[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 147 (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H7834-H7838]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1635, EMPOWERING STUDENTS THROUGH
ENHANCED FINANCIAL COUNSELING ACT, AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF
H.R. 4606, ENSURING SMALL SCALE LNG CERTAINTY AND ACCESS ACT
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1049 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1049
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. 1635) to amend the loan counseling
requirements under the Higher Education Act of 1965, 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 Education and the Workforce. After general
debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the
five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. All
points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. No
amendment to the bill 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. 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. 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.
4606) to provide that applications under the Natural Gas Act
for the importation or exportation of small volumes of
natural gas shall be granted without modification or delay.
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 Energy and
Commerce. 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 Energy
and Commerce 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 B 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.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Wyoming is recognized
for 1 hour.
{time} 1215
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, during consideration of this resolution all
time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. I yield the customary
30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres), pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
General Leave
Ms. CHENEY. 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
gentlewoman from Wyoming?
There was no objection.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution
1049, which provides a structured rule for consideration of H.R. 4606,
the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, and a structured
rule for H.R. 1635, the Empowering Students Through Enhanced Financial
Counseling Act. These bipartisan bills provide commonsense changes that
will strengthen our economy by removing unnecessary regulatory burdens
and improving financial counseling for our students.
Student loan debt in our country hit a record high of $1.5 trillion
in the first quarter of this year, Mr. Speaker. Furthermore, both the
number and size of student loans are increasing, while the repayment
rates are decreasing. Students are not receiving the proper counseling
when they enroll in Federal aid programs. This has the potential to
cost them immense amounts of money.
Right now, schools are only required to provide entry and exit
financial counseling to students who receive Federal loans. Often, the
counseling offered does not give students a realistic understanding of
their anticipated finances and income during their studies and after
graduation, or information about other Federal aid programs they could
turn to before a private loan.
By enhancing the financial counseling offered and expanding it to
students who receive Pell grants and to the parents of students who
take out Federal loans to pay for their children's education, students
will better be able to manage their finances and maximize their
opportunities, saving themselves and the taxpayers money every single
year.
Mr. Speaker, we provide over $120 billion of Federal student aid
every year, without providing adequate education and support about how
to use those funds. This must change. With this bill, we will begin to
give our students the tools and resources necessary to ensure they put
themselves in the best financial position for the future. H.R. 1635
does just that.
Additionally, the rule we are considering today makes in order
several bipartisan amendments that are aimed at making this good bill
even better.
The rule that we are debating this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, also
provides for consideration of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG
Certainty and Access Act. This rule makes in order two Democrat
amendments to this bipartisan bill which also will help strengthen our
economy and create more American jobs.
Mr. Speaker, as you know, the United States is now the world's
leading producer of oil and natural gas. And my home State of Wyoming
ranks sixth in production of crude oil, and eighth in natural gas
production. However, despite the important and even monumental efforts
by the Trump administration so far, uncertainty and burdensome
regulations still stifle operations and further growth.
Currently, the Natural Gas Act does not specify an amount threshold
for the Department of Energy's lengthy regulatory process for the
exportation of liquefied natural gas. This means that producers wanting
to export a small amount of gas are forced to go through the same
process as major producers.
By providing greater regulatory certainty and a clear timetable for
the
[[Page H7835]]
process of exporting small amounts of LNG, we will better enable
exporters to move forward with capital-intensive projects that create
American jobs.
We also are able, Mr. Speaker, through this bill, to preserve
existing environmental laws and ensure that small-scale export
facilities receive the proper review.
Wyoming's petroleum industry directly employs over 7,000 people, with
an annual payroll of over $668 million, contributing over $900 million
to our economy.
The small scale LNG export market is a growing sector of our economy
with immense potential that can further expand the economic benefits
the petroleum industry yields to my State and to the Nation. This bill
will open up markets where large-scale exports are simply not
economical and help jump-start growth in this important industry.
H.R. 4606 places small-scale exports on a level playing field with
exports to free trade agreement nations. Many of our neighboring
countries are forced to rely on unstable or unfriendly nations for
their energy needs because the regulations we currently place on our
small-scale LNG exporters makes exporting to these nations
uneconomical.
Mr. Speaker, by reducing these regulations, U.S. LNG exports can play
an important role in rebuilding parts of the Caribbean devastated by
hurricanes in 2017, as well as provide a stable source of energy. It
will also prevent our neighbors from having to turn, potentially, to
our adversaries to meet their energy needs.
Mr. Speaker, we are in the midst of an energy boom that is
revitalizing our economy. It is also putting us in a position where we
can greatly assist our neighbor countries by providing them a stable
source of energy and offering support in the event of a natural
disaster.
The current unnecessary and overly burdensome regulations on small
LNG exporters prevent us from taking full advantage of this
unprecedented growth in our energy production and industry. H.R. 4606
allows us to address this issue and to provide an additional boost to
our economy.
Mr. Speaker, the bills that will be considered under this rule are
bipartisan bills that will help strengthen our economy and support our
students. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this rule that will
allow consideration of H.R. 4606 and H.R. 1635, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me the
customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
As we return to the Capitol this week, there remains countless crises
which demand our attention: children still separated from their
families; children being murdered on school grounds, while this body
stands idly by doing nothing, turning a blind eye to gun violence.
We have trade wars started by this President which are raising the
cost of businesses in our communities and putting some companies out of
business.
Finally, the government runs out of funding at the end of the month,
the end of this month, Mr. Speaker. We find ourselves facing yet
another Republican government shutdown.
But instead of funding the government and averting a shutdown, the
majority has decided that these two bills are the best use of our time.
That is right. The majority believes that the best use of what precious
legislative time remains, 10 days, is to codify a DOE rulemaking that
was just recently finalized.
Why don't we provide some meaningful oversight over this
administration?
We have agency after agency attacking our Nation's workers, students,
homeowners, and the health of our environment. We have a President who
is starting trade wars and, reportedly, is itching to start real wars.
But instead, all the majority is interested in doing is bringing
unnecessary bills on the margins, such as the ones that we are
considering today.
The first bill, H.R. 4606, will codify into law a Department of
Energy rulemaking that went into effect less than 3 weeks ago. H.R.
4606 is a solution in search of a problem. The current approval process
is working.
However, by enshrining this rule into law, the majority is, in
essence, saying that all small scale exports of LNG are always and will
always be in the public's interest and will continue to be so. This is
shortsighted and, if it turns out to be wrong, it will be much harder
to correct this policy once it becomes law than if it were to remain a
current DOE rule.
In addition, we are considering H.R. 1635, the Empowering Students
Through Enhanced Financial Counseling Act.
I wish to credit my Republican colleagues. This is a bipartisan bill.
This is an example of what can be done when bills are given full
hearings, a markup, and represent the consensus of the people's House.
Unfortunately, the benefits of this bill are mitigated by actions
from this administration that make it harder for students. For example,
this past February, Republicans on the Education and the Workforce
Committee passed the PROSPER Act.
The so-called PROSPER Act is a highly partisan reauthorization of the
Higher Education Act that cuts nearly $15 billion from Federal student
aid, leaving students with more expensive loans that are more difficult
to repay; more expensive loans for young Americans with the highest
interest rates in nearly a decade.
And just last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's
student loan ombudsman, whose job was to protect student borrowers from
predatory lending practices, resigned, resigned from his position. In
his resignation letter, Seth Frotman wrote that the Trump
administration has ``turned its back on young people and their
financial futures.''
Mr. Frotman also stated that under the leadership of Acting Director
Mulvaney, ``. . . the Bureau has abandoned the very consumers it is
tasked by Congress with protecting'' and that Director Mulvaney has ``.
. . used the Bureau to serve the wishes of the most powerful financial
companies in America,'' not surprising to me.
Mr. Frotman wrote that the Bureau has failed student loan borrowers.
While this bill may help, H.R. 1635, in no way, reverses the damage
this administration has caused our students.
Congress is supposed to be a check on the administration, not a
rubber stamp.
The rule we are considering makes in order two amendments to H.R.
4606 and seven amendments in order to H.R. 1635.
I am deeply disappointed that my two amendments were not made in
order to H.R. 1635. My amendments would have helped students who have
suffered from the closure of schools or school branches.
When schools close, it is the students who are the real losers. They
are saddled with debt and left having to navigate a complicated process
for loan relief.
{time} 1230
The two amendments I offered would have streamlined the process for
students to have their loans discharged, ensuring that bureaucracy
didn't slow down providing these students the relief that they need,
and fixed the Pell grant process to make sure that students wouldn't be
limited in pursuing their educational goals at a new institution. These
are bipartisan ideas, which have been reviewed by the current
administration.
I am disappointed that the House wouldn't even allow an open process;
however, I am certainly not surprised. After all, this is the most
closed Congress in our Nation's history. I hope that we can aim to do
better and give our constituents a real debate in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Rules Committee, Mrs.
Torres, for her comments today.
I think that Mrs. Torres and I both agree that Congress needs to
ensure that we are playing our constitutional role, and that is why I
find it particularly surprising that my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle want to further empower the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, which is a completely unaccountable and, I would argue,
unconstitutional agency.
In fact, statutorily, Mr. Speaker, with the regulation of student
loans under the Higher Education Act, Congress has charged the
Department of
[[Page H7836]]
Education with this obligation and responsibility, not the CFPB, and
that is where we think it should belong. We don't think that the answer
to congressional oversight and to increasing congressional oversight is
to give further power to a completely unaccountable Federal agency.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr.
Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the
rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale
LNG Certainty and Access Act.
Mr. Speaker, the United States is currently experiencing an energy
renaissance. Liquefied natural gas production, or LNG, in the United
States is playing a major role in the changing of the international
landscape, with America now leading the way in innovative new LNG
technologies and becoming a major energy exporter.
I am proud to say that much of this national accomplishment comes as
a result of the contributions of many LNG endeavors based in my
district in south Louisiana.
The success we are currently experiencing is just the beginning.
During this Congress, we have worked with the Trump administration to
roll back many of the previous administration's regulations that
injured American industry. In fact, the previous executive branch, in
many ways, actually weaponized Federal agencies against the oil and gas
industry. Conservatives in this Congress have worked to implement
commonsense reforms like the legislation we are considering today to
revive the American energy industry and bring energy security to our
Nation.
H.R. 4606 would provide for the expeditious consideration of NEPA
exclusion applications to import and export small quantities of natural
gas. This is a needed reform that will help encourage economic
development and create jobs.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
support today's combined rule that includes this legislation and to
support the full measure when it comes to the floor for a final vote.
Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as the cost to attend college has continued to rise, so
has the amount of debt students and their parents have had to take on.
According to the Federal Reserve, the outstanding loan debt stands at
approximately $1.5 trillion and climbing. This debt load has hampered
the ability of young graduates to buy their first home, a car, or start
a small business.
Congress needs to do more to help students and their parents deal
with the student loan crisis. This is why I rise today to offer my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle the opportunity to pass a
comprehensive bill to ensure that every student has a path to a debt-
free degree or credential that leads to a rewarding career.
Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an
amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 6543, the Aim Higher Act. This
thoughtful proposal invests in our students, making higher education
more affordable while also addressing the rising costs of college.
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 California?
There was no objection.
Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) to discuss our proposal.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congresswoman Torres for her
leadership and Ms. Cheney for her hard work on the Rules Committee.
Mr. Speaker, in 1965, when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Higher
Education Act, he said that it meant ``that a high school senior
anywhere in this great land of ours can apply to any college or any
university in any of the 50 States and not be turned away because their
family is poor.''
Unfortunately, 53 years later, the promise of an affordable education
is out of reach for millions of students. In May of this year,
America's outstanding student loan debt surpassed $1.5 trillion.
With the cost of college education and the debt needed to afford it
growing each year, Americans are demanding action to lower the crushing
costs of higher education; and thus it is imperative that we pass
a comprehensive update to the Higher Education Act which deals with the
full menu of Federal policy that will keep higher education affordable.
Unfortunately, the majority has failed to bring HEA to the floor in
that long overdue rewrite, and today we are only left with the
Financial Counseling bill that we are going to vote on, which is just a
sliver of what we need to do to build America's future workforce.
In 2008, the last HEA was negotiated under then-Chairman George
Miller and passed the House and Senate with overwhelming bipartisan
support. Fast-forward to last December, the majority introduced the
misnamed PROSPER Act, a misguided attempt to update HEA that guts $15
billion from Federal student aid and diverts taxpayer money to low-
quality, predatory programs.
Unlike 2008, this bill squeaked out of the Education and Workforce
Committee on a party-line vote. Fortunately, that bill has not seen the
light of day ever since.
In the absence of any movement on a long overdue update of HEA, I am
pleased to report that committee Democrats stepped into this vacuum and
introduced the Aim Higher Act, a comprehensive approach to higher
education. Under the Aim Higher Act, every student will have the
opportunity to earn a quality, debt-free degree or credential that
leads to a rewarding career.
This bill makes a number of changes to higher education to make
degrees more affordable and easier to pay off. It provides 2 years of
tuition-free community college to every high school graduate through
Federal-State partnerships, incentivizes States to reinvest in their 4-
year public colleges and universities, and makes Federal financial aid
more generous to keep pace with increased tuition costs.
Additionally, knowing that 4-year college isn't for everyone and that
our workforce needs are changing, our bill allows students to use their
Pell grants for quality, short-term certificate programs that provide
an accelerated path to the workforce.
As I mentioned before, our student loan debt is at the highest level
it has ever been, $1.5 trillion. That is the highest amount of consumer
debt outside of mortgages. This debt burden is a drag not on just the
student graduate or a family, it is a drag on our entire economy that
impacts when or if a buyer can buy a home, start a family, get a small
business off the ground, or change careers.
Today, many interest rates for student loans are often far higher
than other consumer borrowing, yet, like other forms of debt, student
loans cannot be refinanced as interest rates drop, saddling 25 million
borrowers with thousands of dollars in extra debt. Our bill fixes that
and will allow students to refinance their loans to more affordable
rates.
Looking at the nationwide shortage of teachers and primary care
doctors, our bill preserves the effective Public Service Loan
Forgiveness Program, which the PROSPER Act abolished, to encourage
talented individuals to pursue careers in high-need fields.
It also expands the program to address challenges in our farming
communities, where the average farmer age is now 58 years old and new
farmers entering the field have drooped by 20 percent.
The Aim Higher Act isn't just focused on cutting the cost of higher
education; it is also focused on improving the quality of higher
education. It cracks down on predatory institutions that waste student
and taxpayer money by peddling expensive, low-quality programs.
Our veterans who have earned their GI Bill benefits through service
and sacrifice are frequent targets and victims of fraudulent schools,
as Mrs. Holly Petraeus, the wife of General David Petraeus,
crisscrossed America a couple years ago as a representative of the
Consumer Finance Protection Bureau to warn veterans of these rip-offs.
And finally, the Aim Higher Act gives students the tools they need to
[[Page H7837]]
graduate on time. We invest in campus childcare for student parents,
subsidized housing for homeless and foster youth, faculty training for
students with disabilities, and community centers to help student
veterans transition to civilian life.
Policy is defined by priorities. Instead of spending limited
resources on a tax cut for those who don't need it, we believe that we
should invest in our children and in the future of our economy. That is
what the Aim Higher Act does.
Mr. Speaker, I hope you will join us in pushing for a higher
education system that puts the promise of quality, debt-free degrees
and a rewarding career within the reach of all Americans.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Johnson).
Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I thank Madam Chairwoman for
recognizing me.
Mr. Speaker, I represent rural eastern and southeastern Ohio, which
is no stranger to the benefits of natural gas. It sits on top of the
Utica and Marcellus shale plays, which have led to a growing interest
in new and exciting manufacturing opportunities, like ethane cracker
plants and ethane storage hubs.
Those opportunities have become viable thanks to new technologies
that have led to an increase in natural gas production. But that
increased production has also been the result of the growing demand for
excess U.S. natural gas.
H.R. 4606, the Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act,
will help ensure the United States takes full advantage of our
opportunities for excess small scale LNG exports, along with
encouraging production opportunities here at home.
Specifically, this bipartisan bill provides that applications under
the Natural Gas Act for the importation or exportation of small volumes
of natural gas, that being defined as 0.14 billion cubic feet per day,
shall be granted without delay, but only if they do not require an
environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Despite the U.S. being the world's leading producer of oil and
natural gas, American companies are unable to efficiently export small
quantities of gas to neighboring countries. By reducing regulatory
constraints and codifying a similar rule issued by the Department of
Energy, H.R. 4606 will better allow our domestic providers the
opportunity to provide a stable source of U.S. energy to countries
currently reliant on Venezuelan fuel oil, which has been used to gain
influence in countries in the Caribbean and Central and South America.
This effort to increase U.S. energy opportunities within the region
is not new, as the previous administration also sought to increase
energy engagement through the creation of the Caribbean Energy Security
Initiative.
As many independent and DOE-commissioned studies have confirmed, the
benefits of natural gas exports are clear. They are a net positive to
our domestic economy, but that is not the only benefit.
As Puerto Rico continues to rebuild after the devastating hurricane
in 2017, increased shipments and availability of reliable U.S. natural
gas can help the island meet its energy needs.
Additionally, LNG exports can only serve to strengthen U.S. ties with
countries throughout the region.
With U.S. natural gas reserves as large as they are and with new
technological advancements allowing our producers to access an
increasing amount of natural gas each and every day, it is imperative
that the U.S. take full advantage of this abundant resource and the
economic benefits it provides here at home. H.R. 4606 is a step in that
direction. It will strengthen U.S. geopolitical ties, increase job
creation, and promote economic growth as a result.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage everyone to vote for this rule and this
commonsense underlying bill.
{time} 1245
Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
The House is currently scheduled to be in session for just 10 days
before funding for the government runs out--10 days. And while the
House has passed partisan appropriation bills, none of them have been
signed into law. If Congress fails to act, it will be the third time
the government has shut down in 2018 alone--the third time.
Let me remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that the
Republican Party is in charge of the House. The Republican Party is in
charge of the Senate and the White House. President Trump is again
playing games, and without leadership from this House and our
colleagues in the Senate, his desire for a government shutdown will
cause real people pain and hurt our growing economy.
Three thousand Federal workers in my district have heard President
Trump tell them that they are the reason that we are in debt. Three
thousand workers in my district and 2 million nationally are wondering
if they will be furloughed, while corporations and millionaires get
massive tax cuts.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and
the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I again would like to thank my colleague from the Rules
Committee for her work and her participation in this debate.
I hope that the minority leader of the United States Senate, Mr.
Schumer, might have been listening to her arguments just now, and I
would just recall for our colleagues that it was the Democrats in the
Senate, led by Mr. Schumer, who shut the government down earlier this
year, not the Republicans.
Mr. Speaker, it was the Democrats in the House and the Senate who
walked away from the negotiations on the budget deal that we finally
were able to strike, but not before they refused to show up for at
least one meeting at the White House.
So it is the case that the Republicans are in control of this body.
It is the case that we have a majority in the Senate. As my colleague
knows, we don't have 60 votes in the Senate, and so Mr. Schumer and the
Democrats in the Senate are able to gum up the works pretty
extensively.
But as for us in the House, we have, Mr. Speaker, been successful in
passing all 12 appropriations bills. We have been successful in passing
the necessary appropriations bills without the help of the Democrats in
order to make sure that we are providing the funds that we need to keep
the government open and keep the government functioning.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to
participate in a good-faith manner, particularly in the coming weeks as
we deal with the Defense Appropriations bill once again on this floor,
and just remind them how important it is that we make sure that our men
and women in uniform receive the funds that they deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Johnson) and my colleague from Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie) for their
important and hard work on these bills. We must continue to roll back
the regulatory burdens that make doing business in our country so
difficult.
We also have to give our students the tools they need to maximize
their opportunities for success and to understand the financial
liabilities that they are undertaking when they receive these student
loans. We don't want them to have a future that is diminished by the
burden of unnecessary debt that they can't repay once they graduate.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the rule and passage of
the underlying bills.
The material previously referred to by Mrs. Torres is as follows:
An Amendment to H. Res. 1049 Offered by Ms. Torres
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.
6543) to amend and strengthen the Higher Education Act of
1965 so that every student has a path to a quality, debt-free
degree or credential that leads to a rewarding career. 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
[[Page H7838]]
the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Education and the Workforce. 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. 6543.
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.
Ms. CHENEY. 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.
Mrs. TORRES. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________