[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 17, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H423-H429]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3326, WORLD BANK ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 
 OF 2017, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2954, HOME MORTGAGE 
                       DISCLOSURE ADJUSTMENT ACT

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 693 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 693

       Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, 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. 3326) to increase accountability, combat 
     corruption, and strengthen management effectiveness at the 
     World Bank. 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 
     Financial Services. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
     of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Financial Services now printed in the bill. The committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against the committee amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute are waived. No amendment to the 
     committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in 
     order except those printed in part A of the report of the 
     Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such 
     amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
     report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
     report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
     the time specified in the report equally divided and 
     controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
     subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand 
     for division of the question in the House or in the Committee 
     of the Whole. All points of order against such amendments 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. Any 
     Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any 
     amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill 
     or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute. 
     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.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2954) to amend 
     the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975 to specify which 
     depository institutions are subject to the maintenance of 
     records and disclosure requirements of such Act, and for 
     other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services 
     now printed in the bill, modified by the amendment printed in 
     part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as 
     amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, 
     as amended, and on any further 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; and (2) 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 gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.

                              {time}  1230


                             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 yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying 
legislation.
  This rule makes in order two bills reported favorably by the 
Committee on Financial Services. In addition, the rule makes in order a 
majority of the amendments submitted.
  These bills were the subject of hearings in the Financial Services 
Committee, and both were marked up and reported favorably to the House. 
Both bills received bipartisan support in the committee, and I expect 
that we will see bipartisan support for both bills on the floor this 
week.
  Mr. Speaker, formed in 1944, the World Bank is the oldest 
multilateral development bank. As a post-World War II effort of 
international cooperation, the goal of the World Bank was to fund 
reconstruction efforts in war-torn nations.
  In 1960, the United States pushed for the creation of the 
International Development Association within the World Bank. Where the 
original World Bank division funded middle-income countries, the IDA 
was created to make concessional loans; that is, loans with low 
interest rates and long repayment periods to the world's poorest 
countries.
  The number of countries served by the IDA currently stands at 75. The 
IDA is typically the single largest source of funding for critical 
social programs in these low-income countries. However, the bill before 
us reduces the United States' contribution to the IDA.
  The IDA is funded through replenishments by donor countries. We are 
currently in the 18th replenishment period, known as IDA-18. The bill 
reduces the United States' contribution in IDA-18 by 15 percent. 
Further, the bill requires that the Treasury Department certify that 
the World Bank reform its practices and lending controls in relation to 
the IDA.
  A 2016 report commissioned by the World Bank reveals serious problems 
with one particular IDA project in Uganda. While IDA's role is to 
reduce inequality and support the development of civil society, the 
report outlines numerous failures to achieve these objectives on the 
part of the IDA.
  The report details how IDA financing of a project in Uganda led to 
systemic spreading of HIV/AIDS, sexual abuse of minors, child labor, 
retaliation against local citizens, gender-based violence, and other 
gross abuses of powerless Ugandans. While the IDA took several steps, 
including withdrawing some loans from this particular project, there is 
much concern that this project is indicative of many others.
  The House Committee on Financial Services held a hearing at which 
testimony was received from the International Consortium of 
Investigative Journalists indicating that governments that allow or 
participate in the abuse of their citizens and the subjugation of the 
poor have not been turned away by the World Bank.
  The testimony reads in part: ``We found instead that the bank 
repeatedly funded governments that not only failed to adequately 
resettle communities, but in some cases were accused of human rights 
abuses such as rape, murder, and violent evictions associated with bank 
projects. We found in several cases that the World Bank continued to 
bankroll these borrowers

[[Page H424]]

even after evidence of these abuses came to light.''
  Mr. Speaker, the IDA has a quality control problem, and we are right 
in reducing their funding.
  As if the abuse of citizens by corrupt governments is not enough, the 
committee has also uncovered evidence that the World Bank has serious 
internal problems as well.
  According to the World Bank's Independent Evaluation Group, World 
Bank staff has long been incentivized to simply get more loans out the 
door without any incentive to ensure the quality of the projects. This 
has been a longstanding trend documented since the early 1990s.
  But it is not just perverse incentives. The World Bank has not 
focused enough on rigidly guarding itself against internal corruption. 
A professor from Caltech testified before the committee that it was 
common for World Bank projects to be captured by corrupt governments 
and that World Bank staff try to suppress corruption investigations.
  She said: ``Corruption investigations can shut down projects and 
derail careers. They are also inconvenient for senior management in the 
bank who are balancing delicate relationships with their country 
clients.''
  Due to these problems, the underlying bill protects American 
taxpayers by withholding funding from the World Bank until these 
deficiencies are fixed.
  Mr. Speaker, not only should we be holding international 
organizations accountable, we should also be holding our own government 
accountable, and the second bill made in order under this rule does 
just that.
  In 2011, Dodd-Frank transferred to the Consumer Financial Protection 
Bureau regulatory authority over home mortgages. Since then, CFPB has 
made information reporting by lenders more extensive.
  The impact of these increased regulations has led to greater costs to 
lenders. Consequently, smaller lenders have had to pass on these costs 
directly to potential borrowers. This has reduced access to affordable 
credit to borrowers who would typically seek out smaller lending 
institutions.
  The underlying bill is simple: exempt small lenders from CFPB's 
onerous reporting requirements.
  Under the leadership of Chairman Hensarling, House Republicans have 
consistently put forward a plan to reform the CFPB. However, until we 
can pass broader reforms, we should do everything we can to protect 
Americans from harmful regulations pushed on them by the CFPB.

  Today, we have two bills before us that hold powerful organizations 
accountable to American taxpayers.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule and these 
bills, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, once again, Congress finds itself rushing to try to pass 
legislation to keep the government open; ensure that our youngest, most 
vulnerable Americans have access to health insurance; and protect 
young, aspiring Americans from being deported from the only country 
they have known as home. Yet here we are debating other things with the 
clock running out in the eleventh hour--issues that, no doubt, have a 
few people here and there who care about them, but zero people have 
called my office on, Mr. Speaker.
  My constituents are demanding that we address access to the childhood 
healthcare insurance program and demanding that we act on the DREAMers 
with the deadline approaching and 100-plus DREAMers every day losing 
their status.
  It sounds like, from all we are hearing, that the House is going to 
consider yet another short-term spending bill to maybe keep the 
government running for another 4 weeks or 6 weeks. It is actually the 
fourth short-term spending bill for this year, not allowing the 
Department of Defense to plan to keep our country safe and not allowing 
any of the departments across the Federal Government to make any of the 
investments they need or have any degree of certainty that contractors 
will be paid.
  It is no way to govern, Mr. Speaker. Part of the reason that we are 
left doing this is we are using our precious floor time on all of these 
other issues like the ones before us today.
  It is not that these issues don't deserve their day in the sun, and 
we will talk about them for the rest of the day today, apparently, but 
we are facing the closure of the entire Federal Government in 3 days if 
we don't act. We are doing the equivalent of fiddling while Rome burns. 
This is an absurd exercise in doing some narrowly tailored special 
interest bills rather than addressing what we all know to be the 1,000-
pound gorillas in the room.
  Seniors, military veterans, and people with disabilities shouldn't 
have to question whether they will actually receive their benefits 
month to month because we don't know whether the government will remain 
open. In the meanwhile, Republicans, Democrats, and the White House are 
all trying to put forward bipartisan solutions for the hundreds of 
thousands of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients and 
DREAMers, and we could be debating that on the floor and putting 
together the final package now to do that by this Friday. But instead, 
we are discussing these bills that my constituents aren't telling me 
that they are sending me to Washington to pass.
  A lot of my colleagues say that the deadline for DACA isn't until 
March, but, in reality, over 100 deferred action DREAMers every day 
lose their protected status as their benefits expire. Every day the 
Republicans fail to act, they are creating over 100 more illegal 
immigrants in this country. If Republicans fail to act by March, they 
will have created over 800,000 more people here illegally in our 
country.
  We have about 18,000 DREAMers in Colorado able to work legally today. 
They have come from countries near and far in search of a better life 
for themselves and their families. They grew up in our schools, sports 
teams, cheerleaders, don't know any other country, and many of them 
don't speak any other language.
  One DREAMer that I have gotten to know from Colorado is Anarely, 
whose family stayed in Colorado to help take care of their grandmother. 
Anarely is a triple major at Colorado State University, studying 
political science, ethnic studies, and international relations. She has 
built a life in Colorado--the only life she knows--and continues to 
build a bright future in the U.S. if we can give her the certainty with 
regard to her legal ability to work and, of course, take her place 
alongside other American citizens.
  What makes America so great is we are a country of immigrants made up 
of people from all backgrounds, all quarters of the world. We embrace 
people from different cultures and different countries. We value the 
contributions based on the individual and the values of individual 
responsibility and hard work. That is what makes our country and our 
communities vibrant and our economy successful.
  Mr. Speaker, a group of bipartisan House and Senate Members are 
working together to find a solution to protect DREAMers and improve 
border security. I am proud to cosponsor the USA Act, which we dropped 
yesterday with Mr. Hurd and Mr. Aguilar which would provide DREAMers 
long-term protections and improve our border security to prevent this 
kind of situation from happening again.
  But instead of legislation that addresses long-term funding or 
protects aspiring Americans, here we are bringing bills to talk around 
the fringes about consumer protections and, of course, a bill that 
would chip away at reproductive health rights.
  The rule we are debating today considers two pieces of legislation 
that are not anything to do with the expiration at the end of this week 
of government funding or the over 100 DREAMers who lose their status 
every day--the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act and the World Bank 
Accountability Act.
  The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act has long been a tool to monitor the 
mortgage lending practices and patterns of financial institutions to 
ensure equal and fair access to credit. The information that lenders 
are required to report shows that they are meeting the housing 
financing needs of their communities. HMDA data is very important in 
fair lending assessments and helps make determinations of where to 
target community development resources.
  Congress has made changes to HMDA as a response to legitimate 
concerns about the role that widespread predatory lending played in the 
financial

[[Page H425]]

crisis. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was charged with 
updating how lenders report HMDA.
  The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau adopted a standard for the 
new reporting requirements that took into account the burdens imposed 
on banks by new standards to ensure that the data is being reported to 
monitor fair lending practices to prevent another systemic meltdown 
like we had in 2008 and 2009.
  The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau even temporarily raised the 
reporting threshold eliminating the need for low-volume banks to report 
through 2019, in order to conduct research to determine the right way 
to document open-ended loans. We should not codify this threshold, 
removing the flexibility of the agency that we in Congress set up to 
prevent another financial meltdown. It would literally tie their hands 
and prevent them from acting, even if there was a need to, to prevent a 
financial meltdown.
  I strongly support regulatory relief for community banks and small 
financial institutions. This bill would actually exempt 85 percent of 
depository financial institutions and 48 percent of nondepository 
lenders.
  Congress should want to encourage increased access to housing finance 
and combat unlawful practices that can prey on vulnerable home buyers 
or lead to systemic risk which leads to people coming to this town 
demanding another Republican taxpayer bailout.
  This rule also considers debate for H.R. 3326, the World Bank 
Accountability Act--another issue that does not relate to the 
expiration of government funding at the end of the week, does not 
relate to the illegal aliens that the Republicans are creating every 
day, and does not relate to the Children's Health Insurance Program 
expiring.
  What it does is it places a restriction on funding to the World Bank 
International Development Association--again, something I am not 
hearing from my constituents on, that they are not sending me to 
Washington and demanding that I take action on--and try to get them to 
reform to improve their management accountability and fight extremism, 
which I am sure is fine. It is true that, of course, they probably need 
to improve accountability and oversight, and Congress can have this 
discussion, but here we are, backs to the wall, the government is about 
to close, DREAMers are facing deportation, children are going without 
healthcare, and, yes, of course, World Bank accountability, great, 
let's discuss it, but can't we do it next week after we get through 
this?
  In fact, I believe the Republicans are sending us all on vacation 
next week. I think most Americans wish they had 10 days off at the end 
of January. I don't understand this. It makes no sense. I think 
Congress is about to do a last-minute funding bill and then send every 
Member of Congress on a 10-day vacation saying: Good job, we dealt with 
World Bank accountability. That is what the voters want. Forget about 
government shutdowns, forget about Republicans creating more illegal 
aliens, forget about Republicans plunging our Nation deeper into debt 
with their tax-and-spend policies. That is where we are headed, Mr. 
Speaker.

                              {time}  1245

  Of course, we should have a debate on the best way to make reforms in 
the U.S. and engage the World Bank to encourage those reforms.
  Again, fiddling while Rome burns, Mr. Speaker, it is a common theme 
over here, and the American people are seeing through it, which is why 
the approval rating of this institution is under 15 percent--no shock.
  We can be debating World Bank accountability every day for the next 
year if you want. That is why people think this body is out of touch. 
We are just not addressing or dealing with the issues the American 
people sent us here to deal with: skyrocketing debt; over 12 million 
people who are here illegally, and yet this Congress fails to take up 
comprehensive immigration reform; expiration of the Children's Health 
Insurance Program; fixing the Affordable Care Act.
  Withholding funds to the IDA has a lot of positives and negatives. We 
could influence them to act. Others fear it could punish people in the 
developing world. It could hamper their ability to fight famine. It 
could force the necessary reforms.
  Again, fine, we will have that discussion under this rule for an hour 
or two and Congress will debate that. Congress will pass a bill, and we 
will see whether the Senate even takes it up. They often don't.
  But, again, it is backs to the wall, fiddling while Rome burns, the 
eleventh hour, record debt, Republicans creating more illegal 
immigrants every day, and here we are debating accountability for 
different aid programs.
  The 15 percent must be, like, the family members and cousins of the 
Republican Members. I don't know anybody who is satisfied with this 
Congress, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I remind my friend from Colorado that the House did pass 
the Children's Health Insurance Program bill in November. We did send 
it to the Senate. Perhaps if he could talk to the leadership in his 
party over in the Senate, we could get that bill passed in the Senate 
instead of blocked, and we could deal with a very important issue, an 
issue in Colorado that is absolutely essential, because the money is 
running out in Colorado, one of the few States where it is even more 
important than many of the other States.
  I appreciate my colleague's concern on this issue. I share his 
concern. The House acted responsibly in a broad, bipartisan bill. 
Hopefully, we can get our friends over in the Senate to get more done.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Emmer), my good friend and the sponsor of one of the bills today.
  Mr. EMMER. Mr. Speaker, every citizen in our Nation deserves a chance 
to achieve their American Dream. For thousands across the country, 
their American Dream consists of owning a home or starting their own 
business. Some laws have proven helpful in achieving this dream; others 
have created obstacles by codifying government overreach.
  In 1975, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act was enacted. This important 
law exposed and helped eliminate discriminatory lending practices, 
particularly against minorities. In short, this law helped more 
Americans realize their dream of owning a house.
  Over the years, however, the disclosure required by the law has 
expanded away from the original intent and has actually become an 
obstacle preventing small, medium, and local lenders from helping 
aspiring homeowners.
  In 2015, the Dodd-Frank-created agency, the Consumer Financial 
Protection Bureau, or CFPB, demanded from lenders more than double the 
amount of data originally required under the Home Mortgage Disclosure 
Act. That double-the-data rule took effect on the first of this month.
  Larger financial firms are able to adapt. In fact, most, if not all, 
continue to be in the home mortgage business; but for smaller financial 
firms, for the family-owned bank on Main Street, USA, the double-the-
data rule means making fewer mortgages or none at all. This unintended 
result is something each of us has heard over and over again in our 
home districts.
  Again, these are not the Wells Fargos, Bank of Americas, or J.P. 
Morgans. These are the small guys on Main Street, in small towns all 
across Minnesota and our country.
  As a direct result of having fewer and fewer small, medium, and local 
lenders in the home mortgage business or offering the capital necessary 
for their neighbor's small business to get off the ground, the CFPB's 
rule has put the American Dream out of reach for many Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, today we have an opportunity to rightsize government 
regulation to create more opportunity. We have the opportunity to 
encourage small and medium financial institutions in our local 
communities to keep their doors open, to make mortgages again, to make 
loans to would-be entrepreneurs, in short, to fund the dreams of their 
neighbors and friends. We have the opportunity to expand not the law 
but, rather and instead, the number of Americans who can own a home or 
start their own business.
  I first introduced the Home Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act when I

[[Page H426]]

came to Congress in 2015. It is a bill that will keep the original 
intent of the 1975 HMDA law. Nothing will overwrite or exempt any 
financial institution, big or small, from reporting data related to 
race or gender. It is a bill that will put a stop to the loss of 
lenders we see in our home districts by providing desperately needed 
regulatory relief for Main Street banks and credit unions. I am proud 
to say it is a bill that has been perfected with input from both sides 
of the aisle and in both Chambers.
  Our goal today shouldn't be to expand the law. Our goal today should 
be to expand the number of Americans who want to get one step closer to 
achieving their American Dream, whether it is owning a home or starting 
a business. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2954 will help us achieve this goal.
  If my colleagues share the goal, then I ask you to vote ``yes'' on 
H.R. 2954 and pass the Home Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act.

  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, last week, President Trump tweeted: ``The Democrats are 
all talk and no action. They are doing nothing to fix DACA.'' That is 
deeply insulting to those of us who have worked so hard for years. I 
was even here when the Democrats passed the DREAM Act in December of 
2010.
  This is the 18th time we have attempted to bring up the bipartisan 
bill, H.R. 3440. We are about to do it again with my colleague, Mr. 
Gomez. The Dream Act makes our position clear. We want immigration 
policies that make America safer. We want to make sure that our 
aspiring, de facto Americans can take their place alongside of us with 
the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.
  Unfortunately, President Trump made his position clear, as well. I am 
not sure which position; he changes every other day. But at times, he 
said he will sign whatever we do. At other times, he said:

       My standard is very simple: America first, and Make America 
     Great Again.

  That is an easy one. This bill we bring up if we defeat the previous 
question will absolutely make America greater. According to the 
conservative think tank CATO, repealing DACA would actually cost the 
government over $60 billion, reduce economic growth by $280 billion, 
and make us all poorer.
  We just want to make America wealthier, make us better, and recognize 
the aspiring Americans and let them work hard and play by the rules and 
pay taxes and live the American Dream. That is an America first policy 
that we can all get behind.
  This is the 18th attempt here to do this. But I am a Jewish American, 
and 18 is actually a lucky number. ``Chai'' means ``life,'' when you do 
the numerology. Mr. Gomez is lucky to be here for number 18. For our 
Jewish friends watching on C-SPAN, Mr. Speaker, they will recognize 
that. It is kind of like seven. I don't know if seven is a Christian 
lucky number or pagan or what, but I have heard seven is a lucky 
number, too.
  But 18 means life, and this is life for the DREAMers. That is what 
Mr. Gomez's motion is all about: it is letting young people who have 
that uncertainty and don't even know if they can go to their job and 
work hard come March, or even come today or tomorrow for the over 100 a 
day whose status is expiring.
  I really hope that my Republican colleagues join Mr. Gomez and me in 
defeating the previous question so we can bring up H.R. 3440, the Dream 
Act, which would pass this body, Mr. Speaker. You and I know that. It 
is bipartisan, bicameral. It would help thousands of young people who 
are Americans in every single way--de facto Americans, aspiring 
Americans--except on paper.
  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 
gentleman from Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Gomez) to discuss our proposal for the 18th time: chai, 
or life.
  Mr. GOMEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my colleagues about the 
American Dream and why their families came to our great country.
  Was it to build a better future for their children so they could live 
and attend school in the greatest country in the history of the world?
  Was it so they could work and live in a safe place without fear of 
violence?
  Was it because they knew that, if they came here, no matter where 
they are from, no matter what God they worship, if they work hard, 
contribute to our country, and believe in the ideals of America that 
all men and women are created equal, then you deserve a place here in 
the United States of America?
  The answer to these questions is ``yes.'' Our ancestors and parents 
came to the United States for all these reasons and more.
  That answer holds true for hundreds of thousands of DREAMers and 
their parents who live and work and attend school here in the United 
States without fear of deportation thanks to DACA. Yet, on September 5, 
the Trump administration destroyed the American Dream for 800,000 young 
people and their families by recklessly terminating DACA.
  One of those 800,000 DREAMers is Itayu Torres, a proud DACA recipient 
from my district, the 34th Congressional District of California. She 
was born in Oaxaca, Mexico, and arrived in my district before she 
turned 1. The United States is the only place she has ever known as her 
country, and she is as American as you and I, but she was forced to 
live with the burden of her legal status.
  At the age of 14, she found out she didn't have legal status when she 
tried to travel out of State to play in a soccer tournament. That fear 
of being deported if she left her State of California prevented her 
from leaving.
  But her life changed when she became a DACA recipient. Thanks to 
DACA, she enrolled in a liberal arts college in Maryland. She no longer 
had to live in crippling fear as she goes about her day-to-day life.
  DREAMers like Itayu deserve the chance to succeed and contribute to 
our great country. That is why I urge my colleagues to defeat the 
previous question, so we can bring up the Dream Act to give 800,000 
DREAMers a shot at the American Dream.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Barr), chair of the Subcommittee on Monetary Policy and 
Trade.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this combined rule 
that will enable the people's House to consider both the World Bank 
Accountability Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act.
  Before I speak about why I support this rule, I do want to respond to 
the other gentleman from Colorado saying that this House is not doing 
the people's business. In fact, this House is dealing with year-end 
spending, and we are doing it right now. We are working on immigration 
reforms. To suggest otherwise is simply not true.

  In fact, on year-end spending, this House passed all appropriations 
bills ahead of time, ahead of schedule, before the end of the fiscal 
year. Those bills were sent over to the Senate.
  This House also dealt with the issues related to the Children's 
Health Insurance Program, dealt with community health centers and a 
whole range of other issues. Those pieces of legislation went over to 
the Senate.
  So the issue is really with the Senate, it is not with this House.
  Furthermore, this House has passed historic tax reform that has 
become law. It has passed over 16 Congressional Review Acts rolling 
back Obama-era regulations and rules that were holding back our 
economy. The result is millions of jobs were created and the best 
economy we have seen in a decade.
  So it is just simply not true to suggest that this House is not doing 
the people's business. We are dealing with some important additional 
issues this week. We can do both: plan for the year-end spending 
debates with the Senate and also reauthorize the World Bank.
  The World Bank's mission is to reduce poverty around the globe. 
However, during congressional oversight hearings, it has become clear 
that the World Bank is falling short of its antipoverty mission.

[[Page H427]]

  As early as 1992, outside reviews of the World Bank--and, later, its 
own reviews--concluded that a ``pressure to lend'' on staff, through 
the staff evaluation process, has created perverse incentives for some 
World Bank employees to focus on loan volume in order to receive a 
raise or a promotion rather than what really matters, which is poverty 
reduction outcomes.
  In addition, there are numerous examples of where the very group of 
people that was supposed to be helped through World Bank assistance was 
actually harmed by a corrupt government or its cronies. From violent 
evictions to rape, to murder, the list of human rights violations goes 
on and on.
  One of the most egregious examples of human rights violations was the 
Uganda crisis, where contractors were sexually abusing a dozen or more 
girls, and it took the World Bank years to stop it. Even more 
perplexing, the World Bank's country manager for the Uganda project 
was, disturbingly, promoted to become World Bank country director for 
the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where allegations, not 
surprisingly, of sexual and gender-based violence have resurfaced in 
2017.

                              {time}  1300

  For these reasons and more, I support the World Bank Accountability 
Act, which requires the World Bank to fix its problems or face a 15 to 
30 percent reduction of the U.S. contribution to the World Bank's 
International Development Association fund, or, as it is commonly 
called, IDA.
  More specifically, the bill authorizes $3.3 billion for IDA over the 
next 3 years and mandates that the World Bank must align its incentives 
for employees with the World Bank's goals of poverty reduction, ending 
the ``pressure to lend'' problem that is pervasive today. Throwing 
money at this problem is not the answer, but getting results and doing 
so without these kind of terrible, horrific scandals is critically 
important.
  The legislation also requires the World Bank to fix failures 
identified in the Uganda sexual abuse crisis so that nothing like that 
ever happens again.
  Additionally, the legislation requires the World Bank, through its 
various tools, to support property rights, due process of law, and 
economic freedom. The World Bank must also demonstrate that none of its 
resources have been used to fund terrorism, and must also improve its 
ability to detect and minimize corruption. If the World Bank does all 
of these commonsense reforms, then it will receive its full U.S. 
contribution for IDA. But if it fails to do this, then the World Bank 
doesn't deserve the full funding backed by U.S. taxpayers.
  Mr. Speaker, I also am a strong supporter of the Home Mortgage 
Disclosure Adjustment Act. This much-needed legislation exempts 
community financial institutions, such as small banks and credit 
unions, from the onerous doubling of Home Mortgage Disclosure 
Adjustment Act reporting requirements if they make 500 or fewer 
mortgages and 500 or fewer home equity lines of credit each of the 
preceding 2 years.
  The lenders I have spoken to say that, without relief, they will have 
to devote more resources to compliance costs, rather than deploying 
more capital into our economies to benefit working families and 
businesses.
  Instead of having to collect superfluous redundant data, let's allow 
and liberate our community financial institutions to do what they want 
to do, and what they should be doing, in their core mission, and that 
is serving their customers and providing loans.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Emmer for his hard work on the Home 
Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act. I thank Chairman Hensarling also 
for his leadership on both of these bills.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support both of these important 
pieces of legislation.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, here we go. We are finding ourselves staring down self-
created deadlines, and I want to be clear about that. The deadline for 
the expiration of the DREAMers in March and the fact that 100 are 
expiring every day is self-created by President Trump. It is a 
manufactured crisis. We, of course, could do immigration reform while 
not having our backs to the wall on that issue.
  This shutdown of the government is a construct of this body, this 
House. They said that they would only fund the government through 
January 19. So we are facing another deadline. Again, I believe, from 
what I am hearing, that Congress will then create another artificial 
crisis sometime in February, when we are going to be facing a 
government shutdown again.
  All in the face of record deficits and tax-and-spend Republican 
policies, the American people have had enough.
  Hundreds of thousands of DREAMers are at risk of deportation by this 
administration.
  Millions of children are at risk of losing their health insurance.
  We are all being plunged deeper and deeper into debt, not just for 
ourselves, but our future generations: my kids and many of our 
grandkids, for those who have them.
  We are facing another government shutdown of necessary, important 
government services, including economic drivers in areas I represent, 
like Rocky Mountain National Park, with over 3 million tourists a year. 
It would close down if the government shuts down.
  Air traffic controllers. So many other important parts of our 
necessary infrastructure to succeed as a country faces an expiration 
this Friday.
  Even if somehow the Republicans say, ``Okay, here is another 2 or 3 
weeks of funding,'' the uncertainty that that creates--meaning they 
can't plan for short- to medium-term capital projects: a simple repair 
that might take more than 3 weeks; knocking down a wall; fixing a 
building; making a hire and an employee not knowing whether they are 
going to have a job in 3 weeks, or contractors not knowing whether they 
are going to be paid, and then having to reflect that in their pricing 
and ultimately charging the taxpayers more for the work they are doing 
because they don't know if the government will pay.
  What kind of country are we running, Mr. Speaker?
  I know we can do better, and that starts by defeating the previous 
question so that we can just pass the Dream Act and move on. It will 
pass. Sixty, seventy, or eighty percent of this body will probably vote 
for it. I know there are people who don't like it. Let the people's 
House work its will. Let us vote. That is what we are here to do, Mr. 
Speaker--Republicans and Democrats. Let us work our will.
  We have the votes on the Dream Act and we have the votes to keep the 
government open, if you simply allow us to have an open process to do 
it. That is what this floor time should be used for today. This is 
precious floor time--the time that we are in session debating--
especially considering Republicans are sending Congress on a 10-day 
vacation at the end of this week. Let's use this floor time to do what 
matters.
  Sure, there will be a day to discuss the finer points of World Bank 
policies and the finer points of the threshold for regulatory 
forbearance for mortgage cutoffs. Those things are fine, Mr. Speaker. 
Those are fine to discuss, but not while the Republicans are creating 
over 100 more illegal immigrants a day and they are going to create 
800,000 more in just a couple of months; not when the Republicans are 
plunging our Nation deeper and deeper into debt with their tax-and-
spend policies; not when Republicans are forcing another government 
shutdown, if not this week, then in 3 weeks or in 4 weeks.

  Crisis to crisis to crisis, manufactured crisis to manufactured 
crisis to manufactured crisis, the American people count on us to be 
stewards of the greatest Republic that has ever been created on the 
face of this Earth. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, Congress is letting them 
down. Let's defeat the previous question and defeat this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Overlooking corruption and abuse is unacceptable in any governing 
body, particularly one funded by the United States.
  It is clear that serious reforms and oversight are needed at the 
World Bank. The International Development Association has strayed from 
its mission to help combat inequality around the world.

[[Page H428]]

  The World Bank Accountability Act puts our international partners on 
notice that the United States is not simply going to stand by and allow 
abuses to continue.
  And while we stand up for the underprivileged around the world, we 
also must ensure that every American has equal access to our own 
financial institutions.
  The Home Mortgage Disclosure Adjustment Act ensures that CFPB 
regulations do not shut out certain groups of Americans.
  I thank Chairman Hensarling for putting these bills forward. I thank 
my colleagues on the Financial Services Committee, who have joined me 
on the floor today to make the case for these efforts. I thank Chairman 
Sessions for his leadership on the Rules Committee and for providing 
the debate on these issues today.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the rule 
and supporting the underlying bills. We must ensure that American 
taxpayer money is not spent on corrupt regimes and that all Americans 
have access to financing here in the U.S.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Polis is as follows:

            An Amendment to H. Res. 693 Offered by Mr. Polis

       At the end of the resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec 3. 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. 4. 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 (Mr. Womack). The question is on ordering the 
previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on:
  Adopting House Resolution 693, if ordered; and
  Suspending the rules and passing H.R. 4258.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 230, 
nays 187, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 20]

                               YEAS--230

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     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)
     Curtis
     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
     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
     Hurd
     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
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     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
     Sanford
     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
     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

[[Page H429]]


  


                               NAYS--187

     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
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     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)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     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
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     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
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Amodei
     Barletta
     Brady (TX)
     Cummings
     Kind
     Lewis (GA)
     Long
     Noem
     Poe (TX)
     Rush
     Scalise
     Schneider
     Vela

                              {time}  1335

  Mr. GUTIERREZ and Ms. GABBARD changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Messrs. BUDD and BISHOP of Michigan changed their vote from ``nay'' 
to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 228, 
noes 188, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 21]

                               AYES--228

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     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)
     Curtis
     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
     Frelinghuysen
     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
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     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
     Sanford
     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
     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

                               NOES--188

     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
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     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)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     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
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     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
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Amodei
     Brady (TX)
     Cummings
     Gaetz
     Kind
     King (IA)
     LaMalfa
     Lewis (GA)
     Long
     Noem
     Poe (TX)
     Scalise
     Schneider
     Vela

                              {time}  1345

  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.

                          ____________________