accordance with our mandate to advise the President, 
     Congress, and other federal agencies regarding policies, 
     programs, practices, and procedures that affect people with 
     disabilities, NCD submitted comments to SSA on the proposed 
     rule on June 30th, 2016. In our comments, we cautioned 
     against implementation of the proposed rule because:
       ``[t]here is, simply put, no nexus between the inability to 
     manage money and the ability to safely and responsibly own, 
     possess or use a firearm. This arbitrary linkage not only 
     unnecessarily and unreasonably deprives individuals with 
     disabilities of a constitutional right, it increases the 
     stigma for those who, due to their disabilities, may need a 
     representative payee[.]''
       Despite our objections and that of many other individuals 
     and organizations received by SSA regarding the proposed 
     rule, the final rule released in late December was largely 
     unchanged. Because of the importance of the constitutional 
     right at stake and the very real stigma that this rule 
     legitimizes, NCD recommends that Congress consider utilizing 
     the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal this rule.
       NCD is a nonpartisan, independent federal agency with no 
     stated position with respect to gun-ownership or gun-control 
     other than our long-held position that restrictions on gun 
     possession or ownership based on psychiatric or intellectual 
     disability must be based on a verifiable concern as to 
     whether the individual poses a heightened risk of danger to 
     themselves or others if they are in possession of a weapon. 
     Additionally, it is critically important that any restriction 
     on gun possession or ownership on this basis is imposed only 
     after the individual has been afforded due process and given 
     an opportunity to respond to allegations that they are not 
     able to safely possess or own a firearm due to his or her 
     disability. NCD believes that SSA's final rule falls far 
     short of meeting these criteria.
       Additionally, as NCD also cautioned SSA in our comments on 
     the proposed rule, we have concerns regarding the ability of 
     SSA to fairly and effectively implement this rule--assuming 
     it would be possible to do so--given the long-standing issues 
     SSA already has regarding long delays in adjudication and 
     difficulty in providing consistent, prompt service to 
     beneficiaries with respect to its core mission. This rule 
     creates an entirely new function for an agency that has long 
     noted that it has not been given sufficient resources to do 
     the important work it is already charged with doing. With all 
     due respect to SSA, our federal partner, this rule is simply 
     a bridge too far. In fact, it is conceivable that attempts to 
     implement this rule may strain the already scarce 
     administrative resources available to the agency,

[[Page H897]]

     further impairing its ability to carry out its core mission.
       The CRA is a powerful mechanism for controlling regulatory 
     overreach, and NCD urges its use advisedly and cautiously. In 
     this particular case, the potential for real harm to the 
     constitutional rights of people with psychiatric and 
     intellectual disabilities is grave as is the potential to 
     undermine the essential mission of an agency that millions of 
     people with and without disabilities rely upon to meet their 
     basic needs. Therefore, in this instance, NCD feels that 
     utilizing the CRA to repeal the final rule is not only 
     warranted, but necessary.
           Regards,
                                                   Clyde E. Terry,
     Chair.
                                  ____

                                        National Rifle Association


                                                   of America,

                                                      Fairfax, VA.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     House Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Minority Leader Pelosi: I am writing 
     on behalf of the National Rifle Association Institute for 
     Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) to urge you to vote yes on H.J. 
     Res. 40. This measure is a joint resolution to disapprove, 
     under the Congressional Review Act, a Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) rule that would result in hundreds of 
     thousands of law-abiding Americans permanently losing their 
     Second Amendment rights.
       SSA claims its rule was mandated by the NICS Improvement 
     Amendments Act of 2007 (NIAA), as interpreted by the Obama 
     administration's Department of Justice. The supposed intent 
     of the rule is for SSA to identify disability or 
     Supplementary Security Income beneficiaries who qualify as 
     prohibited ``mental defectives'' under the Gun Control Act 
     (GCA) and report them to the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS).
       NICS came online nearly 20 years ago, but at no point 
     before this new regulation did SSA consider its own 
     operations or decisions as somehow implicated by the 
     prohibitions in the GCA. Clearly this was not provoked 
     because of the NIAA or because of changes in the SSA's own 
     procedures, but because of the antigun politics of the Obama 
     administration. President Obama made clear that if Congress 
     would not support his desire for increased gun control, he 
     would act on his own. That's why he issued this proposal in 
     the final days of his administration.
       The SSA received over 91,000 comments in response to its 
     proposed rule, the overwhelming majority of them in 
     opposition. Comments submitted by NRA-ILA explained in detail 
     how the rule misread the underlying statutes; ignored binding 
     case law; targeted harmless individuals who do not pose a 
     risk of harm; violated due process; and hijacked the SSA's 
     legitimate functions for political purposes.
       Our opposition was joined by mental health professionals 
     and advocates for the mentally ill, who argued that the 
     proposal was not supported by evidence or science; added to 
     the stigma of mental illness; and created disincentives for 
     mentally ill persons to seek help and benefits to which they 
     are entitled.
       Reporting law-abiding, non-dangerous individuals to NICS 
     and forcing them, as a condition of removal, to prove they 
     are not a threat to society is inconsistent with the GCA, the 
     Second Amendment and basic due process.
       For these reasons, the NRA strongly supports H.J. Res. 40. 
     Because of the importance of this issue to NRA members and 
     gun owners throughout the country, votes on H.J. Res. 40 will 
     be considered in future candidate evaluations and we will 
     notify our members accordingly.
           Sincerely,
     Chris W. Cox.
                                  ____

                                            National Coalition for


                                       Mental Health Recovery,

                                 Washington, DC, January 29, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: I write on 
     behalf of the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery 
     (NCMHR) regarding the final rule the Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) released on December 19th, 2016, 
     implementing provisions of the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Amendments Act of 
     2007, 81 FR 91702.
       NCMHR submitted comments to SSA on the proposed rule in 
     June 2016. In our comments, we cautioned against 
     implementation of the proposed rule because there is no 
     causal connection between the inability to manage money and 
     the ability to safely and responsibly own, possess or use a 
     firearm. This arbitrary linkage not only unnecessarily and 
     unreasonably deprives individuals with disabilities of a 
     constitutional right, it increases the stigma for those who, 
     due to their disabilities, may need a representative payee.
       Despite our objections and that of many other individuals 
     and organizations received by SSA regarding the proposed 
     rule, the final rule released in late December was largely 
     unchanged. Because of the importance of the constitutional 
     right at stake and the very real stigma that this rule 
     legitimizes, NCMHR recommends that Congress consider 
     utilizing the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal this 
     rule.
       NCMHR is a nonpartisan, is a nonpartisan, nonprofit with no 
     stated position with respect to gun-ownership or gun-control 
     other than our long-held position that restrictions on gun 
     possession or ownership based on psychiatric or intellectual 
     disability must be based on a verifiable concern as to 
     whether the individual poses a heightened risk of danger to 
     themselves or others if they are in possession of a weapon. 
     Additionally, it is critically important that any restriction 
     on gun possession or ownership on this basis is imposed only 
     after the individual has been afforded due process and given 
     an opportunity to respond to allegations that they are not 
     able to safely possess or own a firearm due to his or her 
     disability. NCMHR believes that SSA's final rule falls far 
     short of meeting these criteria.
       The CRA is a powerful mechanism for controlling regulatory 
     overreach, and NCMHR urges its use advisedly and cautiously. 
     In this particular case, the potential for real harm to the 
     constitutional rights of people with psychiatric and 
     intellectual disabilities is grave as is the potential to 
     undermine the essential mission of an agency that millions of 
     people with and without disabilities rely upon to meet their 
     basic needs. Therefore, in this instance, NCMHR feels that 
     utilizing the CRA to repeal the final rule is not only 
     warranted, but necessary.
           Sincerely,
                                    Daniel B. Fisher, M.D., Ph.D.,
     Chair NCMHR.
                                  ____

                                                    Consortium for


                                   Citizens with Disabilities,

                                 Washington, DC, January 26, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Co-
     Chairs of the Rights Task Force of the Consortium of Citizens 
     with Disabilities (CCD) urge you to support a Congressional 
     Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the Final Rule 
     issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) on 
     December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement 
     Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require the Social 
     Security Administration to forward the names of all Social 
     Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental 
     Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who use a 
     representative payee to help manage their benefits due to a 
     mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal Background 
     Check System (NICS).
       The Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) is the 
     largest coalition of national organizations working together 
     to advocate for Federal public policy that ensures the self-
     determination, independence, empowerment, integration and 
     inclusion of children and adults with disabilities in all 
     aspects of society.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, the CCD Rights 
     Task Force conveyed its opposition to the rule through a 
     letter to the Obama Administration and through the public 
     comment process. We--and many other members of CCD--opposed 
     the rule for a number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
       On behalf of the CCD Rights Task Force, the undersigned Co-
     Chairs,

[[Page H898]]

     Dara Baldwin,
       National Disability Rights Network.
     Samantha Crane,
       Autistic Self-Advocacy Network.
     Sandy Finucane,
       Epilepsy Foundation, Law.
     Jennifer Mathis,
       Bazelon Center for Mental Health.
     Mark Richert,
       American Foundation for the Blind.
                                  ____



                               American Civil Liberties Union,

                                 Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
     Vote YES on the Resolution of Disapproval, H.J. Res. 40 
         (Social Security Administration NICS Final Rule)
     Vote NO on the Resolution of Disapproval, H.J. Res. 37 
         (Federal Acquisition Regulation/Fair Pay and Safe 
         Workplaces EO)

       Dear Representatives: On behalf of the American Civil 
     Liberties Union (ACLU), we urge members of the House of 
     Representatives to support the resolution disapproving the 
     final rule of the Social Security Administration which 
     implements the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
     System Improvement Amendment Acts of 2007.
       Additionally we urge members to oppose the resolution of 
     disapproval of the rule submitted by the Department of 
     Defense, the General Services Administration, and NASA 
     relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation that implement 
     the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order 13673.


   Social Security Administration (SSA)'s Implementation of the NICS 
   Improvement Amendment Acts of 2007 Harms People with Disabilities

       In December 2016, the SSA promulgated a final rule that 
     would require the names of all Social Security Disability 
     Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 
     benefit recipients--who, because of a mental impairment, use 
     a representative payee to help manage their benefits--be 
     submitted to the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
     System (NICS), which is used during gun purchases.
       We oppose this rule because it advances and reinforces the 
     harmful stereotype that people with mental disabilities, a 
     vast and diverse group of citizens, are violent. There is no 
     data to support a connection between the need for a 
     representative payee to manage one's Social Security 
     disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence. The 
     rule further demonstrates the damaging phenomenon of 
     ``spread,'' or the perception that a disabled individual with 
     one area of impairment automatically has additional, negative 
     and unrelated attributes. Here, the rule automatically 
     conflates one disability-related characteristic, that is, 
     difficulty managing money, with the inability to safely 
     possess a firearm.
       The rule includes no meaningful due process protections 
     prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     The determination by SSA line staff that a beneficiary needs 
     a representative payee to manage their money benefit is 
     simply not an ``adjudication'' in any ordinary meaning of the 
     word. Nor is it a determination that the person ``[l]acks the 
     mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs'' as 
     required by the NICS. Indeed, the law and the SSA clearly 
     state that representative payees are appointed for many 
     individuals who are legally competent.
       We recognize that enacting new regulations relating to 
     firearms can raise difficult questions. The ACLU believes 
     that the right to own and use guns is not absolute or free 
     from government regulation, since firearms are inherently 
     dangerous instrumentalities and their use, unlike other 
     activities protected by the Bill of Rights, can inflict 
     serious bodily injury or death. Therefore, firearms are 
     subject to reasonable regulation in the interests of public 
     safety, crime prevention, maintaining the peace, 
     environmental protection, and public health. We do not oppose 
     regulation of firearms as long as it is reasonably related to 
     these legitimate government interests.
       At the same time, regulation of firearms and individual gun 
     ownership or use must be consistent with civil liberties 
     principles, such as due process, equal protection, freedom 
     from unlawful searches, and privacy. All individuals have the 
     right to be judged on the basis of their individual 
     capabilities, not the characteristics and capabilities that 
     are sometimes attributed (often mistakenly) to any group or 
     class to which they belong. A disability should not 
     constitute grounds for the automatic per se denial of any 
     right or privilege, including gun ownership.


  Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Regulations Advance Worker Safety and 
                                 Rights

       The rules implementing the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces 
     Executive Order take an important step towards creating more 
     equitable and safe work conditions by ensuring that federal 
     contractors provide workplaces that comply with federal labor 
     and civil rights laws.
       Employers that have the privilege of doing business with 
     the federal government must meet their legal obligations. The 
     Fair Pay and Safe Workplace regulations are crucial because 
     they help ensure that federal contractors behave responsibly 
     and ethically with respect to labor standards and civil 
     rights laws and that they are complying with federal labor 
     and employment laws such as the Fair Labor Standards Act 
     (which includes the Equal Pay Act), Title VII of the Civil 
     Rights Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and 
     the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and their state law 
     equivalents. The Executive Order also bans contractors from 
     forcing employees to arbitrate claims under Title VII of the 
     Civil Rights Act as well as claims of sexual harassment and 
     sexual assault.
       Congress should stand with workers, increase the 
     accountability of federal contractors and oppose any attempts 
     to undo the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces regulations. These 
     rules will help ensure that the federal government does not 
     contract with employers that routinely violate workplace 
     health and safety protections, engage in age, disability, 
     race, and sex discrimination, withhold wages, or commit other 
     labor violations.
       If you have any questions, please feel free to contact 
     Vania Leveille, senior legislative counsel.
           Sincerely,
     Faiz Shakir,
       Director, Washington Legislative Counsel.
     Vania Leveille,
       Senior Legislative Counsel, Washington Legislative Office.
                                  ____

         The Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law,
                                 Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Bazelon 
     Center for Mental Health Law urges you to support a 
     Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the 
     Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) 
     on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS 
     Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' The Center is a 
     national legal advocacy organization that protects and 
     advances the rights of adults and children with mental 
     disabilities.
       This rule would require the Social Security Administration 
     to forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance 
     (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit 
     recipients who use a representative payee to help manage 
     their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National 
     Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       The rule is inconsistent with the statute it implements, 
     has no evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate 
     inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental 
     disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
     scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the 
     agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits 
     applications toward a mission in which the agency has little 
     expertise.
       First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) 
     statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS 
     database on the basis of a determination that the person 
     ``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs'' 
     as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental 
     illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment 
     of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard. 
     It indicates only that the individual needs help managing 
     benefits received from SSA.
       Second, the rule puts in place an ineffective strategy to 
     address gun violence, devoid of any evidentiary basis, 
     targeting individuals with representative payees and mental 
     impairments as potential perpetrators of gun violence. In 
     doing so, it also creates a false sense that meaningful 
     action has been taken to address gun violence and detracts 
     from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks for 
     gun violence.
       Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association 
     of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important 
     efforts to promote community integration and employment of 
     people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people 
     with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or 
     services, or from applying for financial and medical 
     assistance programs.
       Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA 
     without providing any additional resources. Implementation of 
     the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work 
     of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to 
     overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are 
     waiting for months and years for determinations of their 
     benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to 
     make the determinations about safety that it would be called 
     upon to make as part of the relief process established by the 
     rule.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge 
     Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this 
     new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the 
     disability community.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Jennifer Mathis,
                            Director of Policy and Legal Advocacy.


[[Page H899]]


  


                              {time}  1400

  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, we need to put a stop to this 
rule now. That is why I introduced H.J. Res. 40, along with Congressman 
Abraham, to overturn this rule and make sure the constitutional rights 
of individuals with disabilities are protected.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and pass this resolution.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thompson).
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. 
Res. 40. This resolution undermines our NICS background check system.
  I am a gun owner and a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, but 
this isn't about denying people the right to own a gun. It is about 
upholding the law, and the law is very clear on who should be reported 
to the NICS system.
  The law was passed more than a decade ago to keep guns out of the 
hands of people who can't responsibly own them. These are not people 
just having a bad day. These are not people simply suffering from 
depression or anxiety or agoraphobics. These are people with a severe 
mental illness who can't hold any kind of job or make any decisions 
about their affairs. So the law says very clearly that they shouldn't 
have a firearm.
  The Supreme Court in the Heller decision recognized that the Second 
Amendment grants Americans the right to own firearms, but they also 
stated that reasonable restrictions to that right can apply, such as 
when a person is diagnosed with a severe mental illness.
  The Social Security Administration is simply obeying the law.
  So what exactly is the objection here?
  Passage of this resolution puts Americans at risk. It would prevent 
the Social Security Administration from reporting the names of those 
who should not have a gun and prohibit that indefinitely.
  If there are concerns about the rules, let's revise it. But the CRA 
process is not a revision. It would ban Social Security from even 
amending their rule. This is a dangerous overstep, and I urge Members 
to consider the safety of our districts. No one wants another Virginia 
Tech. No one wants another Newtown.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Abraham).
  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, I am honored to introduce this resolution 
with my good friend, Representative Sam Johnson of Texas, one of the 
greatest patriots I have had the honor to come in contact with and a 
lifelong defender of our freedoms in America.
  This resolution can be boiled down to one point: no bureaucrat should 
be able to deny an American his or her constitutional rights just 
because someone else handles their finances.
  In the midnight hour of President Obama's last days in office, the 
Social Security Administration finalized a rule that would allow it to 
send the name of any beneficiary to the FBI's criminal background check 
system if they are assigned a representative payee due to mental 
impairment.
  Allowing bureaucrats at the Social Security Administration to 
determine whether or not a beneficiary is fit to exercise their Second 
Amendment rights is a clear violation of due process that every 
American is afforded.
  When this awful rule was proposed in 2015, both Representative Sam 
Johnson of Texas and I introduced legislation to prevent the Social 
Security Administration from carrying it out. With the introduction of 
this joint resolution, I am pleased that Congress and the President 
will now have the opportunity to review and to reverse this terrible 
rule.
  That is why I strongly urge my colleagues, in both the House and the 
Senate, to pass this resolution and keep the government bureaucracies 
from putting themselves before the Constitution.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, at a time here in America when mass 
shootings have become all too frequent, at a time when bullets 
literally rip apart human bodies and human families and cause so much 
pain, at a time when effective groups like Moms Demand Action for Gun 
Sense and Texas Gun Sense and the P.E.A.C.E. Initiative are asking this 
Congress to act to reduce gun violence, this Congress has committed 
itself to doing absolutely nothing about that violence.
  If you are on the terrorist watch list and you cannot fly, not to 
worry about buying a gun. It's ``No fly,'' but you can still buy.
  Today we are told the problem isn't that there are too many guns out 
there causing too much harm to American families. There are not enough. 
A group is being left out, omitted from access to guns.
  There are a group of Americans, who either from birth or by 
contracting some mental disability later in life, have a mental 
impairment that is so significant that we ask taxpayers across America 
to provide them support through the Social Security disability system. 
They are declared to be disabled.
  And within that group that is taxpayer funded, there is a much 
smaller group whose disability is so severe that they can't handle 
their own affairs. They can't receive a check. But these folks say 
don't worry that you can't place a check in their hand and you have to 
give it to someone else, it is okay to put a gun in their hands. That 
is what this proposal does.
  Now, we have, as they have failed to point out, a system in place at 
the Veterans' Administration so that if someone is a veteran and they 
are disabled, there is a process by which they are included within this 
system.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, but these folks, instead of reaching out to 
do something about gun violence in America, propose to make them more 
accessible to individuals that are so impaired they cannot take care of 
themselves in many ways and cannot even accept a check and are saying: 
Give them a gun.
  There are already safeguards in this Rule. Someone can appeal being 
listed and say: You know, I can't accept a check, but I do have the 
ability to own a gun. And they can do that through the Social Security 
Administration, as soon as they see their name on the list. Or if they 
are denied a purchase at a later time and they are someone who doesn't 
belong on this list, there is a way for them to get off the list.
  In short, there is due process to ensure they are not unfairly denied 
gun access. But the American people and the families that are being 
hurt day after day by gun violence, they deserve some due process, too.
  Let's uphold this Rule and reject this giant step backward that will 
only produce more gun violence and more families torn asunder.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this 
resolution to repeal a rule which would arbitrarily revoke the Second 
Amendment rights of certain Social Security beneficiaries. The 
inability to manage one's Social Security benefits does not correlate 
with the capacity to judiciously use firearms.
  By adding Social Security beneficiaries to the NICS list with no 
judicial review and forcing them to go through an appeals process to be 
removed, this rule would also violate the due process rights of these 
Americans.
  I would also like to focus on the component of this rule which would 
inhibit the ability of Social Security disability beneficiaries to be 
approved by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to 
work with or around certain materials.
  Mr. Speaker, there is bipartisan agreement we should be investing in 
and rebuilding our infrastructure. There is also bipartisan agreement 
we should be empowering people receiving benefits, like disability 
insurance, to return to work if they are able to do so.
  However, this rule will create a new barrier for beneficiaries 
seeking to return to work in industries like construction by forcing 
them to navigate a complex appeals process before they can be 
reemployed.
  Let me say again, if we do nothing about this rule, it will prevent 
law-

[[Page H900]]

abiding Americans who are able to do so from getting off the disability 
rolls and returning to work.
  We can work together on constructive ways to prevent those who would 
do us harm from having access to firearms and explosives. This rule is 
not the way to do so.
  I urge support for the resolution.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Higgins).
  Mr. HIGGINS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. 
Res. 40 with a message, and that is: Do not repeal this rule.
  The Social Security Administration rule is intended to promote and to 
preserve the integrity of gun ownership in America.
  I have heard it said by gun owner advocates that a steady hand is the 
best gun control. I believe that, but a steady hand requires a 
rationale mind.
  The Social Security Administration rule that my colleagues on the 
other side want to eliminate is written carefully and narrowly, 
affecting a very small group of people with a very severe, long-term 
mental disorder that makes them unable to do any kind of work in the 
U.S. economy, even part-time or with very low wages and, also, people 
not mentally capable of managing their own benefits.
  The Social Security Administration rule ensures that individuals, who 
are already prohibited from having guns under existing Federal law, 
have their names included on the National Instant Criminal Background 
Check System.
  Mr. Speaker, 93 percent of Americans support background checks and 
believe that systems should be in place to ensure that guns are not in 
the hands of individuals who have been determined already by Federal 
law to be unable to use them safely.
  I urge my colleagues to reject H.J. Res. 40.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Renacci).
  Mr. RENACCI. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Sam Johnson of Texas for 
his work on this important resolution and his many years of service to 
our country.
  Mr. Speaker, in the final weeks of President Obama's final term, the 
Social Security Administration finalized a rule that flat out 
discriminates against millions of individuals with disabilities by 
denying them their Second Amendment rights.
  But it gets worse. Not only does the rule place these innocent 
individuals' names in the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
System, it does so in a way that strips them of their due process. 
Specifically, it would subject these people to a very timely appeals 
process requiring them to prove their own innocence before their name 
could be removed.
  In other words, this rule turns due process on its head by shifting 
the burden of proof from the government to the individual to ensure 
their constitutional right is not stripped away.
  Moreover, as a member of the Social Security subcommittee, I am very 
concerned that this rule falls way outside the bounds of the Social 
Security Administration's mission. Instead of using the Social Security 
administrator's field office staff to help Ohioans manage and 
understand their benefits, this rule diverts resources away from that 
core mission toward one that is constitutionally suspect.
  That is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of Chairman Sam 
Johnson of Texas' resolution that protects Americans' Second Amendment 
rights and protects Americans with disabilities, their constitutional 
right, to due process under the law.
  I urge my colleagues to support this joint resolution of disapproval.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Members of the House, we have some organizational support for 
opposing this resolution. The first is the AFL-CIO, one of our largest 
unions in the country. The second is the Consumer Federation of 
America, and then there is this great organization, Everytown for Gun 
Safety across the country.
  In addition, the Americans for Responsible Solutions organization is 
opposed to H.J. Res. 40. Finally, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun 
Violence is also opposed to this measure, as is the Consumer Federation 
of America.

                              {time}  1415

  If Members believe this rule needs further refinement or that it does 
not afford adequate due process, then we should have the conversation 
with an eye toward improving the rule, but that is not what has been 
done. Unfortunately, this is what we are not discussing today. Instead, 
H.J. Res. 40 would invalidate all aspects of this rule and prohibit the 
agency from adopting substantially the same rule.
  We should not summarily dismiss this rule, which would undermine the 
effort to make the NICS more effective. If H.J. Res. 40 passes Congress 
and is signed into law, some individuals will be able to pass firearm 
background checks solely because Congress prevented relevant records 
from being submitted to the system.
  The Social Security Administration's rule is about making Americans 
safer from the scourge of gun violence and, unfortunately, believe me, 
H.J. Res. 40 would do the opposite.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Walorski).
  Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.J. 
Res. 40.
  As part of our bold agenda for the American people, we are reining in 
the out-of-control bureaucracy in Washington. We are taking action to 
roll back 8 years of Obama administration overreach.
  Today we are stopping an egregious violation that flies in the face 
of the Constitution. This regulation, finalized in the final days of 
the Obama Presidency, would deny certain Social Security recipients 
their Second Amendment rights without due process.
  If you receive Social Security disability payments and someone helps 
you manage those payments, this regulation stops you from being able to 
purchase a firearm, your name gets added to a Federal database, and the 
burden is on you to prove it doesn't belong there. This is absolutely 
outrageous.
  This regulation discriminates against individuals with disabilities 
by denying them their Second Amendment rights and violating their 
rights of due process. And it gives far too much power to bureaucrats 
at the Social Security Administration, who should be focused on making 
sure people get the benefits they deserve, not deciding who can own a 
gun.
  This is why we are standing up for the Second Amendment rights of all 
disabled citizens. Being disabled doesn't make you a danger to society, 
and getting help managing your benefits doesn't mean you forfeit your 
constitutional rights.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to absolutely thank Congressman Sam Johnson and 
Congressman Ralph Abraham for their leadership on this issue. I 
strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record additional letters of support.

         National Association of County Behavioral Health & 
           Development Disability Directors,
                                 Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
     Re NACBHDD and NARMH Letter of Support for the CRA on the SSA 
         NICS Rule.

     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: NACBHDD and 
     NARMH urge you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) 
     resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social 
     Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, 
     ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 
     2007. This rule would require the Social Security 
     Administration to forward the names of all Social Security 
     Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income 
     (SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to 
     help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       NACBHDD is a national organization that represents county 
     mental health, substance use, and developmental; disability 
     directors in Washington, DC. NARMH represents rural mental 
     health in the Capital.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NACBHDD and NARMH 
     conveyed our opposition to the rule through a letter to the 
     Obama Administration and through the public comment process. 
     We join many of our

[[Page H901]]

     mental health coalition members and advocates who--opposed 
     the rule for a number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
           Sincerely yours,
                                            Ron Manderscheid, PhD,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                                 National Alliance


                                            on Mental Illness,

                                  Arlington, VA, January 31, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) writes to urge you 
     to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to 
     disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation 
     of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule 
     would require the Social Security Administration to forward 
     the names of all Social Security and Supplemental Security 
     Income (SSI) disability beneficiaries who use a 
     representative payee to help manage their benefits, and who 
     have been found eligible by meeting or equaling an SSA mental 
     impairment listing, to the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS).
       NAMI is the nation's largest grassroots mental health 
     organization dedicated to building better lives for the 
     millions of Americans affected by mental illness, with more 
     than 1,100 state and local affiliates nationwide. NAMI 
     recognizes and supports the need to prioritize reducing gun 
     violence in the U.S. However, we are gravely concerned that 
     the rule, as adopted, perpetuates unfounded stereotypes about 
     people with mental illness and other mental disabilities that 
     have no basis in fact. Moreover, we believe that the rule may 
     have unintended negative consequences, including deterring 
     individuals from seeking or receiving help when they need it.
       Our specific concerns about the rule are the following:
       There is no evidence supporting the proposition that people 
     who are assigned Representative Payees on the basis of mental 
     illness or other mental disabilities pose increased risks for 
     gun violence or threats to public safety;
       Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies 
     to transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, the assignment of a Representative Payee to a 
     recipient of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social 
     Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) is not equivalent to an 
     adjudication. Rather, it is a unilateral determination by the 
     SSA that a person may need help in managing his or her 
     benefits. There is no hearing, the beneficiary is afforded no 
     oppornmity to testify or provide evidence why he or she 
     should not be assigned a Representative Payee, and there are 
     no other due process protections typically associated with 
     formal adjudications.
       The new rule reinforces unfounded perceptions associating 
     mental illness and other mental disabilities with violence. 
     Scientific studies that have assessed risk factors for 
     violence contain no evidence linking difficulties with 
     managing benefits with increased risks for violence.
       SSI and SSDI provide vital links to medical benefits for 
     people with mental illness. The rule may deter individuals 
     from applying for these benefits for fear that their names 
     will be added to a public database maintained by the FBI. 
     Without such benefits, access to mental health treatment and 
     services will be impeded.
       Mr. Speaker and Madam Leader, NAMI asserts that the 
     adoption of this misguided rule in the aftermath of 
     Congressional adoption of a comprehensive bill to improve 
     mental health care in America is exactly the wrong step to 
     take. We therefore urge Congress to act, through the CRA 
     process, to disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage 
     it inflicts on people with mental illness and other 
     disabilities.
       Thank you for your prompt attention to these concerns.
           Sincerely,
                                             Mary Giliberti, J.D.,
     Chief Executive Officer.
                                  ____

                                   National Association for Rights


                                      Protection and Advocacy,

                                 Huntsville, LA, January 31, 2017.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Senate Majority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Schumer,
     Senate Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Schumer: 
     The National Association of Rights Protection and Advocacy 
     (NARPA) urges you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) 
     resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social 
     Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, 
     ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 
     2007.'' NARPA was formed in 1981 to provide education and 
     advocacy in the mental health arena. Members are attorneys, 
     people with psychiatric histories, mental health 
     professionals and administrators, academics, and non-legal 
     advocates. Central to NARPA's mission is the promotion of 
     those policies and strategies that represent the preferred 
     options of people who have been diagnosed with psychiatric 
     disabilities.
       This rule requires the Social Security Administration to 
     forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance 
     (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit 
     recipients who use a representative payee to help manage 
     their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National 
     Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). The rule is 
     inconsistent with the statute it implements, has no 
     evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate 
     inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental 
     disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
     scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the 
     agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits 
     applications toward a mission in which the agency has little 
     expertise.
       First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) 
     statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS 
     database on the basis of a determination that the person 
     ``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs'' 
     as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental 
     illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment 
     of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard. 
     It indicates only that the individual needs help managing 
     benefits received from SSA.
       Second, the rule puts in place an ineffective strategy to 
     address gun violence, devoid of any evidentiary basis, 
     targeting individuals with representative payees and mental 
     impairments as potential perpetrators of gun violence. In 
     doing so, it also creates a false sense that meaningful 
     action has been taken to address gun violence and detracts 
     from potential prevention efforts targeting actual risks for 
     gun violence.
       Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association 
     of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important 
     efforts to promote community integration and employment of 
     people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people 
     with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or 
     services, or from applying for financial and medical 
     assistance programs.
       Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA 
     without providing any additional resources. Implementation of 
     the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work 
     of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to 
     overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are 
     waiting for months and years for determinations of their 
     benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to 
     make the determinations about safety that it would be called 
     upon to make as part of the relief process established by the 
     rule.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge 
     Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this 
     new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the 
     disability community.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Ann Rider,
     President.
                                  ____

                                                  National Council


                                        on Independent Living,

                            Rochester, New York, January 27, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     National Council on Independent Living (NCIL) urges you to 
     support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to 
     disapprove the Final Rule issued by

[[Page H902]]

     the Social Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 
     2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act 
     of 2007.'' This rule would require the Social Security 
     Administration to forward the names of all Social Security 
     Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income 
     (SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to 
     help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       NCIL represents people with disabilities, Centers for 
     Independent Living (CILs), Statewide Independent Living 
     Councils (SILCs), and other organizations that advocate for 
     the human and civil rights of people with disabilities 
     throughout the country.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NCIL joined the 
     CCD Rights Task Force to convey its opposition to the rule 
     through a letter to the Obama Administration and through the 
     public comment process. We--and many other members of CCD--
     opposed the rule for a number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
       We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and 
     your staff about our concerns.
           Respectfully,
                                                   Kelly Buckland,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                                 January 31, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     National Disability Leadership Alliance (NDLA) urges you to 
     support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to 
     disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation 
     of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule 
     would require the Social Security Administration to forward 
     the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) 
     and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who 
     use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due 
     to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS).
       NDLA is a national cross-disability coalition that 
     represents the authentic voice of people with disabilities. 
     NDLA is led by 14 national organizations run by people with 
     disabilities with identifiable grassroots constituencies 
     around the country. The NDLA steering committee includes: 
     ADAPT, the American Association of People with Disabilities, 
     the American Council of the Blind, the Association of 
     Programs for Rural Independent Living, the Autistic Self 
     Advocacy Network, the Hearing Loss Association of America, 
     Little People of America, the National Association of the 
     Deaf, the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery, the 
     National Council on Independent Living, the National 
     Federation of the Blind, the National Organization of Nurses 
     with Disabilities, Not Dead Yet, Self Advocates Becoming 
     Empowered, and the United Spinal Association.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NDLA conveyed its 
     opposition to the rule through letters to Vice President 
     Biden, to President Obama, and to Congress. NDLA members also 
     raised concerns through letters to the Obama Administration 
     and through the public comment process. We--and many other 
     disability rights organizations--opposed the rule for a 
     number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
           Sincerely,
       ADAPT, American Association of People with Disabilities, 
     Association of Programs for Rural Independent Living (APRIL), 
     Autistic Self Advocacy Network, Little People of America, 
     National Association of the Deaf, National Coalition for 
     Mental Health Recovery, National Council on Independent 
     Living, National Organization of Nurses with Disabilities, 
     Not Dead Yet.
                                  ____

                                               National Disability


                                               Rights Network,

                                 Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
     Re National Disability Rights Network letter of support for 
         Use of Congressional Review Act on the Social Security 
         Administration NICS Rule.

     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     National Disability Rights Network (NDRN) urges you to 
     support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to 
     disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security 
     Administration on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the 
     NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would 
     require the Social Security Administration (SSA) to forward 
     the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) 
     and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who 
     use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due 
     to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS).
       NDRN is the nonprofit membership organization for the 
     federally mandated Protection and Advocacy (P&A) and Client 
     Assistance Program (CAP) agencies for individuals with 
     disabilities. Collectively, the P&A/CAP Network is the 
     largest provider of legally based advocacy services to people 
     with disabilities in the United States.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, NDRN joined the 
     Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities (CCD) Rights Task 
     Force conveying its opposition to the rule through a letter 
     to the Obama Administration and through the public comment 
     process. We--and many other members of CCD--opposed the rule 
     for a number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that would be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focuses on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's SSDI benefits and a propensity toward gun 
     violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this rule and prevent the damage that it may cause 
     on the disability community.
       We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and 
     your staff about our concerns.

[[Page H903]]

       Sincerely,
                                                      Curt Decker,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

         New York Association of Psychiatric Rehabilitation 
           Services, Inc.,
                                     Albany, NY, January 31, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: On behalf 
     of thousands of New Yorkers with psychiatric disabilities, 
     the New York Association of Psychiatric Rehabilitation 
     Services (NYAPRS) urges you to support a Congressional Review 
     Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by 
     the Social Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 
     2016, ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act 
     of 2007.''
       By way of reference, NYAPRS is a 36 year old statewide 
     coalition that has brought together New Yorkers with 
     psychiatric disabilities and community recovery providers to 
     advance policies, programs and social conditions that advance 
     recovery, rehabilitation, rights and community inclusion.
       This rule would require the Social Security Administration 
     to forward the names of Social Security Disability Insurance 
     (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit 
     recipients who use a representative payee to help manage 
     their benefits due to a mental impairment to the National 
     Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       The rule is inconsistent with the statute it implements, 
     has no evidentiary justification, would wrongly perpetuate 
     inaccurate stereotypes of individuals with mental 
     disabilities as dangerous, and would divert already too-
     scarce SSA resources away from efforts to address the 
     agency's longstanding backlog of unprocessed benefits 
     applications toward a mission in which the agency has little 
     expertise.
       First, there is no statutory basis for the rule. The 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) 
     statute authorizes the reporting of an individual to the NICS 
     database on the basis of a determination that the person 
     ``lacks the capacity to contract or manage his own affairs'' 
     as a result of ``marked subnormal intelligence, or mental 
     illness, incompetency condition or disease.'' The appointment 
     of a representative payee simply does not meet this standard. 
     It indicates only that the individual needs help managing 
     benefits received from SSA. Second, the rule puts in place an 
     ineffective strategy to address gun violence, devoid of any 
     evidentiary basis, targeting individuals with representative 
     payees and mental impairments as potential perpetrators of 
     gun violence. In doing so, it also creates a false sense that 
     meaningful action has been taken to address gun violence and 
     detracts from potential prevention efforts targeting actual 
     risks for gun violence.
       Third, the rule perpetuates the prevalent false association 
     of mental disabilities with violence and undermines important 
     efforts to promote community integration and employment of 
     people with disabilities. The rule may also dissuade people 
     with mental impairments from seeking appropriate treatment or 
     services, or from applying for financial and medical 
     assistance programs.
       Finally, the rule creates enormous new burdens on SSA 
     without providing any additional resources. Implementation of 
     the rule will divert scarce resources away from the core work 
     of the SSA at a time when the agency is struggling to 
     overcome record backlogs and prospective beneficiaries are 
     waiting for months and years for determinations of their 
     benefits eligibility. Moreover, SSA lacks the expertise to 
     make the determinations about safety that it would be called 
     upon to make as part of the relief process established by the 
     rule.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule. We urge 
     Congress to act, through the CRA process, to disapprove this 
     new rule and prevent the damage that it inflicts on the 
     disability community.
       Please feel free to contact me at any time.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Harvey Rosenthal,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                    Safari Club International,

                                 Washington, DC, January 31, 2017.
     Re Safari Club International Support for House Joint 
         Resolution 40.

     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     House Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Minority Leader Pelosi: Safari Club 
     International (Safari Club) supports House Joint Resolution 
     40, which provides for Congressional disapproval under the 
     Congressional Review Act of the final rule submitted by the 
     Social Security Administration (SSA) relating to 
     ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 
     2007,'' adopted on December 19, 2016, 81 Fed. Reg. 91702.
       Safari Club seeks Congressional disapproval of the rule for 
     several reasons. It deprives an individual of the ability to 
     receive or possess a firearm, including for recreational 
     hunting, due to that individual's inability to manage his or 
     her financial affairs (Firearms Rule). Under the Firearms 
     Rule, the prohibition would apply when the SSA designates a 
     representative payee because of the individual's mental 
     impairment. A mental impairment that makes an individual 
     incapable of handling his/her financial affairs does not 
     necessarily equate to an inability to properly abide by the 
     law in the use of firearms. The Firearms Rule unfairly 
     attributes illegal conduct to law abiding citizens.
       In addition, the Firearms Rule fails in its attempt to 
     rectify its unfair treatment of individuals with mental 
     impairments through its program for individuals to request 
     relief from Federal Firearms prohibitions. This program 
     places on the individual with a mental impairment the costly 
     and burdensome task of collecting and presenting data to 
     overcome the presumption that he or she is incapable of 
     abiding by the law. This program forces upon law-abiding 
     citizens the task of confronting a federal bureaucracy just 
     to prove that they should not be unfairly treated as a 
     criminal due to a mental impairment.
       For these reasons, Safari Club supports a joint resolution 
     stating ``that Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the 
     Social Security Administration relating to Implementation of 
     the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007, and such rule 
     shall have no force or effect.''
           Sincerely,
                                                    Larry Higgins,
                             President, Safari Club International.

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).
  Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, the regulatory state in America is alive 
and well. I wish I could say as much for our economy and our personal 
freedoms, but I believe that that is about to change thanks in large 
part to the recent Presidential election.
  Over the last 8 years, we have replaced a free enterprise system with 
a regulatory bureaucracy that has crushed our economy, stifled our 
innovation, and quashed the great American spirit.
  America has never seen such an onslaught of abusive and burdensome 
actions from the fourth branch of government. The cumulative cost of 
regulations on our American economy is almost $2 trillion. It costs 
almost $60 billion just to enforce all the regulations on the books.
  Let me give you, though, an example of a regulation that is far worse 
in its effects than just simply economic burden or burden on our 
people.
  Today, I stand with my friend and great American hero, Sam Johnson, 
in strong support of H.J. Res. 40 to strike down the Obama 
administration's last-ditch effort to infringe upon our Second 
Amendment rights. In the 11th hour, the Obama administration quietly 
sneaked in a rule that threatens to deny certain Social Security 
beneficiaries their right to purchase a firearm. Federal law makes it a 
crime already to possess a firearm if an individual has been 
adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental 
institution. This midnight rule designates Social Security 
beneficiaries as having a mental impairment simply because they ask 
someone to manage their finances.
  Just because an elderly or disabled individual chooses to delegate 
their financial responsibilities to another does not make them mentally 
incompetent, nor does it waive their right to due process. Many people, 
even in this Chamber, are designated to manage the finances of their 
parents on Social Security, and they do so because their parents may 
prefer not to deal with the complexities of our current financial 
environment.
  Not only would this proposed rule be a continuation of the Obama 
administration's regulatory fiat, it would be irresponsible and 
dangerous and a breach of one of our fundamental rights. We cannot 
allow the Federal Government to haphazardly restrict our freedoms and 
the freedoms of over 4 million law-abiding Americans who would 
otherwise be responsible gun owners. In fact, they are some of the most 
vulnerable Americans who need to be able to protect themselves.
  As noted by the Founders and in the plain language of our 
Constitution, the Federal Government shall not infringe upon our right 
to keep and bear arms.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,

[[Page H904]]

and I would like to emphasize several points additionally.
  The degree of impairment required for reporting to the NICS is 
extremely high, to the extent that someone is not capable of working at 
any job in the economy, no matter how basic. Someone receiving Social 
Security benefits as a retiree, even if they have mental impairment and 
have been assigned a representative payee, would not meet the criteria 
for reporting to the NICS because they are not receiving benefits 
because of disability.
  Further, the rule went into effect in January, but compliance is not 
required until December of this year. This would only impact claims 
going forward and will not involve retroactively assessing individuals 
already receiving Social Security disability payments based on mental 
impairment.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho).
  Mr. YOHO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Johnson for standing up and 
defending our Nation's Constitution again, not just in his service to 
our country during the Vietnam era, but here in Congress and his many 
years here.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation. As a tireless 
advocate for the protection of our Second Amendment rights, I am 
disappointed, but not surprised, in the Obama administration's attempt 
to impair Americans' right to own firearms, by fiat, in its last days 
of existence. It is unconscionable and unthinkable that a President 
would do that to the citizens of this country.
  This rule claims to strengthen the National Instant Criminal 
Background Check but, in reality, acted as a gun grab on individuals 
who receive disability insurance benefits or Supplemental Security 
Income payments. Participants in those programs should not be forced to 
worry that, in order to receive government assistance, they must 
sacrifice their constitutional liberty at the random whim of a 
government bureaucrat. The Second Amendment to our Constitution states 
very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms ``shall not be 
infringed,'' and Congress cannot stand by and allow unaccountable 
rulemaking from a previous administration to infringe on that right.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Judy Chu), my colleague, a member of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition 
to this use of the Congressional Review Act to repeal the Social 
Security Administration's rule strengthening the National Instant 
Criminal Background Check System. The rule in question implements 
already-existing law to establish a commonsense streamlining of 
information which will help improve our background check system for gun 
purchases.
  It is important to note that individuals with disabilities are 
actually more likely to be victims than perpetrators of gun violence, 
which is why I support more far-reaching gun safety measures like 
universal background checks and a ban on the most dangerous weapons.

  However, when there have been instances of mass shootings committed 
by those with a history of mental health issues, top Republicans, 
including Speaker Ryan, have stood on this very floor to say that they 
believe we should focus on mental health issues. Well, this is their 
chance to prove that those were not just empty words; but, instead, 
they are showing their true loyalties and again resisting any attempt 
to strengthen basic safeguards to ensure responsible gun ownership.
  This is a commonsense regulation that sets a high bar for referring 
names to the background check system. No one's rights are unduly 
restricted. An appeals process has been built in to afford due process. 
So it is clear that my Republican colleagues concerns' are not about 
safety, but about maximizing profits for gun manufacturers, even if it 
costs the lives of fellow Americans.
  And worse, they are using the restrictive Congressional Review Act to 
do so. This will not only make it easier for even those with severe 
mental health issues to buy a gun, but it will also take the option for 
writing similar rules off the table forever, tying the hands of all 
future administrations.
  This is reckless. Gun deaths are a daily scourge in our country, and 
it is up to us to do whatever we can to mitigate the risk of the 
dangerous weapons in the wrong hands. I urge my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on this resolution.
  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, having no other speakers, I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Members of the House, this is a very serious matter. This rule, and I 
have to emphasize this, does not run afoul of the Second Amendment. You 
can oppose this--well, let's put it like this: The Heller Court, in the 
Supreme Court case, said that ``nothing in the Court's opinion should 
be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession 
of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.'' I emphasize ``and the 
mentally ill.''
  And it is in that sense that I join with the AFL-CIO, Consumer 
Federation of America, Everytown for Gun Safety, Americans for 
Responsible Solutions, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, and 
many thoughtful citizens who support the Second Amendment in opposing 
the measure that is on the floor now.
  I urge Members to vote ``no.''
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of 
my time.
  This is about constitutional rights of individuals with disabilities. 
Just because someone has a disability does not mean they are a threat 
to society. Furthermore, needing help to manage your benefits does not 
make you dangerous.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record additional letters of support.

                                           American Association of


                                     People with Disabilities,

                                 Washington, DC, January 26, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) urges 
     you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to 
     disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social Security 
     Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation 
     of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule 
     would require the Social Security Administration to forward 
     the names of all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) 
     and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who 
     use a representative payee to help manage their benefits due 
     to a mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal 
     Background Check System (NICS).
       AAPD is a national disability rights organization that 
     works to improve the lives of people with disabilities by 
     acting as a convener, connector, and catalyst for change, 
     increasing the economic and political power of people with 
     disabilities.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, AAPD conveyed its 
     opposition to the rule to the Obama Administration. We, and 
     many other disability rights organizations, opposed the rule 
     for a number of reasons, including:
       1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections 
     prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       AAPD urges Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule to prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community and the extraordinarily 
     damaging message it sends to society that people with mental 
     impairments could should be feared and shunned.

[[Page H905]]

       Thank you for taking our position into consideration.
           Yours truly,
                                                 Helena R. Berger,
     President & CEO.
                                  ____



                                                        ADAPT,

                                  Rochester, NY, January 31, 2017.
       ADAPT urges you to support a Congressional Review Act (CRA) 
     resolution to disapprove the Final Rule issued by the Social 
     Security Administration (SSA) on December 19, 2016, 
     ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 
     2007.'' This rule would require the Social Security 
     Administration to forward the names of all Social Security 
     Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income 
     (SSI) benefit recipients who use a representative payee to 
     help manage their benefits due to a mental impairment to the 
     National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       ADAPT is a national grass-roots community that organizes 
     disability rights activists to engage in nonviolent direct 
     action, including civil disobedience, to assure the civil and 
     human rights of people with disabilities to live in freedom.
       We oppose the rule for a number of reasons, including:
       1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections 
     prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, have urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
       We look forward to an opportunity to speak with you and 
     your staff about our concerns.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Bruce Darling,
     National Organizer.
                                  ____

                                             Association of Mature


                                            American Citizens,

                                                 February 1, 2017.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     U.S. Senator, Iowa,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ralph Abraham,
     5th District, Louisiana,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Sam Johnson,
     Chairman, Social Security Subcommittee, House Committee on 
         Ways and Means, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley, Chairman Johnson, and Congressman 
     Abraham: On behalf of the 1.3 million members of AMAC, the 
     Association of Mature American Citizens, I am writing in 
     support of the Joint Resolution to protect certain Americans' 
     Second Amendment rights, H.J. Res. 40. Using the 
     Congressional Review Act, this Joint Resolution is meant to 
     undo a Social Security Administration (SSA) regulation that 
     would deprive thousands of Americans who are disabled and who 
     utilize a ``representative payee'' in order to acquire their 
     benefits of their ability to purchase a firearm. This 
     regulation is both unnecessary and unfair to thousands of 
     law-abiding seniors and citizens who wish to exercise their 
     basic Second Amendment rights.
       In December 2016, SSA finalized a rule providing that any 
     American receiving disability benefits due to a ``mental 
     disability'' and who are also receiving assistance in 
     managing their benefits should be labeled ``mentally 
     defective.'' As a result, those who are inappropriately 
     labeled as ``mentally defective'' are mandatorily reported to 
     the National Instant Criminal Background Check System--a 
     federal list of people who are barred from purchasing 
     firearms--as required by the Gun Control Act. This finalized 
     rule unjustly equates persons with disabilities and those who 
     require assistance to manage their benefits to those who are 
     actually ``mentally defective.''
       Aside from the fact that this regulation inappropriately 
     equates disabled persons relying on representative payees 
     with those who are ``mentally defective,'' AMAC objects to 
     the way in which this regulation has been implemented. Over 
     the past several years, Americans, particularly seniors, have 
     been at the mercy of executive overreach and mandate. As 
     millions of American seniors rely on SSA for their retirement 
     income, the burden of this regulation has been largely 
     concentrated in our communities. This Joint Resolution is a 
     welcome reprieve to seniors who have had their Second 
     Amendment rights subverted by an administration and agency 
     with significant influence over their retirement income.
       As an organization committed to representing the interests 
     of mature Americans and seniors, AMAC is dedicated to 
     ensuring senior citizens' interests are protected. This 
     midnight regulation has placed an undue burden on those 
     requiring assistance to manage their benefits and who suffer 
     from disability. As an organization, we thank Senator 
     Grassley, Chairman Johnson, Congressman Abraham, and their 
     respective staffs for their quick response and steady resolve 
     to protect seniors and those who have been affected by this 
     regulation. We ask Congress to quickly pass this Joint 
     Resolution and restore the basic Second Amendment rights this 
     rule has abridged.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Dan Weber,
     President and Founder of AMAC.
                                  ____



                                                      The Arc,

                                 Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The Arc of 
     the United States (The Arc) writes to urge you to support a 
     Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the 
     Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) 
     on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS 
     Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require 
     the Social Security Administration to forward the names of 
     all Social Security and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 
     disability beneficiaries who use a representative payee to 
     help manage their benefits, and who have been found eligible 
     by meeting or equaling an SSA mental impairment listing, to 
     the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
       The Arc is the largest national community-based 
     organization advocating for people with intellectual and 
     developmental disabilities (I/DD) and their families, with 
     over 660 state and local chapters nationwide. The Arc is 
     devoted to promoting and protecting the human and civil 
     rights of people with intellectual and developmental 
     disabilities and has over 60-years of history of advocating 
     for the rights of children and adults with disabilities. The 
     Arc is concerned about the safety of all Americans, including 
     through gun violence. However, The Arc--and many other 
     members of the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities 
     (CCD)--opposes the rule for a number of reasons, including:
       The damaging message that may be sent by an SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage ones Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       The absence of any meaningful due process protections when 
     interfering with an individual's constitutional right, prior 
     to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to manage their own affairs.
       The potential for the rule to deter some people with mental 
     impairments from seeking access to the Social Security and 
     SSI disability benefits that they are eligible for, out fear 
     of being added to the NICS or having their privacy violated.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
           Respectfully Submitted,
                                                       Marty Ford,
                          Senior Executive Officer, Public Policy.

[[Page H906]]

     
                                  ____
                               Autistic Self Advocacy Network,

                                 Washington, DC, January 30, 2017.
     Hon. Paul Ryan,
     Speaker of the House,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Office of the Democratic Leader,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Speaker Ryan and Democratic Leader Pelosi: The 
     Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) urges you to support a 
     Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to disapprove the 
     Final Rule issued by the Social Security Administration (SSA) 
     on December 19, 2016, ``Implementation of the NICS 
     Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.'' This rule would require 
     the Social Security Administration to forward the names of 
     all Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and 
     Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit recipients who use 
     a representative payee to help manage their benefits due to a 
     mental impairment to the National Instant Criminal Background 
     Check System (NICS).
       The Autistic Self Advocacy Network is a nationwide 
     501(c)(3) advocacy organization run by and for autistic 
     people ourselves. ASAN promotes public education and public 
     policies that are aimed at eliminating stigmatizing attitudes 
     and increasing autistic Americans' access to all aspects of 
     the community.
       Prior to the issuance of the Final Rule, the Autistic Self 
     Advocacy Network conveyed its opposition to the rule through 
     a letter to the Obama Administration and through the public 
     comment process, in addition to joining in public comments as 
     a member of the Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities 
     Rights Task Force. We--and many other disability rights 
     organizations--opposed the rule for a number of reasons, 
     including:
       1) The damaging message that may be sent by a SSA policy 
     change, which focused on reporting individuals who receive 
     assistance from representative payees in managing their 
     benefits to the NICS gun database. The current public 
     dialogue is replete with inaccurate stereotyping of people 
     with mental disabilities as violent and dangerous, and there 
     is a real concern that the kind of policy change encompassed 
     by this rule will reinforce those unfounded assumptions.
       2) The absence of any data suggesting that there is any 
     connection between the need for a representative payee to 
     manage one's Social Security disability benefits and a 
     propensity toward gun violence.
       3) The absence of any meaningful due process protections 
     prior to the SSA's transmittal of names to the NICS database. 
     Although the NICS Improvements Act of 2007 allows agencies to 
     transmit the names of individuals who have been 
     ``adjudicated'' to lack the capacity to manage their own 
     affairs, SSA's process does not constitute an adjudication 
     and does not include a finding that individuals are broadly 
     unable to Manage their own affairs.
       Based on similar concerns, the National Council on 
     Disability, an independent federal agency charged with 
     advising the President, Congress, and other federal agencies 
     regarding disability policy, has urged Congress to use the 
     Congressional Review Act to repeal this rule.
       We urge Congress to act, through the CRA process, to 
     disapprove this new rule and prevent the damage that it 
     inflicts on the disability community.
           Sincerely,

                                               Samantha Crane,

                                        Director of Public Policy,
     Autistic Self-Advocacy Network.
                                  ____

                                              Council for Citizens


                                     Against Government Waste,

                                 Washington, DC, February 1, 2017.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative, You will soon consider a number of 
     resolutions that will disapprove rules offered within the 
     last six months of the Obama Administration, pursuant to the 
     Congressional Review Act. On behalf of the more than one 
     million members and supporters of the Council for Citizens 
     Against Government Waste (CCAGW), I urge you to support the 
     following resolutions:
       Rep. Bill Johnson's (R-Ohio) resolution to disapprove the 
     Department of the Interior's (DOI) Stream Protection rule. 
     The rule rewrites more than 400 regulations, while 
     threatening one-third of the nation's coal mining workforce. 
     The rule would also override preferable existing regulations 
     at both the state and federal level.
       Rep. Bill Huizenga's (R-Mich.) resolution to disapprove the 
     Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) rule, ``Disclosure 
     of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers.'' The SEC, whose 
     mission is to maintain efficient markets, estimates 
     compliance of the rule could reach $591 million annually. The 
     rule also fails to protect investors and prevents capital 
     formation.
       Rep. Sam Johnson's (R-Texas) resolution to disapprove a 
     rule promulgated by the Social Security Administration 
     relating to the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
     System (NICS). This rule misinterprets the NICS Improvements 
     Amendment Act, and it allows disability or Supplemental 
     Security Income beneficiaries to be deemed ``mental 
     defectives'' in NICS without any due process as required by 
     law.
       Rep Virginia Foxx's (R-N.C.) resolution to disapprove the 
     so-called ``blacklisting'' rule promulgated by the Department 
     of Defense, General Services Administration, and National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration. This rule requires 
     employers bidding on federal contracts to disclose both 
     violations and alleged violations of state and federal labor 
     laws for every contract bid, and to update that information 
     every six months during the contract. This rule unnecessarily 
     drives up the cost of projects, violates due process, and 
     puts small business at a disadvantage.
       Rep. Rob Bishop's (R-Utah) resolution to disapprove the 
     Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Venting and Flaring rule. 
     This rule is an example of agency overreach, as BLM lacks the 
     statutory authority to regulate air quality. Further, the 
     rule fails to address BLM's real problem: a backlog of 
     permits for the pipelines, in turn forcing the methane 
     companies to vent and flare gases wastefully.
       It is critical that Congress removes as many of the 
     ``midnight regulations'' as possible forced on taxpayers by 
     the previous administration. All votes on these resolutions 
     will be among those considered for CCAGW's 2017 Congressional 
     Ratings.
           Sincerely,

                                                   Tom Schatz.

     President.
                                  ____



                                        Disability Law Center,

                                  Anchorage, AK, January 25, 2017.
     Re: Social Security ``Implementation of the NICS Improvement 
         Amendments Act of 2007''.

     Sen. Lisa Murkowski,
     Anchorage, Alaska.
     Sen. Dan Sullivan,
     Anchorage, Alaska.
     Congressman Don Young,
     Anchorage, Alaska.
       Dear Senators Murkowski and Sullivan, and Congressman 
     Young: This past summer, our office commented on Social 
     Security's propsal to report certain beneficiaries to the 
     federal firearms database. A copy of these comments is 
     attached. Despite those comments, and many others, the agency 
     went ahead with its proposal. 81 Fed. Reg. 91702 (December 
     19, 2016). According to press reports today, you will soon 
     have before you a joint resolution disapproving these new 
     regulations. This is to urge you carefully to consider, and, 
     if appropriate, pass this joint resolution.
       This is not a situation where Congress would be asserting 
     its political will over an agency that carefully analyzed the 
     comments on its proposed regulations and responded to those 
     comments in a thoughtful way. Instead, in its responses to 
     comments, Social Security:
       1) Simply failed to take into account that its disability 
     determination process does not purport to decide whether 
     someone is a ``mental defective,'' that Social Security is 
     not the kind of ``court, board, commission, or other lawful 
     authority'' that makes such findings, and that written 
     decisions saying that someone qualifies for benefits 
     typically do not mention whether the person meets or equals 
     the mental Listings, thus omitting information necessary for 
     people to decide whether to appeal. 81 Fed. Reg. at 91703.
       2) Relied, repeatedly, for its legal analysis on a DOJ 
     Guidance that has not been published anywhere, let alone 
     published in the Federal Register. 81 Fed. Reg. at 91703, 
     91704, 91706.
       3) Responded to the suggestion that people might not apply 
     for disability benefits they deserved because they would be 
     reported to the database by saying that the reason they were 
     on the database would be kept private, so they would not be 
     ``stigmatized'' or ``embarrassed.'' 81 Fed. Reg. at 91707. It 
     isn't a matter of stigmas or embarrassments. It's a matter of 
     wanting to own a firearm and being discouraged from applying 
     for benefits because you know that if you get benefits you 
     may lose your property.
       4) Agreed that the process can assign someone a 
     representative payee even though the person is competent, 81 
     Fed. Reg. at 91709-10, but did not see that this fact ought 
     to keep that person from going onto the federal firearms 
     database; and
       5) Completely failed to analyze whether putting someone on 
     the database restricts Alaskan subsistence activities as 
     protected by ANILCA.
       This is agency decisionmaking that is, for want of a better 
     word, wrong. It deserves to be analyzed and rejected under 
     the Congressional Review Act.

  Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as the ACLU said: ``We oppose 
this rule because it advances and reinforces the harmful stereotype 
that people with mental disabilities, a vast and diverse group of 
citizens, are violent. There is no data to support a connection between 
the need for a representative payee to manage one's Social Security 
disability benefits and a propensity toward gun violence.''
  Mr. Speaker, we must act today to protect the rights of individuals 
with disabilities.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of H.J. Res. 40, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I have always been a strong ally of the 
disability community and have paid close attention to the concerns many 
have had with this rule.
  I'm proud to have been the lead sponsor of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act in 1990,

[[Page H907]]

which opened doors of independence, access, opportunity, and equity for 
millions of Americans with differing abilities.
  In Congress, Democrats have put forward commonsense gun safety laws 
that would prevent violent and dangerous individuals with mental 
disabilities from purchasing firearms. However, the Republican-led 
Congress would not allow even a vote on such legislation.
  President Obama took a series of limited steps within his authority, 
one of which was this rule, whose aim has been to prevent those who 
shouldn't have guns from obtaining them. I believe that, absent action 
from Congress to enhance our background check system, this rule 
represents an imperfect but necessary step.
  It is imperfect because it stigmatizes the disability community 
unfairly and needs a stronger appeals process to protect the rights of 
those who fall under its purview. I disagree with the premise that 
having a mental disability that precludes independent management of 
one's finances correlates with a heightened risk of violence. I have 
read the rule and recognize that it was written in a narrow way so that 
it applies only to those with severe mental illnesses.
  I've had many discussions over the past several days with leaders in 
the disability community. I've grappled with the very difficult 
questions this resolution poses and ultimately decided that, given 
these circumstances, the best step right now is to oppose this 
resolution.
  I look forward to working closely with the disability community and 
gun safety advocates to push for Congress to take up legislation that 
keeps all Americans safe from gun violence while protecting the rights 
of those with differing abilities.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong 
opposition to this misguided resolution that will only imperil the 
lives of more Americans.
  In 2007, this body passed the National Instant Criminal Background 
Check System Improvement bill with a unanimous voice vote.
  We all agreed that the background check system needed better 
information, especially after dangerous individuals slipped through the 
cracks and were able to purchase guns they never should have been 
allowed to buy in the first place.
  Like Jared Loughner, who killed six people in Arizona who were at a 
grocery store to meet our colleague Gabby Giffords.
  He passed background checks even though he had a history of drug use 
and disturbing behavior that should have been in the system.
  So the Obama Administration, at Congress's direction wrote this rule 
to make sure that federal mental health records make their way into the 
background check system, so that it can effectively deny purchases to 
individuals who are already prohibited from buying guns.
  And let's be clear about what we're talking about.
  This rule only affects those with very severe, long-term mental 
disorders, and who have been identified by doctors and psychologists as 
severely mentally disabled.
  It does not paint disability recipients with a broad brush.
  8.8 million Americans receive Social Security disability benefits, 
yet SSA estimates only 75,000 would meet the criteria under this rule.
  That is less than one percent.
  Let's also be clear: this resolution is an attempt to hamstring our 
federal agencies and to keep them from improving the background check 
system.
  Rather than work with a new administrator to improve the rule, the 
Majority would rather have no rule at all because this bill not only 
repeals this background check improvement rule, it also prohibits the 
federal government from issuing a similar rule in the future.
  We've got it backwards. We shouldn't be repealing gun safety rules, 
we should be strengthening them. Gun violence is an epidemic in this 
country and we have done literally nothing in Congress about it since 
Republicans took the majority in the House in 2011.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this 
bill that uses dangerous procedure to advance dangerous policy to erode 
our important firearms background check system and undermine public 
safety.
  In response to the tragic mass shooting at Virginia Tech, the 
National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Amendment 
Act was passed by Congress unanimously and signed into law by President 
Bush because everyone agreed that we need federal and State agencies to 
submit relevant information to maintain an accurate, effective system.
  This bill directly undermines public safety by permanently blocking a 
federal agency from submitting records to this critical safeguard 
system.
  I know the high cost of gun violence on families and communities. I 
know that policy makers have an obligation to address public safety 
carefully and responsibly. Reasonable people can disagree about whether 
the rule by the Social Security Administration struck the right balance 
between the threshold and process reporting to the background system. 
While opponents have raised some concerns about whether there is 
sufficient due process in this rule, the solution is not to block the 
rule entirely. Rather, the solution is to fix it.
  Therefore, I oppose this CRA because it would permanently prohibit 
the Social Security Administration from ever reporting individuals to 
this critical safety system, which is an extreme, dangerous, 
irresponsible, and irreversible action that threatens the safety of our 
communities.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 71, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________