[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 182 (Wednesday, November 8, 2017)]
[House]
[Pages H8609-H8614]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2201, MICRO OFFERING SAFE HARBOR 
                                  ACT

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 609 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 609

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2201) to 
     amend the Securities Act of 1933 to exempt certain micro-
     offerings from the registration requirements of such Act, and 
     for other purposes. All points of order against consideration 
     of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill are 
     waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate 
     equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Financial Services; (2) 
     the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules 
     accompanying this resolution, if offered by the Member 
     designated in the report, which shall be in order without 
     intervention of any point of order, shall be considered as 
     read, shall be separately debatable for the time specified in 
     the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
     and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for 
     division of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), 
my friend, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the 
purpose of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the 
underlying legislation. The rule provides 1 hour of debate and makes in 
order all amendments offered at the Rules Committee.
  I want to note that not one amendment to this rule or to this bill 
was offered by the Democrats.
  Mr. Speaker, the Micro Offering Safe Harbor Act is an important step 
toward helping small businesses grow across our country. Small 
businesses aren't just about selling a product or providing a service. 
Entrepreneurs take the risk for a chance to improve their community and 
their family's livelihood. These individuals employ our friends and 
families and improve our quality of life. Congress needs to do what we 
can to help entrepreneurs succeed.
  Young businesses need to use their limited capital, time, and 
resources to grow their business, not fill out bureaucratic paperwork. 
This problem has only grown worse since Congress passed the Dodd-Frank 
Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act in 2010.
  When Dodd-Frank passed, Congress promised it would protect consumers. 
But it has only hurt community banks, small businesses, and the middle 
class. Dodd-Frank's burdensome regulatory regime has caused community 
banks to disappear across America, making access to capital more 
difficult for many small businesses.
  The House passed the Financial CHOICE Act to repeal and replace Dodd-
Frank, but it currently sits untouched in the United States Senate. I 
hope they will quickly vote to repeal Dodd-Frank and make credit easier 
to access for Main Street.
  But there is more we can do in the people's House to help create new 
jobs and opportunities. All too often the Federal Government creates 
regulations that disproportionately hurt small businesses. While a 
large corporation may have a team of lawyers to comply with these 
rules, this is rarely the case for a young business. That is why I 
support this bill.
  This bill ends ambiguity in the law by clearly defining a nonpublic 
offering exemption under the Securities Act. Currently, companies just 
starting out risk unintentionally violating these laws, which might 
discourage them from seeking the capital they need to grow. It is 
common sense to ensure our country's laws are clear and to allow small 
businesses to operate without fear of accidentally violating the law.
  Our economy depends on small businesses and those who put everything 
on the line to pursue the American Dream. This bill will benefit all of 
us by helping those individuals grow their businesses and create jobs 
in their communities. In order to help our small businesses grow and 
create jobs, we need to pass this rule and pass the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the Securities Act of 1933, which, obviously, was put 
into effect after the Depression or while it was going on, governs 
current law regarding the sale and purchase of securities like stocks, 
bonds, or options. The intent behind this law is to require that 
investors receive necessary information about the securities and to 
prevent fraud when they are sold.

[[Page H8610]]

  To achieve this, the Securities and Exchange Commission currently 
prohibits the sale or delivery of securities that have not been 
registered with the agency, with some limited exemptions. Today, these 
exceptions are usually limited to those transactions made with 
sophisticated investors who understand the associated risks.
  H.R. 2201 would weaken the Securities Act unnecessarily by adding an 
entirely new exemption for certain issuers while removing important 
disclosure requirements.
  Let me say that again: while removing important disclosure 
requirements, in other words, to know what you are buying.
  It would leave investors vulnerable to fraud by allowing companies to 
sell unregistered securities without the important guardrails that 
apply to these transactions today. It is part of the majority's agenda 
that prioritizes deregulation above all else.
  Through the Congressional Review Act and many other bills, the 
majority has been relentlessly attacking safeguards that protect 
consumers--risking our health, our safety, and our finances. This is 
all in order to make it easier for corporations to engage in 
questionable business practices.
  Who loses in the giveaway to big corporations and bad actors? The 
American people do.
  Mr. Speaker, I have always believed that a bad process leads to a bad 
product. This week has put the majority in the history books for all 
the wrong reasons.
  Closed rules completely block Members from offering amendments on the 
House floor, and just yesterday, with the 49th closed rule of the year, 
this majority broke the record for becoming the most closed session of 
Congress in history. That is a long time.
  Let me repeat that. This session of the 115th Congress is the most 
closed session ever. In fact, our present Speaker has not had an open 
rule.
  This is not some arcane matter. More than 1,300 amendments have been 
blocked this year through the restrictive rules. It has prevented 
action on matters that touch nearly every sector of society.

  This week we saw another mass shooting in a church. Families gathered 
together in a small Texas town, and a man with a gun came in and killed 
26 of them and wounded 20 more. One family lost eight of its cherished 
members. Those killed in that attack equal 7 percent of the small 
town's entire population.
  Now, this Congress could work together and actually stop these tragic 
murders because this is the place where we can do that, but under the 
majority, we can't even get a vote on any measure that would do 
anything about it.
  If you care about whether we send troops to war in Afghanistan and 
Syria--if you care--then closed rules matter.
  If you care about protecting whistleblowers or reducing government 
spending, then closed rules matter.
  If you care about whether we build the President's offensive border 
wall with Mexico or strengthen ethics in the executive branch, then 
closed rules matter.
  If you care about protecting the nearly 800,000 young DREAMers 
nationwide, then closed rules definitely matter.
  The majority has used restrictive closed and structured rules to 
prevent debate and votes on these and many, many other important 
matters from ever happening here on the House floor.
  Each of us has been elected to do our job representing our 
constituents by amending legislation on this floor, but because of the 
closed process, we are being prevented from doing our jobs.
  Bills routinely come before the Rules Committee that haven't even 
been fully considered by the relevant committees. Such a bill is before 
us today.
  When Speaker Ryan took the gavel 2 years ago, he said: ``Only a fully 
functioning House can really, truly do the people's business.'' Well, 
Mr. Speaker, we are not doing the peoples business. We are unable to do 
the job we were sent here to do. We are unable to take action on the 
things our constituents care about most.
  It is no wonder that this Congress is the most unpopular Congress in 
recent memory. It is past time that we return to regular order and 
start tackling the major issues that we face.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Emmer).
  Mr. EMMER. Mr. Speaker, obtaining accessible and reliable forms of 
capital is one of the biggest challenges that small businesses and 
entrepreneurs face today. I will say that again. We are not talking 
about large corporations. We are talking about small businesses and 
entrepreneurs.
  According to the 2016 Year-End Economic Report from the National 
Small Business Association, 41 percent of all small businesses surveyed 
said that ``lack of capital is hindering their ability to grow their 
business or expand their operations, and 20 percent said they had to 
reduce the number of employees as a result of tight credit.''
  That is why I introduced the Micro Offering Safe Harbor Act. This 
bill does not create a new securities registration exemption under the 
Securities Act; rather, it defines what constitutes a permissible 
nonpublic offering, and it provides small businesses with the clarity 
and confidence to know that their offering is not a violation of the 
Securities Act.
  If enacted, this will make it easier for entrepreneurs and small 
businesses--again, not large corporations--to raise money from family, 
friends, and their personal network without running afoul of the vague 
and undefined private offering safe harbor provisions in the Securities 
Act of 1933.
  More specifically, this legislation requires the following three 
criteria be met simultaneously in order to trigger a safe harbor 
exemption for a security offering: each purchaser must have a 
substantive preexisting relationship with an owner; there can be no 
more than 35 purchasers of securities from the issuer that are sold in 
reliance on the exemption during the 12-month period preceding; and, 
lastly, the aggregate amount of all securities sold by the issuer 
cannot exceed $500,000 during the 12 months preceding the offering.
  The Micro Offering Safe Harbor Act helps bring clarity to existing 
law so that our current and future job creators can easily raise 
capital within the confines of an easy-to-understand provision without 
the help of an ever increasingly expensive expert.

                              {time}  1245

  Furthermore, the legislation preserves all Federal and State 
antifraud protections. Ultimately, this bill will scale existing 
Federal rules and regulatory compliance for small businesses, thus 
providing another practical option for entrepreneurs to raise the 
capital they need to start and grow their business.
  The timing for this legislation could not be better, as the House 
continues to promote job creation and economic growth through this 
once-in-a-generation effort to reform our Tax Code.
  As our small businesses and startups continue to provide for over 
half of all current jobs and over 65 percent of all net new jobs since 
the 1970s, we must provide the tools they need to succeed, and this 
legislation does just that.
  I thank Chairman Hensarling, Chairman Sessions, and Chairman Huizenga 
for working to bring this important bill to the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the previous question, 
adopt the rule for H.R. 2201, and vote in favor of the Micro Offering 
Safe Harbor Act when it comes to the floor for consideration.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream Act. This 
bipartisan, bicameral legislation would help thousands of young people 
who are Americans in every way, except on paper.
  Democrats have tried numerous times to protect DREAMers. We voted 
over and over to try and bring the Dream Act, and we have offered 
amendments, only to be blocked by this record-breaking closed Congress. 
There is bipartisan agreement that something must be done to help these 
young people. Let's do it today.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?

[[Page H8611]]

  There was no objection.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Aguilar) to discuss our proposal.
  Mr. AGUILAR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, today I must ask a question of this Chamber: What makes 
America great?
  Do we measure greatness by the strength of our economy or by the size 
of our military?
  Is greatness defined by export prices and profits of corporations?
  You see, Mr. Speaker, I don't think that is the case. I believe that 
we are a nation built upon a set of unshakable values. It is our 
ability to uphold these values, not the rise and fall of the stock 
market, that will ultimately define our greatness.
  One of our values is this: if you work hard, set goals, and refuse to 
give up, you can fulfill your dreams. As Americans, this value is 
engrained into all of us. We repeat it each and every day, and we tell 
our kids to follow their dreams, or tell them that they can be anything 
that they want when they grow up.
  We say these things, Mr. Speaker, because we believe them. We believe 
that hard work pays off. We believe that dreams can come true.
  Yet, on September 5 of this year, President Trump ignored these 
American beliefs when he ended the DACA program. That decision told 
nearly 800,000 young people in this country that their hard work didn't 
matter and that their dreams of pursuing success might not pay off in 
the end.
  These young DREAMers, who are as American as any of us, go to school 
here, they have jobs here, they raise families in our communities, and 
they serve in our military.
  This is why each and every day we fail to pass the Dream Act, we call 
the values that make our country great into question. If we fail to 
pass this bipartisan legislation, then we are no longer a nation where 
hard work pays off.
  I will be forced to explain that to DREAMers in my district. I will 
have to tell Minerva, who paid her way through college, that she will 
have to give up her dream of medical school. I will have to explain to 
Leticia that, despite becoming the first in her family to attend 
college, she will not be able to fulfill her dream of serving others as 
a social worker.
  You see, Mr. Speaker, these are real young people with real dreams. 
They deserve a real answer. They put in the work, they have done 
everything they can to build lives in this country, and we need to come 
together to make sure that we uphold our values and allow them to 
continue those lives here.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous 
question so that we can bring the Dream Act to the floor for a vote 
immediately. This country is great because we uphold our values. Mr. 
Speaker, it is time that we prove that.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), chairman of the Subcommittee on Capital 
Markets, Securities, and Investments.
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friend from Colorado 
allowing me an opportunity to speak on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, currently, the Securities and Exchange Commission 
prohibits the sale or delivery of securities that have not been 
registered with the agency.
  A large portion of startups--and, really, these are ideas--rely on 
small, nonprofit offerings also known as private placements, such as 
with friends and family. They do a round of offerings in order to raise 
initial, early-stage seed capital; however, the Securities Act of 1933 
does not define what constitutes a public offering or, conversely, a 
nonpublic offering. As a result, startups may unintentionally violate 
the act when it seeks to offer securities to potential investors in a 
private placement.

  Let's put that in real English. Let's make this actually approachable 
in a way that I think true American entrepreneurs can understand.
  The reality is, these are people with an idea, a drive to move 
forward and to improve something. They go and offer to their family, or 
maybe ask of their family, to be a part of that dream, to help with 
some seed capital, to give them a little bit of their hard-earned money 
to help them achieve their dream.
  And, guess what?
  They get to take part in the success of that. There is some risk, but 
there is also reward.
  How this really translates is that there might be the doctor who has 
got a great idea for a new health drink or a new implement to use while 
he is in surgery. This might be a mom who left the workforce and was 
taking care of her kids and said: There has got to be a better way of 
making sure my kids are getting a healthy meal transported to school; 
or something like that.
  These are people who are looking around and saying: I can go make 
life better not for me, not just for my family, but for others. They 
are then trying to pursue that.
  To address this uncertainty that we have, H.R. 2201, the Micro 
Offering Safe Harbor Act, would implement a simple amendment to the 
Securities Act of 1933, by making clear what constitutes a nonpublic 
offering.
  It is going to provide small businesses with needed clarity and 
confidence to know that their offering is not a Securities Act 
violation. Think of that. Again, it might be that doctor or that stay-
at-home mom who is out there just trying to fund an idea, 
unintentionally and with no malice or no understanding that they are 
violating Federal law.
  A micro-offering authorized under this bill would allow small 
businesses or small entrepreneurs to operate with confidence, and the 
commonsense requirements to be a part of this are such:
  Each investor has a substantive preexisting relationship with an 
owner. This is no fly-by friendship. This is somebody who you actually 
know;
  There are fewer than 35 purchasers or investors; and
  Also, the amount cannot exceed $500,000.
  If you just divide out $500,000, which is a lot of money, by 35 
people, that is less than $15,000 a person. That is $14,285, to be 
exact. This is not about helping Wall Street somehow, for crying out 
loud. This is about Main Street.
  I believe it is important to note, as the sponsor, Mr. Emmer, had 
noted earlier, that nothing in this bill would remove or inhibit the 
authority of the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Department 
of Justice from prosecuting securities fraud.
  With antifraud protections still in place, the legislation 
appropriately scales Federal rules and regulatory compliance costs for 
these small businesses and entrepreneurs.
  H.R. 2201 is a commonsense bill designed to help Main Street and not 
Wall Street. Simply put, it will allow these small businesses and 
entrepreneurs, these DREAMers, to access capital necessary for their 
growth.
  As I said, Representative Emmer has done a phenomenal job in 
shepherding this through. In a 2016 Capital Markets, Securities, and 
Investments Subcommittee hearing where we dealt with the bill, he had a 
great quote that said:
  ``The problem with the ability of small businesses to effectively use 
this exemption is--the term `private offering' is not defined in law. 
Not only does this prevent small business from using the exemption, it 
leaves businesses who try to use the exemption and can't afford a team 
of expensive lawyers--which, again, most small businesses cannot--
exposed to potential lawsuits and future liability. . . . This 
legislation will create a bright line safe harbor for small private 
offerings. It will help entrepreneurs open new businesses and expand 
existing ones.''
  Mr. Speaker, I applaud the hard work of my colleague, Mr. Emmer, on 
this bill, and I encourage all my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 
2201.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, unnecessary, partisan bills like this one take up 
valuable floor time when we could be considering important legislation 
to extend expired programs like Perkins loans, which help low-income 
students finance their education, or to address gun violence. The 
American people are frightened of an agenda that prioritizes 
deregulation and corporations above all else.
  Democrats have been pushing for votes on the House floor on 
amendments that would actually address the

[[Page H8612]]

major problems we are facing today. That includes everything from 
climate change and our military's role abroad to protecting the DACA 
recipients and addressing the gun violence epidemic that is tearing 
communities apart. But we have been blocked at every turn.

  The majority has gone to unprecedented lengths to prevent any kind of 
real debate from happening. We have proof of that because they have 
used closed and structured rules to block more than 1,300 amendments so 
far this year. So far, this session is the most closed session of 
Congress since Congress began.
  It is no wonder that just 13 percent of the public approves of 
Congress under this leadership. That is according to the latest figures 
from Gallup. The bill before us just continues that dangerous and 
unpopular agenda.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, the rule, 
and the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is an important step to improve the American 
economy. We need to support small businesses and their ability to grow. 
This will happen if we give the free market the opportunity to work.
  We should get bureaucrats out of the way of small-business owners who 
only want to serve their families and communities. This bill moves us 
in that direction.
  I thank Congressman Tom Emmer for introducing this important bill and 
for taking the time to come to the floor today. I also thank Chairman 
Hensarling for his work on these bills as well as the House Financial 
Services Committee.
  Chairman Hensarling recently announced that he will not be seeking 
reelection to Congress, but we will all remember the great work he has 
done during his time in D.C. and the important contribution he made to 
the legislation we are looking at today.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the rule, and I 
ask them to vote ``yes'' on the underlying legislation.
  The material previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is as follows:

          An Amendment to H. Res. 609 Offered by Ms. Slaughter

       At the end of the resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec. 2 Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     3440) to authorize the cancellation of removal and adjustment 
     of status of certain individuals who are long-term United 
     States residents and who entered the United States as 
     children and for other purposes. The first reading of the 
     bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
     consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be 
     confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general 
     debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 
     five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 
     intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and 
     reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then 
     on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately 
     after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of 
     rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further 
     consideration of the bill.
       Sec. 3. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 3440.
                                  ____


        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

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

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on:
  Adopting the resolution, if ordered; and
  Suspending the rules and passing H.R. 4173.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 224, 
nays 190, not voting 18, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 616]

                               YEAS--224

     Abraham
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie

[[Page H8613]]


     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--190

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Aderholt
     Babin
     Bridenstine
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cuellar
     Gosar
     Grothman
     Hurd
     Johnson, E. B.
     LaMalfa
     Mitchell
     Norman
     Pocan
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Roybal-Allard
     Sanford
     Walker

                              {time}  1326

  Messrs. KHANNA, RYAN of Ohio, and HOYER changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. CALVERT, KATKO, SMITH of New Jersey, and GOODLATTE changed 
their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted 
``yea'' on rollcall No. 616.
  Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained in a meeting with 
the Secretary of the Navy. Had I been present, I would have voted 
``yea'' on rollcall No. 616.
  Mr. COFFMAN. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 616.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hultgren). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 233, 
nays 190, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 617]

                               YEAS--233

     Abraham
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Handel
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--190

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier

[[Page H8614]]


     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Aderholt
     Bridenstine
     Cuellar
     Hurd
     Johnson, E. B.
     Mitchell
     Pocan
     Roybal-Allard
     Sanford


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1334

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________