Congressional Record, Volume 164 Issue 196 (Wednesday, December 12, 2018)

[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 196 (Wednesday, December 12, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H10115-H10128]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

{time} 1215
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2, AGRICULTURE
AND NUTRITION ACT OF 2018

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1176 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows

H. Res. 1176

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report to accompany the
bill (H.R. 2) to provide for the reform and continuation of
agricultural and other programs of the Department of
Agriculture through fiscal year 2023, and for other purposes.
All points of order against the conference report and against
its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be
considered as read. The previous question shall be considered
as ordered on the conference report to its adoption without
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2)
one motion to recommit if applicable.
Sec. 2. The provisions of section 7 of the War Powers
Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1546) shall not apply during the
remainder of the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress to a
concurrent resolution introduced pursuant to section 5 of the
War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544) with respect to the
Republic of Yemen.

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

General Leave

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and
reported a rule, House Resolution 1176, providing for further
consideration of a very important piece of legislation for America's
farmers and ranchers: the conference report to accompany H.R. 2, the
Agriculture and Nutrition Act, commonly referred to as the farm bill.
This rule provides that the conference report shall be considered as
read.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, as the House considered its version
of the farm bill, I spoke in this Chamber about a farm bill listening
tour I conducted in my own district, traveling to every county that I
represent to hear from and listen to input and the concerns from
farmers, ranchers, and producers across the State of Washington.
In the days since the House passed that bill earlier this summer,
there has been growing concern that the job would not get done and that
the 2014 farm bill would expire and our Nation's farm country would be
left without the crucial tools this legislation provides to strengthen
the farm safety net and provide certainty and flexibility to America's
farmers and ranchers.
Fortunately, with the legislation before us today, we can report that
this is not the case. After months of painstaking negotiations between
the House and the Senate conferees, we have an agreement before us.
This agreement, while not including several provisions I would have
liked to have seen, sets us on a better path for our farmers and
ranchers, for our rural communities, for small businesses, and for
consumers across the country at the grocery store and at kitchen
tables.
With this conference agreement to the farm bill, I can now go back to
my district and confidently report to my constituents that we have
provided a strong foundation to help our farmers survive a 50 percent
drop in net farm income over the past 4 years. I can go back to
Okanogan County and tell my constituents in Pateros that we have

[[Page H10116]]

strengthened market access programs and provided strong resources to
open new sources for exporting across the globe.
I can tell farmers in Grant County that we have protected crop
insurance and made several key improvements, including for whole farm
revenue coverage for specialty crop producers. I can tell dairy
producers in Yakima County that we have improved the dairy safety net
for large, mid-sized, and small dairies. I can report back to producers
in Prosser, in Benton County, who stressed the importance of
agriculture research, that we have provided an increase in funding for
research, extension, and education projects.
With the bill before us, I can let key agriculture partners in our
community like Washington State University know that we will keep
American agriculture at the forefront of innovation and productivity.
Farmers from East Wenatchee will hear from me that this farm bill
invests in critical cost-share and incentive-based programs to help
farm families improve our soil, water, and other natural resources. I
can tell farmers in Othello, in Adams County, concerned with the
regulatory burdens on their shoulders, that this legislation protects
our producers from costly, additional, and unnecessary red tape.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise today as a third-generation farmer to
say that this farm bill takes strong steps to address challenges facing
America's agricultural community. The rule we bring before the House
provides for further consideration of the conference report to H.R. 2,
the Agriculture and Nutrition Act, legislation that is critically
important to my district in central Washington, and to rural districts
across this great country.
This legislation maintains and strengthens important policies like
Price Loss Coverage, Agricultural Risk Coverage, commodity loans, Dairy
Margin Coverage, livestock disaster programs, and crop insurance. It
enhances and permanently funds the Foreign Market Development Program
and Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops, which are so vital for
export-driven agricultural economies like those in my State of
Washington.
It increases funding for land-grant universities, research, and
education, as well as special research initiatives, including for
specialty crops and organic research.
This legislation makes strides to expand quality broadband to all of
rural America by including forward-looking standards to ensure we are
meeting next-generation rural broadband needs. It also improves the
tools available to reduce forest fuel loads that increase the size and
force of catastrophic wildfires. By renewing key categorical exclusion
and expanding its purpose to allow for expedited reduction of hazardous
fuels in our forests, we can continue to reduce the threat these
wildfires pose on rural communities.
Mr. Speaker, with support from the 2014 farm bill, American farmers
have been able to combat depressed prices and severe drops in farm
income, but they would not have been able to do so without a robust
safety net in place. The conference report before us will build upon
this effort and ensure a steady food supply will be on the shelves and
in our markets for years to come.
As I mentioned, it doesn't include everything I would have liked to
have seen in this bill, but, in reality, no piece of legislation is
perfect, particularly comprehensive bills that have been negotiated for
months But the fact of the matter is, this farm bill includes important
and significant wins for American farmers and ranchers. It is now our
responsibility to get the job done.

Mr. Speaker, the people's House has more than 20 farmers, ranchers,
and producers serving in this body. Among us are a dairyman from
central California; a blueberry farmer from Maine; a rancher from South
Dakota; two rice farmers, one from California and another from
Minnesota; a cattleman from Kentucky; an almond farmer from California;
and, yes, a proud hops farmer from the Yakima Valley of Washington
State.
This is the first farm bill that I have had the opportunity to engage
in since coming to Congress, Mr. Speaker. I have spent my whole life on
the farm, and my life in public service, including serving as
Washington State's Director of the Department of Agriculture, has been
spent working on behalf of American farmers, ranchers, rural
communities, and families.
It is an honor today to bring this rule forward for the conference
report to accompany the farm bill, H.R. 2, the Agriculture and
Nutrition Act. I humbly urge my colleagues to support the rule, support
the bill, and strengthen the future for America's farmers and all those
who depend on them.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
and I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse), my friend,
for yielding the customary 30 minutes.
(Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I will be submitting a longer statement
for the Record, so I will be keeping my floor remarks today fairly
brief.
Mr. Speaker, I intend to support this farm bill. This farm bill is
not perfect. It is not the bill that I would have written. But this
conference report, unlike the farm bill that the House produced, is a
good, bipartisan product.
I want to thank Chairman Roberts and Ranking Member Stabenow for
their tireless efforts to protect SNAP benefits throughout this
process. Because of their work, hungry people across this country will
have access to the modest benefits they need to feed their families. I
thank as well Chairman Conaway, who recognized the importance of
getting a farm bill over the finish line this year.
I especially want to recognize the efforts of Ranking Member
Peterson. He is truly an amazing guy who presides over a committee that
is very diverse with rural, suburban, and urban Members of Congress. It
has conservatives, moderates, and liberals like me. Yet, he has managed
to bring us together and not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Farmers, consumers, and hungry people all across the country owe him a
debt of gratitude.
I also want to thank the staff of the minority and the majority who
put in endless hours trying to negotiate a compromise. I want to thank
Kaitlin Hodgkins, who was my point person on these ag issues, for all
of her work.
Mr. Speaker, the issue of hunger and food insecurity has been my
primary cause in Congress. I have been proud to work on these issues as
a member of the Agriculture Committee and to oversee the SNAP program
as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Nutrition.
As members of this House well know, I have been very critical of the
legislation that the Republican majority in this House initially
produced. It included more than $20 billion in SNAP cuts that would
have disproportionately harmed the most vulnerable among us--kids,
disabled, and the elderly--the very people who are often left to wonder
where they will get their next meal. Many would have been cut off from
assistance altogether if the House version actually prevailed.
The Senate, however, took a much different course. Their Agriculture
Committee chairman, Senator Roberts, actually consulted with Ranking
Member Stabenow. There were no disastrous work requirements, no
partisan policies cooked up in some extreme conservative think tank
somewhere. It largely continued proven policies that both sides have
traditionally agreed on.
Thankfully, the conference committee took the same course. This final
bill does not include any SNAP benefits cuts. No one is getting kicked
off the rolls, there are no changes to categorical eligibility or
severing of the link between SNAP and LIHEAP. And importantly, there
are no additional burdensome work requirements.
In fact, this conference report makes a number of administrative
improvement and efficiencies, saving $1 billion. These are reinvested
into nutrition programs. As a result, more Americans will have access
to healthy food and SNAP employment and training programs will be
strengthened.
Mr. Speaker, I hope the Secretary of Agriculture and the President
are tuning in to this debate. Right now, we have heard rumors that they
are trying to work behind the scenes to circumvent the will of this
Congress by

[[Page H10117]]

instituting more onerous work requirements administratively. Such a
move, I believe, will likely lead to legal action.
In the next Congress, when Democrats are in the majority, we will use
every legislative tool available to block such a move at every turn. We
will not tolerate more of their disrespect and callousness toward the
most vulnerable in this country. No more beating up on poor people,
period. We will be watching them very closely, and if they do
anything--and I mean anything--to increase hunger in America, we will
fight them. And that is a promise.
When a Congress as polarized as the 115th can negotiate and arrive at
a bipartisan agreement, we should be celebrating it. It is mind-
boggling to think there are some on the other end of Pennsylvania
Avenue working to overturn it even before it is signed into law.
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, I wanted to be able to vote for this rule today,
since I said I was going to support the underlying legislation. But my
Republican friends screwed it up again. Tucked inside this rule is
language that turns off fast track procedures for all Yemen resolutions
through the end of this Congress. That is right. The Republican
leadership has declared that the worst humanitarian conflict in the
world, where the U.N. has just announced famine is taking place due to
the war, is not worth the time and attention of the people's House.
This is an offensive abdication of our responsibility. We should not be
sitting idly by, waiting for the start of the next Congress, as this
conflict rages on. We should be doing something today.
Mr. Speaker, it is because of this Yemen language that I strongly
urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule.
Mr. Speaker, this Farm Bill isn't perfect. It's not the bill that I
would have written. But very rarely do we get the chance to vote on
professionalism in this body. And this conference report is the product
of a professional process that was made better by deliberative,
bipartisan debate.
The issue of food insecurity has been my primary cause. As members of
the House know well, I have been very critical of the Farm Bill that
House Republicans initially produced. It included more than $20 billion
in SNAP cuts that would have disproportionately harmed the most
vulnerable among us. Kids. The disabled. And the elderly. The very
people who are often left to wonder where they'll get their next meal.
Many would have been cut off from assistance altogether.
These cuts were put forward to try and hoist an unproved and
drastically underfunded state-based workforce bureaucracy experiment on
the entire nation. Without any evidence or any study proving its
effectiveness, House Republicans wanted to disadvantage poor parents.
The Senate, however, took a much different course. Their Ag Committee
chairman, Senator Roberts, actually consulted with their ranking
member, Senator Stabenow. There were no disastrous work requirements.
No partisan policies cooked up in some extreme conservative think tank
somewhere. It largely continued proven policies that both sides have
traditionally agreed on.
Thankfully, the conference committee took this same course. This
final bill doesn't include devastating SNAP benefit cuts. No one is
getting kicked off the rolls. There are no changes to categorical
eligibility or severing of the link between SNAP and LIHEAP.
The conference committee rejected the House's onerous child support
enforcement proposal, and instead required a study of the current child
support option. This study will only be useful in improving policy if
USDA includes the experiences of grandparents, victims of domestic
violence, and others who may avoid participating in SNAP out of fear
that the provision.
This conference report rejects many provisions of the House bill
including the state option to privatize SNAP operation. Current law and
the administration's standards around merit systems personnel was the
appropriate course.
And importantly, there are no additional work requirements.
That's because the existing flexibility that states have to respond
to local labor conditions works. And as the conference report notes, we
expect states to continue to be able to identify the areas that they
wish to include in their areas and to be able to use the labor surplus
definition of unemployment for the area having to be twenty percent
above the national average for a two-year period. This has worked well
for over twenty years. While the flexibly to waive this harsh and
unfair rule does not go far enough, we do not wish to make it more
restrictive or limiting for states.
While the Farm Bill does clarify that state agency-drafted waivers
need the governor's support, this does not require additional steps in
the waiver process or interfere with the discretion and authority that
a chief executive may have in place. The conference committee does not
intend this provision to interfere with state operations by changing
the waiver process that states have relied on for twenty years.
This conference report makes a number of administrative improvements
and efficiencies, saving a billion dollars. One provision requires
state participation in the National Accuracy Clearinghouse, which is a
database that allows for checks of participation across state lines.
Let me be clear: a data match does not mean an individual is committing
fraud by intentionally seeking benefits in more than one state. A match
can also mean that a participants first state of residence has failed
to act on the individuals' reported move.
The National Accuracy Clearinghouse can play an important role in
cleaning up state caseloads. This is important because even if a
household requests a closure of the case due to a change in residency,
the state may not act on it in a timely manner, and there's little a
household can do to prove they tried to close their case. States have a
duty to assist individuals in the application process and that means,
to me, that a state must help individuals who have recently moved.
Without evidence of an individual's intent to defraud the program,
state agencies should assume dual enrollment is unintentional.
The conference report sets up a reasonable approach to dealing with
matches from external data sources. This provision codifies recent USDA
regulations that identify the limited number of circumstances in which
a state must follow up with most households to verify information it
obtains that is likely to impact eligibility or is not required to be
reported by the household. There is no change to current policy.
The conference report also supports and codifies recent efforts by
USDA to establish clearer and more consistent quality control measures.
I expect USDA to develop clear and consistent review standards but not
to change what is meant by an error, nor to change the essential
quality control review process.
The conference report, as I mentioned earlier, saves a billion
dollars. These savings are directly reinvested into nutrition programs.
Because of this, more Americans will have access to healthy food. The
investments also help to improve SNAP employment and training programs,
reinforcing the requirement that states properly assess clients and
assign them to programs appropriate to their needs and skills, and
asking states to build programs with a demonstrated impact on improving
outcomes.
We addressed a long-standing problem--when a SNAP participant is
referred to a training program, and the program determines that the
services they provide are not well-matched to the need of the
participant. States have long been required to do meaningful
assessments in order to properly assign clients. The expanded
investment in case management should improve this capacity. And this
bill emphasized that reassessment is important as well. If a client
fails to be successful in a program it is often the result of an
inability to comply versus a refusal to comply with what's needed.
The bill and report make clear that states must reassess and reassign
the partisan if appropriate. Participants will no longer lose benefits
because states are doing a poor job of assigning them to programs that
don't work for them.
The conference report also includes an improvement to ensure all
states use a standard homeless shelter allowance. When implemented,
this provision must maintain the current flexibly that states have
around documenting the household circumstances. People experiencing
homelessness may now be able to obtain and track receipts or records of
their expenses--that is why a standard allowance is such a useful
policy. It allows states to deduct modest shelter costs for homeless
individuals who have no way of documenting those costs. In addition, a
homeless individual may have costs that exceed the standard allowance
and they must be able to claim the higher deduction. The standard
allowance does not preempt the individuals' rights to deduct actual
costs.
I have long argued that we should be increasing SNAP benefits, which
currently average a mere $1.40 per person, per meal, to help hungry
Americans afford nutritious food. While the bill unfortunately does not
provide any additional increase in SNAP benefits, it does require USDA
to revise the Thrifty Food Plan on a regular basis. Prior revisions to
the Thrifty Food Plan were done in a way that did not increase costs
despite food prices increasing and decreasing time available to prepare
many foods at home. This provision allows for

[[Page H10118]]

future revisions to increase the cost of the plan to more accurately
reflect the reality of food purchasing for most Americans. If the cost
of the plan goes up, we expect the Secretary to adjust the plan.
Mr. Speaker, I hope the Secretary of Agriculture and the president
are tuning into this debate. Right now, they are reportedly working
behind the scenes to circumvent the will of this Congress by
instituting more onerous work requirements administratively. Such a
move, I believe, will likely lead to legal action. And next Congress
when Democrats are in the Majority, we will use every legislative tool
available to block such a move at every turn.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Mitchell).
Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the conference report to H.R.
2, the farm bill.
Our ag community has faced far too much uncertainty and challenges
this past year, and I am glad to see we are finally able to reach a
consensus that sets our country forward on a better path to help
farmers, ranchers, and rural communities throughout America--
communities like mine.

{time} 1230

The bill addresses the urgent needs of rural communities and
agricultural communities, including those in Michigan's 10th
Congressional District.
First, the bill authorizes a huge investment in rural broadband, $350
million a year. As hard as it may be for people to believe, access to
stable, high-speed Internet is not commonplace in rural America. It
hinders economic development. It hinders the economic opportunity. It
hinders them in many ways.
This bill also raises the minimum standards for rural broadband and
targets grants and financial support to communities that are most in
need of assistance.
The farm bill also assists our dairy producers, especially the small
dairy producers like in my community who have faced real challenges
with dairy prices, by expanding affordable coverage for all producers
of all sizes.
It maintains the sugar program urgently needed in my district to
protect American farmers from anticompetitive foreign programs that
dump sugar at artificially low prices.
Lastly, the conference report makes important changes to protect the
financial integrity of the SNAP program and to make it more effective
for recipients. We need to be concerned that we cannot keep people on
SNAP forever who can work. We have to help people return to the labor
market and support themselves, despite what my colleague may believe.
I am pleased we were able to come to a consensus, finally, with the
Senate, and I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of the rule and
the underlying bill.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I just want to say for the Record, in
response to my colleague who just spoke, that the average SNAP
recipient is on the benefit for less than a year, and the majority of
SNAP recipients who can work, in fact, do work.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Kind).
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Massachusetts for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise, first, in opposition to the rule. I think the
gentleman from Massachusetts is correct. Here we are in the waning days
of this session of Congress, and we can't produce a rule that
specifically focused on the farm bill. They had to include, in the late
hours of last night, language that affects our policy as it relates to
Yemen.
I commend my colleague from Massachusetts for his efforts to try to
strip section 2 out of the title of this rule, so we could have a rule
that specifically addresses the farm bill. It wasn't done. We should go
back and make sure that it is and allow that policy to develop in the
debate that we need on the House floor.
Mr. Speaker, I am a representative of one of the largest agriculture
producing districts in the Nation, my rural western Wisconsin district.
I own a farm myself. We rotate corn and beans. We have some beef cattle
in from time to time. No one appreciates the hard work that our family
farmers are going through to stay in business today more than I.
This past year, I had countless meetings with family farmers
throughout my State. I have never seen the palpable fear in their eyes
or heard it in their voices than we have this last year after dealing
with multiple years of low commodity prices. Our family farmers are
being driven out of the business in droves right now.
I appreciate, having been involved in farm policy in the past--and
mind you, we only have a chance to correct farm policy every 5 or 6
years in this place--how difficult it is to put together a coalition to
get a farm bill done.
There are many things in this bill that are commendable. As co-chair
of the House Organic Caucus, we have perhaps the strongest organic
title of any farm bill ever produced. We have good agriculture research
programs in this farm bill, a plus-up in funding for rural broadband
expansion, a new beginning farmer program, and the nutrition title was
protected after what was initially reported out of the House earlier
this year.
But I reluctantly stand today in opposition of the overall bill
because it is not addressing the two evils that are driving our family
farmers out of business today: overproduction and the trade war that
President Trump has created.
In fact, they are doubling down on encouraging policy that will lead
to more production, which will flood the market and drive commodity
prices down even more, by expanding the title 1 subsidy programs.
These are taxpayer subsidies that primarily go to a few, but very
large, agribusinesses. Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of the title 1 subsidies
are going to the 20 percent largest farm operations in the country.
The average person back home would be astounded to see how many
subsidy checks are being mailed to addresses in Washington, D.C., New
York City, Chicago, and San Francisco. Under this bill, they are even
expanding those subsidy opportunities by what is called a multiple
entity rule that was, again, included in the final conference report.
That means no longer just husbands and wives will qualify for
subsidies operating on the farm, but sons and daughters, uncles and
aunts, nieces and nephews, and cousins will be able to qualify now for
these subsidy programs. Not only will that encourage, again, these
large operations to ramp up production, driving prices down, but it is
not fiscally responsible.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Wisconsin an
additional 30 seconds.
Mr. KIND. Mr. Speaker, we are in an era now of huge budget deficits,
yet we are finding an additional $1 billion under the title 1 subsidy
programs, primarily by taking it out of the conservation fund by
reducing funding under the Conservation Stewardship Program from $1.8
billion to $1 billion. That will jeopardize quality water programs
throughout our Nation.
So, unfortunately, this bill is not going to solve the problem, the
crisis that our farmers are facing today, which is driving them out of
business in record numbers: the overproduction in agriculture in our
country and this trade war.

I think we should take a little bit more time and get the policy
right, because we won't have another opportunity for another 5 or 6
years, and that is going to be too late for too many of our family
farmers.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson), who will expound on the importance of this
bill and how it does respond to the plights in which farmers find
themselves today and actually does give certainty to family farmers
around the country.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
his leadership here managing this rule debate and for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, as vice chair of the Agriculture Committee and a
conferee, I rise in strong support of this rule and the underlying
bill, the farm bill of 2018.
Over the past 3 years, the House and Senate Agriculture Committees
comprehensively reviewed the 2014 farm bill through a variety of
hearings to gain feedback from hundreds of farmers, ranchers,
landowners, and stakeholders. This conference report is the

[[Page H10119]]

final product of this process and months of bipartisan, bicameral
compromise.
While there are many important provisions within the bill to
highlight, at its core, the farm bill is about supporting American
agriculture and access to food. It is about supporting our domestic
food supply and our ability to feed, clothe, and provide energy and
fiber for all Americans.
One portion of this bill I am particularly pleased with is the dairy
reforms contained in title 1. These reforms build on the positive
changes made to the dairy margin insurance program in this year's
bipartisan budget agreement.
Our dairy farmers have continued to face difficult times over the
past decade, and I am hopeful that the 2018 farm bill will help to
provide some stability in this sector.
Also of note is a strong conservation title and support for active
land management. This includes reauthorization of the Conservation
Reserve Program, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, and the
Regional Conservation Partnership Program.
Finally, I would like to mention the positive reforms that we made to
SNAP included in this conference report. These changes will help with
program integrity. It will encourage work for able-bodied adults
without dependents and better ensure that SNAP funding and resources
are going to our most vulnerable and those truly in need.
I would like to thank Chairman Conaway, Ranking Member Peterson, and
all the committee staff for their hard work on this conference report
and dedication to agriculture.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this rule and the underlying farm
bill and ask my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on both.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, as I said, some of us who support this
farm bill wanted to support the rule as well. But, again, the
Republicans thought it was important to basically tuck inside this rule
language that turns off fast track for procedures for all Yemen
resolutions through the end of this Congress.
This is the worst humanitarian crisis in the world right now, and we
don't have time to talk about it. In fact, the Republican leadership
takes the extraordinary step of doing everything they can to block
debate. It is unconscionable.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Khanna), who has been a leader on this issue.
Mr. KHANNA. Mr. Speaker, Americans around this country are wondering:
What does a farm bill have to do with the war in Yemen? And the answer
is absolutely nothing.
You wonder why people are frustrated with Congress, why they think
Congress lacks common sense. It is because no one understands why you
would have a vote on a farm bill and you would tie it to a vote on war
and peace in Yemen.
The only reason the leadership is doing this is because they know
that there are dozens of Republicans who will stand with Democrats to
stop the killing in Yemen.
How do they know this? Because Senate Republicans are voting to stop
the killing in Yemen.
I came to Congress because of my grandfather, who inspired me. He
spent 4 years in jail in Gandhi's independence movement. I came to
Congress to say that America should always stand for human rights.
I urge my Republican colleagues to look at the pictures in The New
York Times and Huffington Post: 5-year-old kids, 7-year-old kids
starving to death, a Yemeni child dying every 10 minutes.
They tell us to wait until January. That would mean thousands more
Yemeni kids dead.
I don't think this is a partisan issue. This is an American issue.
Let's stop the killing in Yemen. Let's end the famine. Let's have a
vote in this House so we can stop the civil war in Yemen and save
lives.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, we all look forward to the classified
briefing that we will be a part of tomorrow with the Department of
Defense and others to talk about the situation in Yemen. It seems
premature to make decisions regarding that issue at this present time,
but tomorrow will give us much enlightenment on the issue.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Walden) to get back to the issue at hand, the farm bill.
Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the farm bill, the rule
that allows us to bring this to the floor, and the lives I want to save
in the West and across America, because this bill takes important steps
to help improve the management of our Federal forests by extending
expedited management tools for insect and disease projects in eastern
Oregon and expanding it to hazardous fuels reduction to reduce the
threat of fire and smoke. These are real life and safety issues in our
communities.

The great tragedies we have seen in California this last summer, in
Paradise this last fall, I guess, they are repeating themselves year
after year as climate change and drought and higher temperatures and
the overgrowth in our forests all come together to create catastrophic
wildfires, as pictured here. These are monsters when they fire up. They
kill.
It is unfortunate that the provisions that the House passed as part
of the farm bill were rejected by the Democrats in the Senate. It is
unfortunate because, after these catastrophic fires, we should get in
and be able to remove the fuel load so that the next fire doesn't burn
even more intensely, which is what happens. It is a bigger threat to
the firefighters, because these snags that remain are destined to fall.
This year, we lost a firefighter to a snag that fell.
But they rejected that.
While we are expanding CE authorities, categorical exclusion
authorities, in some forests, the House provision said we should expand
it to all forests so that we can begin to catch up and remove the
excess fuel load from our forests, so that when we do get fire, which
is a natural part of environment, it does not become so destructive
that it burns up entire towns.
Unfortunately, again, Senate Democrats rejected that.
So we are left with a bill that is pretty good. The farm bill
provisions are terrific, as the leader has said.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30
seconds.
Mr. WALDEN. But when we are losing towns, and people and firefighters
in our communities are choked with smoke, we can do better.
Last night, in Medford, Oregon, the Jackson County Commission held a
public meeting to talk about this fire situation we face. A dad from
Jackson County recounted how his daughter with cystic fibrosis had to
move away. He told the audience: ``It's been devastating for us as a
family. We wish our daughter could live with us.'' Then he went on to
say: ``When you can't breathe, nothing else matters.''
So you want to talk about life and safety and health issues in
America, we should have done better with the Senate. But we are doing
okay with this bill, and I intend to support it.

Today I rise in support of the underlying legislation: the 2018 Farm
Bill.
This bill takes steps to help improve the management of our federal
forests by extending expedited management tools for insect and disease
projects in eastern Oregon and expanding it to hazardous fuels
reduction to reduce the threat of fire and smoke.
We've also allowed more local involvement from counties in forest
management projects and extended funding for collaborative forest
projects.
These all help, but it is unfortunate the Senate Democrats rejected
provisions from the House bill that would have greatly reduce the
threat of fires and smoke in all of Oregon.
The ability to clean up the burned dead timber after a fire--
responsibly and where it makes sense--and replant a new, healthy forest
for the next generation? Excluded.
Providing tools that help manage our forests in western and southern
Oregon--where some of Oregon's worst fires have been in recent years?
Excluded, even after devastating fires like the Klondike Fire pictured
here burned more than 175,000 acres.
People in southern Oregon are tired of choking on smoke every year
because of poor management. Recently a dad from Jackson County
recounted how his daughter with cystic fibrosis had to move away saying
``it's been devastating for us a family. We wish our daughter could
live with us.'' But, as he went on to say, ``When you can't breathe,
nothing else matters.''

[[Page H10120]]

You can understand people's disappointment when they see little here
to help their region, while efforts continue to lock up more southern
Oregon forests as more wilderness--a contributor to several large fires
in recent years.
As someone from Medford told me last night, if something doesn't
change, ``We're gonna get killed.''
Meanwhile, in central Oregon, the 5,000 residents of Crooked River
Ranch are worried they will become the next Paradise, California. We've
worked together on a simple public safety bill to make a small
adjustment to a neighboring Wilderness Study Area so critical fire
prevention work can be done to protect the community.
Our bill passed the House unanimously, passed a Senate Committee
unanimously, has broad support from the local community, and is ready
to be voted on today.
Unfortunately, partisan posturing in the Senate is holding this
critical public safety bill hostage over unrelated public lands
measures.
The Senate needs to stop playing with fire and the lives of people of
Crooked River Ranch, and pass my legislation before the end of this
Congress. We do not want to see images of homes turned to ash and lives
destroyed in central Oregon all because politics got in the way of
protecting lives.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), who has been one of the leaders in this
Congress, fighting on behalf of the most vulnerable in our country.
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for
yielding, and I commend my colleagues of the farm bill conference
committee in both the House and the Senate for strengthening the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and rejecting harmful cuts
and onerous hurdles that would have made efforts of struggling families
working to escape poverty more difficult.
This conference agreement very specifically protects SNAP's
categorical eligibility. What a victory we have won by not throwing
235,000 children, including 23,000 in my home State of Wisconsin, off
school lunch, as the House bill proposed.

{time} 1245

It rejected language to impose a lifetime ban on SNAP assistance for
individuals reentering the community from incarceration. It rejected
harsh work requirements and extremely limited time restrictions
proposed in the House bill, which would have left millions of Americans
hungry and vulnerable.
And as a true compromise, Mr. Speaker, nobody got everything they
wanted. For example, we still must work to strengthen access for
seniors and people with disabilities who face difficulties
participating in SNAP. That is a fight that we are going to continue to
fight in the next Congress.
But for the meantime, let's not have the perfect be the enemy of the
good, and let's celebrate that we won't be taking food off the table
for millions this holiday season.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Kansas (Mr. Marshall).
Mr. MARSHALL. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for giving me an
opportunity to speak today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the work of the House and
Senate Agriculture Committees. This afternoon, we will be considering
the conference report of the 2018 farm bill. I am proud to have had the
chance to work alongside two of my great mentors, Senator Pat Roberts
and my House colleague, Chairman Mike Conaway, on this bill.
While the national media might not spend much time reporting on this
one, I want to take a moment and recognize both the importance of this
bill and the work done by the farmers and ranchers it protects.
Mr. Speaker, Kansans sent us to Congress to get a farm bill done, and
I am honored to be here today to say we delivered for Kansans.
I can't hold a townhall or listening session in my district without
hearing about the importance of this bill. Our farmers need certainty
and a responsible safety net that can protect them from the whims of
nature and markets that are far out of control.
Crop prices have dropped 50 percent since the last farm bill, and
that impact is showing up in the bottom lines of producers across the
country. In Kansas, farm bankruptcies are up six times in just 3 years.
I am not here to fear-monger but to share the seriousness of the state
of the agriculture economy.
Mr. Speaker, as I vote here today, I will be thinking of and honoring
my parents and grandparents, knowing this legislation well preserved
the rural way of life from which I was raised and the work ethic that
was taught to me on those family farms.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, again, for those of us who support the farm bill, we
want to be able to support the rule for consideration of the farm bill;
but, unfortunately, the Republican leadership decided to mess things up
by inserting language that would prevent this Congress from debating
the war in Yemen, one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world.
The gentleman from Washington states: Well, we are going to have a
briefing tomorrow. It is not timely.
Well, the bottom line is, in this rule, it not only prohibits us from
debating the war in Yemen with regard to the War Powers Resolution, it
prohibits us from debating it for the rest of the Congress. What if we
learn something tomorrow that prompts action on the other side of the
aisle? You basically have said, ``No. No.''
This is ridiculous.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Doggett), the distinguished ranking member of the Ways and Means
Subcommittee on Tax Policy.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, what cruel irony that this rule, dealing,
in part, with too much food in America, will deny food to millions in
Yemen.
In that remote corner of the world, of which most Americans know very
little, 85,000 children have already died, and another 12 million
people are on starvation's brink. This very day, more children will die
of starvation and disease.
In an eloquent plea this week, Nick Kristof reports on one of them,
an 8-year-old boy who is starving, and his limbs are like sticks. ``He
gazes stolidly ahead, tuning out everything,'' as his ``body focuses
every calorie simply on keeping [his] organs functioning,'' weighing
just over 30 pounds.
United Nations officials have warned that ``this could become the
worst famine'' in the world in a generation. Mr. Kristof rightly
concludes very succinctly. ``The bottom line: Our tax dollars are going
to starve children.''
Suffering is rising; American bombs are still falling. When the Saudi
coalition attacked a schoolbus, killing 40 little children, scrawled on
the remains of the bomb were words that meant ``made in America.''
With today's rule, Trump's enablers here in this House, they tell him
to keep it up, keep supporting the murderous Saudi regime for whom they
can see no evil and hear no evil, even if there is a recording of the
Saudi murder and dismemberment of an American resident available to
listen to.
This rule today prohibits a fair debate and a vote on this floor
because the Republican leaders know that so many members of their own
party, along with Democrats, can no longer stomach these atrocities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from the State of Texas.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, atrocities that are supported with American
tax dollars. They fear that a bipartisan majority of this House would
reject what has become a wretched stain on our Nation.
Last month, this same group of Trump enablers buried consideration of
our resolution to end this atrocity in a bill about gray wolves, and,
today, they bury Yemenis again with a bill about American agricultural
abundance.
As Americans celebrate this special, joyous season of Christmas, the
Trump administration, if we do not act today, will continue to write
the epitaph on the mass graves in Yemen.
Let's reject this rule today and put a stop to this egregious
wrongdoing.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, just let me say: Are the atrocities that are taking
place in Yemen a serious matter? Absolutely, they are.
Do they deserve to be debated and discussed to find solutions on what
we

[[Page H10121]]

can provide? Absolutely. And after tomorrow morning's briefing, if
there is something that we feel that we need to do, we can respond with
quickness, with nimbleness, and we can provide those solutions if we
think there is a necessary solution to be had.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Montana (Mr.
Gianforte).
Mr. GIANFORTE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for
yielding.
This farm bill is a win for Montana's farmers and ranchers who work
the land, feed our country and the world.
As they know too well, weather and markets bring uncertainty. This
farm bill gives our farmers and ranchers a strong safety net that
protects them against the impact of natural disasters and
unpredictable, unfair trade practices of other countries.
Mr. Speaker, this farm bill has Montana's fingerprints on it, and it
addresses many of our key priorities. It protects Montana's sugar beet
growers and processors, and it supports the Agricultural Research
Service, which includes several experiment stations in Montana.
It helps Montanans throughout the State by providing a grant for
rural emergency services, training, and equipment, particularly in our
rural areas. It improves how we manage our forests by empowering county
governments to improve management of neighboring national forest lands.
It also improves rural broadband that is so important to our small
communities.
Mr. Speaker, this farm bill works for Montana. I urge my colleagues
to give America's farmers and ranchers the certainty they need and vote
for the farm bill conference report.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Vermont (Mr. Welch).
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I rise today in
support of the farm bill conference report.
It is absolutely no secret that rural America, our farming
communities, from Franklin County and Addison County in Vermont to the
plains of Kansas and Iowa, to the Central Valley in California, are
facing a crisis. This conference report contains a number of positive
changes that will help in Vermont.
First, nutrition: Thankfully, we are acceding to the Senate position.
We have an economy where profits are up, record incomes for many
people, and increased poverty and nutrition challenges for children.
This makes certain that our kids are going to get the nutrition they
need.
Second, dairy: This farm bill revamps the existing dairy insurance
program, known as Margin Protection, for a more effective and
affordable insurance tool that is going to help our family farmers hang
on. I still believe we need supply management. It is the only
sustainable way to go, but this will help, and no one in Vermont needs
more help and is deserving of more help than our dairy farmers who have
done so much for our State.
Third, maple: Maple syrup is really an important component, including
for our dairy farmers. This bill halts a misguided FDA effort to
require an ``added sugar'' label to pure maple syrup. This is a pretty
stupid FDA regulation. It is now dead, gone forever, and it is really
helpful to our maple industry.
Fourth, organics: This farm bill doubles funding for Federal research
into organic protection methods, improves oversight of the global
organic trade, and funds the organic certification cost-share program.
More organics, better nutrition, more local agriculture, that is a very
good thing.
Fifth, hemp: This legislation legalizes industrial hemp production.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentleman from the State of Vermont.
Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, this legislation legalizes industrial hemp
production, something that Vermonters have been advocating for for
decades. This is going to be a boost for local agriculture in Vermont
and other parts of our country.
And beyond these, there are a number of additional positive changes
contained in the bill. While no one got everything they wanted and many
of the urgent reforms that are needed on the commodity side are not
part of this, this will be a positive contribution to the well-being of
Vermont agriculture.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Arrington).
Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington
State for his leadership and the floor debate.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 2018 farm bill, and I
thank Chairman Conaway, Collin Peterson, and all the members of the
House Agriculture Committee staff for all their hard work. There is no
single piece of legislation more important in my district or rural
communities throughout this Nation than the farm bill, and given the
depressed state of the farm economy, there has never been a more
pressing time to get one passed.
The 2018 farm bill significantly strengthens the agriculture safety
net, which will give our producers the certainty they need to keep
providing a safe and affordable supply of food to our families. It also
makes important investments in rural infrastructure to help sustain
these small towns that are so critical to our vibrant agriculture
economy.
Additionally, 18 of the 21 House-passed reforms to the Food Stamp
program are reflected in the final report, which strengthen the
program's integrity, provide needed oversight, and reduce waste, fraud,
and abuse.
Finally, this farm bill stewards the American taxpayer monies in a
fiscally responsible way by having a farm bill that is budget neutral.
Mr. Speaker, agriculture and traditional American values go hand in
hand. Farmers and ranchers represent more than food and fiber. They
symbolize a culture of faith, hard work, and independence, which has
always been at the heart of America's greatness.
The 2018 farm bill will not only support our producers and families
living in rural America, it will provide security and peace of mind to
all Americans by maintaining our ability to feed and clothe our own
people, or agriculture independence.
I urge my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to support our farmers and
ranchers, to support rural America, to support agriculture independence
in these United States, and I urge them to vote ``yes'' for the 2018
farm bill.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, again, I am here to support the farm bill.
Unfortunately, my Republican friends made the rule controversial.
But another reason to support the farm bill, in addition to the
strong nutrition title for those who are vulnerable here in the United
States, the conference report also provides strong support for
international food assistance programs, like Food for Peace, Food for
Progress in McGovern-Dole, which is a program that I helped write
several years ago, which provides food to some of the most vulnerable
and poor children in the world in school settings.

{time} 1300

So this farm bill, in addition to helping our farmers, in addition to
providing food security for people here in the United States, I think,
also contributes to our national security around the world. And I point
that out so my colleagues understand that this farm bill covers a
whole, wide range of areas.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr.
Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge that Ranking Member Collin
Peterson on the committee has done a good job balancing many special
interests that are profoundly affected by the farm bill; solving a
delicate series of political problems; and holding firm, protecting
vital nutrition programs and things that I care about, that I have been
working on for years, like hemp. But unfortunately, the bill is not
addressing the crisis in American agriculture.
I published a book earlier this year. The Fight for Food had an
alternative farm bill. Some of the provisions have found their way into
it. But this bill does not affect the crisis that we are facing in
American agriculture; having small and medium-sized producers

[[Page H10122]]

being squeezed out; the battle in terms of the chemical warfare in
parts of America with Monsanto products that are threatening
agriculture production; and we are actually seeing violence break out
in terms of being unable to deal with this.
We have a profound problem in terms of the environmental context that
farmers face. Only one in four farmers are going to get access to the
environmental programs they need.
Now, there are some improvements in there, things I have been working
on for years, but the fundamental problem, by flatlining it, we are not
meeting the needs and, in fact, it is going to represent a reduction in
absolute terms.
It does nothing to address the crisis that agriculture is facing
because of climate change and carbon pollution. We have a crop
insurance program that doesn't work for most farmers and ranchers, and
it is grotesquely expensive.
We have had efforts in Congress, committees, outside experts, that
point to ways we can rein in these unjustified subsidies, save money,
and have a program that works for most farmers and ranchers. But sadly,
that will have to wait for another day.
We are not investing in the future. We are not investing in farmers
and ranchers who need the help the most, accelerating research,
accelerating environmental programs, accelerating and investing more in
beginning farmers.
Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough to be able to solve the political
problem, to solve the bill, and prevent the worst abuses that were
being proposed. We need a farm and food bill for Americans who eat, who
pay taxes, and for farmers and ranchers who want to practice on a
sustainable basis on the smaller scale, not massive agricultural
industrial production.
This bill is a missed opportunity. And even though it has got some
good things in it, I am going to vote against it because it is not
nearly good enough.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just like to say that my farmers and ranchers in the State of
Washington, as well as we have heard earlier from the State of Oregon,
do support the strengthening of the provisions in this bill to make
sure that the farm economy can continue on in as strong a manner as
possible, so there is widespread support in agricultural country around
the Nation for this farm bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the great State
of Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I was blessed to be a walk-on football
player for the University of Arkansas and participate on two 10-win
conference championship teams.
Coach Ken Hatfield's triple option offense averaged over 300 yards
per game, but it came in small chunks that resulted in first downs,
that resulted in touchdowns, and eventually led to victories.
Mr. Speaker, farm incomes are down across the board. The West is
consumed by wildfires. China and other nations are taking advantage of
unfair trade laws.
What rural America needs is a first down. Our farmers and ranchers
need to see Congress move the ball forward and provide their families
the protection and relief they need during these hard times.
This conference report is not a Hail Mary. It does not contain
everything that I would like to see in a farm bill, but it does move
the ball forward. It is progress that our farmers need right now.
I am disappointed that Senate Democrats blocked many needed forest
management provisions as we continue to sift through the ashes of
catastrophic wildfires.
However, this conference report strengthens the farm safety net and
provides certainty to our farmers. It does address some forest
management issues. It provides millions of dollars in new funding to
combat a range of issues facing rural America, from funding to
eradicate feral hogs, to address the opioid crisis, and to expand rural
broadband.
This conference report moves farm policy in the right direction. I
urge the adoption of the rule for this farm bill.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Tonko).
Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this legislation
and, as a farm bill conferee, I would like to pass along my sincere
thanks to the Members and staff who worked diligently to put together a
good final product for the American people.
This farm bill strikes the right balance by providing certainty to
our hardworking farmers, while protecting our most vulnerable by
rejecting the harsh SNAP cuts that were contained in the original House
Republican bill, a very meaningful restoral.
In fact, today, I was reminded, as I volunteered at the Capital Area
Food Bank, that they serve 500,000 individuals who are food insecure
annually in the Maryland, D.C., and Virginia area.
I am particularly pleased with provisions that will benefit New
York's dairy farmers and producers of specialty crops, which together
form the backbone of the agricultural economy in my 20th Congressional
District and across upstate New York.
This farm bill also recognizes the importance of expanding broadband
access to the American people and, particularly, to those who don't
have access to a high-speed connection.
I am disappointed, however, that we were unable to agree on stronger
language to ensure Federal money is spent wisely. Investments in
broadband internet infrastructure have the greatest impact on American
lives and should be dealt with in a very resourceful way.
Specifically, I argued for more interagency coordination. The Federal
Communications Commission, the Department of Agriculture, and the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration, need to
coordinate with each other, not merely consult, when funding critical
broadband internet infrastructure.
When it comes to broadband internet spending, this bill provides
limited investments and, because of that, we have a duty to stretch
every dollar as far as possible.
It is unfortunate that this concept was not included in the farm
bill, but I plan to continue advocating for legislation that would
require greater coordination amongst Federal agencies as we build out
broadband. I was proud to work on a bipartisan basis to provide
coordination language in the ACCESS BROADBAND Act which has already
passed the House and is now being considered in the Senate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Poe of Texas). The time of the gentleman
has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. TONKO. I will continue working with my colleagues to improve
coordination of Federal broadband programs so we can increase
efficiency and eliminate duplicative or wasteful efforts.
Finally, while I am grateful for the overall outcome of the
legislation, as a conferee representing the views of the Energy and
Commerce Committee, I was disappointed that on many issues in this
legislation involving committee jurisdiction, the committee was not
properly consulted. It is my hope that, in the future, all conferees
will be allowed greater involvement and their voices will be heard,
especially on issues that cross committee lines.

Again, I would urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis).
Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman
Conaway and my fellow conferees on reaching a conference agreement that
benefits all of agriculture. This bill maintains programs critical for
central Illinois farmers, strengthens agricultural research, and
improves protection for organic products.
First and foremost, this bill ensures crop insurance remains a vital
risk management tool for farmers. It also ensures farmers have a choice
between two different commodity protection programs, something I fought
for in the 2014 farm bill, and I am glad we were successful again in
this farm bill.
Consumer demand for organic products continues to increase, and this
bill makes positive changes to support organic products by placing
higher scrutiny on organic imports, helping farmers who seek organic
certification, and increasing funding for organic research.

[[Page H10123]]

The bill also strengthens agricultural research by including my bill
to ensure USDA's research focuses on agriculture's most-needed
priorities and helps universities like the University of Illinois,
Illinois State University, and Southern Illinois University at
Edwardsville, in my district, continue important research.
Additionally, ensuring rural communities have access to broadband is
an important part of this bill. Not only do we invest in expanding
broadband, we ensure rural communities have access to broadband that
will now meet minimum standards and requirements for today's
technological age.
We have written a strong bill for our farmers but, Mr. Speaker, 80
percent of this farm bill is related to SNAP, and that cannot be
ignored. We missed a golden opportunity to fill in the cracks of our
existing workforce development programs to get millions of families the
opportunity to get educational benefits to get them out of poverty with
the jobs that we know are available in this community.
I am disappointed we weren't successful, but I look forward to
supporting this bill.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), the ranking member of the House
Foreign Affairs Committee.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the rule
because, once again, the majority is stifling debate on a critical
national security issue.
The gentleman from California (Mr. Khanna) has tried again and again
to bring a debate forward in this body about where and how the United
States military is engaged around the world. This is Congress'
responsibility, and not only has the majority abdicated that
responsibility, they won't even let us talk about it.
Resolutions dealing with war powers have special privileges in
Congress because these are such grave issues. That is how Congress
wrote the law. The other body is grappling with this problem, but the
majority in this body wants to pretend these issues just don't exist,
and they strip those privileges away with this rule.
That is wrong. It is a betrayal of the men and women who serve this
country in uniform. We won't ignore these issues in the next Congress.
We should defeat this rule and have a real debate.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Our military is not involved in hostilities surrounding the Yemeni
civil war. As I said, tomorrow we are having a briefing that if we
learn things, we can respond with urgency and nimbleness.
To speak on this issue further, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Sessions), the chairman of the Rules Committee.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the distinguished gentleman,
Mr. Newhouse, for giving me the time.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that, from time to time, the Rules Committee
does need to take the authority and the responsibility that they have,
and the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts will soon learn this
next year as I assume he will assume that role as the new chairman of
the Rules Committee.
In fact, the arguments that are being made today relate to the
substance of the bill. The bill that is at hand is very important, and
that is the farm bill, the farm bill that we know has a 10-year window,
that is net neutral, that protects the balances that we have talked
about.
But it updates not only the opportunities for people who were in
rural areas to update that policy, but it reinvigorates our
establishment by this House, and the United States Senate, that has
already handled this bill, and the President, to reassert that which
they believe is important; and that is, the men and women who live in
the rural areas, the men and women who get up at 4 o'clock in the
morning; men and women who are there protecting the grass roots, the
soil, the topsoil of this country. We need them to serve not only this
Nation but the world.
It is true that hemp was added. Mr. Comer, who is a Member of
Congress from Kentucky, last year began engaging me on this issue. We
agreed that we would put it in. It is an important agricultural product
and will aid and help very much so, not only a marketplace, but farmers
in Kentucky and other places.

{time} 1315

As it relates to the Authorization for Use of Military Force, AUMF, I
would like to tell my colleagues that, in fact, I did make that
decision that we would include by not allowing, not debate, but a vote
that would take place on this floor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 10 seconds to the
gentleman from Texas.
Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, so what we are going to do is, we are
going to have a classified briefing tomorrow that will further allow
debate based upon the facts of the case. Mr. Speaker, I assure you that
we will be here all next week, and if the facts of the case warrant, we
will address the issue then.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining
on my side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 3\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. I think
I am the final speaker here, so I will let the Republicans go ahead.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the good gentleman from
Massachusetts.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr.
King).
Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to speak out on behalf of the Fourth
Congressional District of Iowa, which I claim is the number one
agriculture-producing congressional district in all of America, and to
support this underlying bill, which does a number of good things.
I have heard that it provides certainty. When you deal with
agriculture, I have some apprehension about that, Mr. Speaker, because
certainty in agriculture seems to be an oxymoron to me. But it does
provide predictability, and we owe that to our producers, in
particular.
So it does a number of good things.
It sets up the ARC payments so that they will be identified to the
physical location of the farm. That corrects an inequity.
It has $255 million a year in there for MAP, market access, for
foreign market development, for technical assistance, and the Emerging
Markets Program.
It addresses FMD beyond foreign market developments in another way,
and that establishes a vaccine bank for foot and mouth disease, which
we anticipate could well be something that could befell the United
States. We need to be ready.
I encourage also that we develop a GMO vaccine for FMD, so we can
produce it in this country in sufficient quantities. This bill allows
for that to be developed.
Then it also increases the loan guarantees along the line, especially
for our young producers, up to $1.75 million, and the direct loans to
$400,000, and the direct farm ownership loans to $600,000. Those are
all good things.
I am really happy about the piece that goes in for Iowa State genome
and phenome.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address this.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, if I can inquire of the gentleman from
Washington whether he has any additional speakers.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I have a couple more speakers, yes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, we have a lot of interest in this issue,
as you can tell.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr.
Crawford).
Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the opportunity
to speak here. I will just speak off-the-cuff. My staff wrote me a
speech, but I have only 30 seconds to get this done.
Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what farmers across my district say.
They say that if you can get the Federal Government to relieve the
regulatory burden and open up markets, we can farm in this country. We
can succeed.
Mother Nature is a treacherous business partner, and so the Federal
Government needs to do all that it can to

[[Page H10124]]

make sure that we are mitigating those uncertainties inflicted by
Mother Nature that we have seen across the country this year, certainly
in my district and other parts of the country.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to lend my support to this effort.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Conaway for his exemplary leadership.
To all those who supported this effort on the House and Senate side, I
thank them so much.
Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of the underlying bill.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I know that the gentleman has additional
speakers over there. Would it be appropriate to ask unanimous consent
to give the gentleman an additional 2 minutes? I have 3\1/2\, but I am
going to use that, but could we give them an additional 2 minutes?
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, there is no objection from this side of
the aisle.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts may yield 2
minutes to the majority.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I don't want to yield 2 minutes. I ask
unanimous consent for the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse) to
have an additional 2 minutes. If there is no objection, is that----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot entertain that unanimous
consent request.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Newhouse) to control.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I can't tell you how much gratitude I feel
to the gentleman from Massachusetts for leading in a bipartisan manner.
I appreciate that very much.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Washington
(Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), my good colleague
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Speaker, the American farmer is the
greatest antipoverty program that the world has ever seen. Certainly in
my district, agriculture is a way of life. It is our number one
industry, and getting this farm bill done this year is a top priority
for eastern Washington.
I am proud that this legislation includes important priorities around
crop insurance, expanding the Market Access Program, and ensuring
agriculture research for cutting-edge products that is done at
Washington State University and many others.
As I talk with farmers all around eastern Washington, they often
stress the importance of these priorities.
I was grateful to have the Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue,
visit and talk with the farmers of eastern Washington, as well as the
chairman of the committee, Michael Conaway, come to eastern Washington.
This legislation also includes important provisions for forestry:
better forest management on forests like the Colville National Forest,
which is in my district; expanding the Good Neighbor Authority; fixing
fire borrowing. This is all so important to healthy forests.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the farm bill
conference report.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman have any more speakers?
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman very much for being
gracious with his time, but, no, I have no more speakers.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, do I have 2\1/2\ minutes remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 2\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an
amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 7264, a continuing resolution to
fund the remainder of the government and extend the National Flood
Insurance Program, the Violence Against Women Act, and the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families Act until September 30.
I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the
Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I hope people will vote ``no'' on the
previous question so we can debate this and vote on keeping our
government open. But I would just close by again saying to my
colleagues that this farm bill is not a great bill, but it is a good
bill. It is the result of bipartisan negotiations at a conference
committee that produced something that I think both Democrats and
Republicans can come together and support.
I am supporting this bill because it is good on the nutrition title.
As you know, I have spent a lot of time in this Chamber talking about
the issues of hunger and food insecurity in this country.
There are 40 million Americans who don't have enough to eat, who are
hungry, and this is in the richest and most powerful country in the
world. I am ashamed of that fact. Every Member of this House should be
ashamed of that fact.
Hunger is a political condition. We can fix it, if we had the
political will.
This farm bill is not as robust as I would like it to be under the
nutrition title, but it does no harm. It doesn't increase hunger. It
doesn't throw people off of SNAP. It doesn't make hunger worse in this
country. It is deserving of bipartisan support, so I hope all of my
Democratic colleagues will vote in favor of this farm bill.
Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank all those who came together to
construct this compromise. It is a much, much better product than what
came out of this House, and this is a vote that we can be proud of. I
hope that everybody will support it.
Finally, I regretfully have to say I urge my colleagues to vote
against the rule, because the Republicans couldn't help themselves and
had to insert this Yemen issue into this rule.
This issue has been going on for years. This is not a new phenomenon,
what is happening in Yemen. It is a tragedy that has gone on for years.
We know it is happening. We know it is long time past since we should
act.
Mr. Speaker, we should defeat the rule, have another rule that is
just on the farm bill, and we ought to be debating this issue of Yemen.
Mr. Speaker, vote ``no'' on the previous question, vote ``no'' on the
rule, and vote ``yes'' on the farm bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Again, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his yielding extra
time to us to allow many of our Members to speak on this important
issue. I look forward to reciprocating at some point in the future.
Mr. Speaker, as you heard, there are a lot of wins in this bill for
rural America, especially in these extremely difficult economic times
in farm country around the United States. The 2018 farm bill will help
provide certainty for the American farmer and for the rural communities
that they support.
Families who work every day to put food on our tables deserve our
support.
Before I yield back, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter
that was led by the American Farm Bureau that has no fewer than 489
organizations around the country, every State in the union, supporting
H.R. 2.

December 12, 2018.
The Honorable,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative: The undersigned organizations would
like to express our support for H.R. 2, the Agriculture
Improvement Act of 2018, and urge its adoption.
This farm bill supports farmers and ranchers, protects crop
insurance and conservation programs, invests in efforts to
expand foreign markets, protects animal health and
prioritizes agricultural research and rural development. This
bill is critical to providing all stakeholders, including
farmers, ranchers and consumers, with consistent policy for
the next five years as well as the sectors and industries
that rely on them.
American rural economies are struggling in the face of
successive years of declining prices, high and rising foreign
tariffs and subsidies, and the unpredictability of Mother
Nature. This farm bill helps address these and countless
other issues to ensure farmers, ranchers, and rural America
can survive these difficult times.
Your support is key to enacting this important piece of
legislation. We respectfully urge you to vote ``yes'' on H.R.
2.
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics; Ag New Mexico, Farm
Credit Services, ACA; AgCarolina Farm Credit, ACA; AgChoice
Farm Credit, ACA; AgCountry Farm Credit Services, ACA;
AgCredit, ACA; AgFirst Farm Credit Bank; AgGeorgia Farm
Credit, ACA; AgHeritage Farm Credit Services, ACA;

[[Page H10125]]

AgPreference, ACA; AgriBank, FCB; Agricultural Council of
Arkansas; AgSouth Farm Credit, ACA; AgTexas Farm Credit
Services; AgVantis, Inc.; Alabama Ag Credit, ACA.
Alabama Cotton Commission; Alabama Farm Credit, ACA;
Alabama Farmers Federation; Alabama Independent Insurance
Agents Association; Alabama Peanut Producers Association;
Alaska Farm Bureau, Inc.; Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC;
Amcot; American AgCredit, ACA; American Agri-Women; American
Association of Crop Insurers; American Bankers Association;
American Beekeeping Federation; American Beverage
Association; American Cotton Shippers Association.
American Crystal Sugar Company; American Farm Bureau
Federation; American Farmland Trust; American Malting Barley
Association; American Pulse Association; American Seed Trade
Association; American Sheep Industry; American Society of
Agronomy; American Society of Animal Science; American
Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers; American
Soybean Association; American Sugar Alliance; American Sugar
Cane League; American Sugarbeet Growers Association; American
Veterinary Medical Association.
American Water Works Association; American Wood Council;
Anderson's Maple Syrup, Inc.; Animal Health Institute;
ArborOne Farm Credit; ArborOne, ACA; Arizona Cotton Growers
Association; Arizona Farm Bureau Federation; Arkansas
Cattlemen's Association; Arkansas Community Bankers; Arkansas
Cotton Warehouse Association; Arkansas Farm Bureau; Arkansas
Forestry Association; Arkansas Rice Federation; Association
of American Universities.
Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges;
Association of Equipment Manufacturers; Bascom Maple Farms,
Inc.; Big I New Jersey; Big I New York; Biotechnology
Innovation Organization; Blackland Cotton and Grain
Producers, Inc.; Calcot, LTD; California Association of Wheat
Growers; California Cotton Ginners and Growers Association;
California Farm Bureau Federation; Cape Fear Farm Credit,
ACA; Capital Farm Credit, ACA; Carolina Farm Credit, ACA;
Catfish Farmers of Arkansas; Central Kentucky, ACA.
Central Texas Farm Credit, ACA; Cherry Marketing Institute;
Clemson University Extension; CoBank, ACB; College of
Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences at the
University of Illinois; Colonial Farm Credit, ACA; Colorado
Association of Wheat Growers; Colorado Corn Growers
Association; Colorado Farm Bureau; Colorado Sorghum
Association; Community Bankers Association of Georgia;
Community Bankers Association of Illinois; Community Bankers
Association of Kansas; Community Bankers Association of Ohio;
Community Bankers of Michigan; Compeer Financial, ACA.
Connecticut Farm Bureau Association; Corn Growers of North
Carolina; Corn Refiners Association; Cotton and Grain
Producers of Lower Rio Grande Valley; Cotton Growers
Cooperative; Cotton Growers Warehouse Association; Cotton
Producers of Missouri; Cotton Warehouse Association of
America; Cottonseed and Feed Association; Crop Insurance and
Reinsurance Bureau; Crop Insurance Professionals Association;
Crop Science Society of America; Dairy Farmers of America-
Michigan; Delaware Farm Bureau; Delta Agricultural Credit
Association; Delta Council.
Ducks Unlimited; Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative;
Entomological Society of America; Farm Credit Bank of Texas;
Farm Credit Council; Farm Credit East, ACA; Farm Credit
Illinois, ACA; Farm Credit Mid-America, ACA; Farm Credit
Midsouth, ACA; Farm Credit of Central Florida, ACA; Farm
Credit of Enid, ACA; Farm Credit of Florida, ACA; Farm Credit
of New Mexico, ACA; Farm Credit of Northwest Florida, ACA;
Farm Credit of Southern Colorado, ACA.
Farm Credit of the Virginias, ACA; Farm Credit of Western
Kansas, ACA; Farm Credit of Western Oklahoma, ACA; Farm
Credit Services of America, ACA; Farm Credit Services of
Colusa-Glenn, ACA; Farm Credit Services of Hawaii, ACA; Farm
Credit Services of Mandan, ACA; Farm Credit Services of North
Dakota, ACA; Farm Credit Services of Western Arkansas, ACA;
Farm Credit Southeast Missouri, ACA; Farm Journal Foundation;
FCS Financial, ACA; First South Farm Credit, ACA; Florida
Association of Insurance Agents; Florida Cattlemen's
Association.
Florida Citrus Mutual; Florida Farm Bureau Federation;
Florida Peanut Producers Association; Florida Sugar Cane
League; Food Producers of Idaho; Fresno-Madera Farm Credit,
ACA; Frontier Farm Credit, ACA; Georgia Agribusiness Council;
Georgia Bankers Association; Georgia Cattlemen's Association;
Georgia Cotton Commission; Georgia Farm Bureau; Georgia
Forestry Association; Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers
Association; Georgia Peanut Commission.
Georgia Poultry Federation; Georgia/Florida Soybean
Associations; Glades Crop Care, Inc.; Global Cold Chain
Alliance; Golden State Farm Credit, ACA; Great Plains Canola
Association; GreenStone Farm Credit Services, ACA; Harvest
Land Co-op; Heritage Land Bank, ACA; High Plains Farm Credit,
ACA; Hill Country Conservancy; Idaho AgCredit, ACA; Idaho
Alfalfa/Clover Seed Commission; Idaho Alfalfa/Clover Seed
Growers Association; Idaho Association of Soil Conservation
Districts.
Idaho Cooperative Council, Inc.; Idaho Dairymen's
Association; Idaho Farm Bureau Federation; Idaho Grain
Producers Association; Idaho Hay & Forage Association; Idaho
Honey Industry Association; Idaho Oilseed Commission; Idaho
Onion Growers' Association; Idaho Weed Control Association;
Illinois Farm Bureau; Illinois Soybean Growers; Independent
Bankers Association of New York State; Independent Bankers
Association of Texas; Independent Bankers of Colorado;
Independent Banks of South Carolina.
Independent Community Bankers Association of New Mexico;
Independent Community Bankers of America; Independent
Community Bankers of Minnesota; Independent Community Bankers
of South Dakota; Independent Community Banks of North Dakota;
Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America;
Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of Louisiana;
Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of South Carolina;
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of Arizona;
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California;
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of Idaho;
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of Oregon;
Independent Insurance Agents Association of Montana;
Independent Insurance Agents of Arkansas; Independent
Insurance Agents of Connecticut.
Independent Insurance Agents of Illinois; Independent
Insurance Agents of Indiana; Independent Insurance Iowa;
Independent Insurance Agents of Maryland; Independent
Insurance Agents of Mississippi; Independent Insurance Agents
of Nebraska; Independent Insurance Agents of New Mexico;
Independent Insurance Agents of North Dakota; Independent
Insurance Agents of Rhode Island; Independent Insurance
Agents of South Dakota; Independent Insurance Agents of
Virginia; Independent Insurance Agents of Wisconsin; Indiana
Bankers Association; Indiana Corn Growers Association;
Indiana Farm Bureau.
Indiana Soybean Alliance; Insurance Agents & Brokers of
Delaware; Insurance Agents & Brokers of Pennsylvania;
International Dairy Foods Association; International Maple
Syrup Institute; Iowa Farm Bureau Federation; Iowa Soybean
Association; IR-4 Project; Kansas Association of Wheat
Growers; Kansas Cotton Association; Kansas Farm Bureau;
Kansas Grain Sorghum Producers Association; Kansas Soybean
Association; Kansas State University; Kentucky Cattlemen's
Associations.
Kentucky Corn Growers Association; Kentucky Dairy
Development Council; Kentucky Farm Bureau; Kentucky Forage
and Grassland Council; Kentucky Pork Producers Association;
Kentucky Poultry Federation; Kentucky Sheep and Goat
Association; Kentucky Small Grain Growers Association;
Kentucky Soybean Association; Kentucky Woodland Owners
Association; Land O'Lakes, Inc.; Legacy Ag Credit, ACA;
Livestock Marketing Association; Lone Star, ACA; Louisiana
Cotton and Grain Associations.
Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation; Louisiana Independent
Rice Producers Association; Louisiana Independent Warehouse
Association; Louisiana Land Bank, ACA; MACMA Processing Apple
Growers; MACMA Processing Asparagus Growers; Maine Farm
Bureau; Maine Insurance Agents Association; Maine Maple
Products, Inc.; Maple Syrup Producers Association of
Connecticut; Maryland Farm Bureau; Massachusetts Association
of Insurance Agents; MBG Marketing, The Blueberry People;
Metro Detroit Flower Growers Association; Michigan Ag
Commodities.
Michigan Allied Poultry Industries; Michigan Apple
Association; Michigan Aquaculture Association; Michigan
Asparagus Research Committee; Michigan Association of
Insurance Agents; Michigan Bean Commission; Michigan
Cattlemen's Association; Michigan Christmas Tree Association;
Michigan Corn Growers Association; Michigan Equine
Partnership; Michigan Farm Bureau; Michigan Food Processors
Association; Michigan Great Lakes International; Michigan
Greenhouse Growers Council; Michigan Milk Producers
Association.
Michigan Nursery Lawn and Landscape Association; Michigan
Pork Producers Association; Michigan Sheep Producers
Association; Michigan Soybean Association; Michigan State
University, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources;
Michigan Sugar Company; Michigan Vegetable Council;
MidAtlantic Farm Credit, ACA; Mid-Atlantic Soybean
Association; Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative; Minnesota
Association of Wheat Growers; Minnesota Barley Growers
Association; Minnesota Corn Growers Association; Minnesota
Farm Bureau; Minnesota Soybean Growers Association.
Mississippi Beekeepers Association; Mississippi Cattlemen's
Association; Mississippi Corn Growers Association;
Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation; Mississippi Land Bank,
ACA; Mississippi Peanut Growers Association; Mississippi
Poultry Association; Mississippi Rice Council; Mississippi
Soybean Association; Missouri Association of Insurance
Agents; Missouri Farm Bureau; Missouri Independent Bankers
Association; Missouri Soybean Association; Montana
Association of Wheat Growers; Montana Farm Bureau Federation.
National All-Jersey Inc; National Association for the
Advancement of Animal Science; National Association of
Conservation Districts; National Association of Mutual
Insurance Companies; National Association of Plant Breeders;
National Association of Professional Insurance Agents;
National Association of State Departments of Agriculture;
National Association of Wheat Growers; National Barley
Growers Association; National

[[Page H10126]]

Barley Improvement Committee; National Bobwhite Conservation
Initiative; National Coalition for Food and Agricultural
Research; National Corn Growers Association; National Cotton
Council.
National Cotton Ginners Association; National Cottonseed
Products Association; National Council of Farmer
Cooperatives; National Council of Textile Organizations;
National Crop Insurance Services; National Farmers Union;
National Grain and Feed Association; National Milk Producers
Federation; National Oilseed Processors Association; National
Onion Association; National Peach Council; National Pork
Producers Council; National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association; National Rural Lenders; National Sorghum
Producers.
National Sunflower Association; Nebraska Farm Bureau
Federation; Nebraska Independent Community Bankers; Nebraska
Soybean Association; Nebraska Wheat Growers Association; New
Hampshire Farm Bureau; New Hampshire Maple Producers
Association; New Jersey Farm Bureau; New Mexico Sorghum
Association; New York Corn and Soybean Growers Association;
New York Farm Bureau; Nezperce Prairie Grass Growers
Association; Non-Land-Grant Agriculture and Renewable
Resources Universities; North Carolina Agribusiness Council,
Inc.; North Carolina Cattlemen's Association.
North Carolina Cotton Producers Association; North Carolina
Farm Bureau; North Carolina Peanut Growers Association; North
Carolina Pork Council; North Carolina Small Grain Growers
Association; North Carolina Soybean Producers Association;
North Carolina State University, College of Agriculture and
Life Sciences; North Carolina Sweet Potato Commission; North
Dakota Farm Bureau; North Dakota Grain Growers Association;
North Dakota Soybean Growers Association; Northeast Dairy
Farmers Cooperatives; Northern Canola Growers Association;
Northern Pulse Growers Association; Northwest Farm Credit
Services, ACA.
Ohio Corn and Wheat Association; Ohio Farm Bureau
Federation; Ohio Insurance Agents Association; Ohio Soybean
Association; Oklahoma AgCredit, ACA; Oklahoma Cotton Council;
Oklahoma Farm Bureau; Oklahoma Sorghum Association; Oklahoma
Wheat Growers Association; Oregon Bankers Association; Oregon
Farm Bureau Federation; Oregon Wheat Growers League; Pacific
Northwest Canola Association; Palmetto AgriBusiness Council;
Panhandle Peanut Growers Association; Penn State University.
Pennsylvania Farm Bureau; Pheasants Forever; Plains Cotton
Cooperative Association; Plains Cotton Growers, Inc.; Plains
Land Bank, FLCA; Pollinator Partnership; Potato Growers of
Michigan; Prairie Water User Group; Premier Farm Credit, ACA;
Produce Marketing Association; Puerto Rico Farm Credit, ACA;
Purdue University; Quail Forever; Rain and Hail Insurance
Society; Reinsurance Association of America.
Rhode Island Farm Bureau Federation; Rice Producers of
California; Rio Grande Valley Sugar Growers; River Valley
AgCredit, ACA; Rochester Institute of Technology; Rolling
Plains Cotton Growers, Inc.; Rural Community Insurance
Services; San Joaquin Valley Quality Cotton Growers
Association; Select Milk Producers, Inc.; Sidney Sugars
Incorporated; Society of American Florists; Soil Science
Society of America; South Carolina Cotton Board; South
Carolina Farm Bureau; South Carolina Peach Council.
South Dakota Farm Bureau; South Dakota Wheat Incorporated;
South East Dairy Farmers Association; South Texas Cotton and
Grain Association; Southeastern Lumber Manufacturers
Association; Southern AgCredit, ACA; Southern Association of
Agricultural Experiment Station Directors; Southern Cotton
Growers, Inc.; Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Cooperative;
Southern Peanut Farmers Federation; Southern Rolling Plains
Cotton Growers Association; Southwest Council of
Agribusiness; Southwest Georgia Farm Credit, ACA; Spreckels
Sugar Company; St. Lawrence Cotton Growers Association.
Staplcotn Coop Association; Supporters of Agricultural
Research (SoAR) Foundation; Sustainable Food Policy Alliance;
Tennessee Farm Bureau Federation; Texas Agricultural
Cooperative Council; Texas Agricultural Irrigation
Association; Texas Cattle Feeders Association; Texas Citrus
Mutual; Texas Corn Producers Association; Texas Farm Bureau;
Texas Farm Credit Services; Texas Grain and Feed Association;
Texas Grain Sorghum Association; Texas Pecan Growers
Association; Texas Rice Council.
Texas Rice Producers Legislative Group; Texas Seed Trade
Association; Texas Soybean Association; Texas Wheat Producers
Association; The Fertilizer Institute; The Property Casualty
Insurers Association of America; U.S. Apple Association; U.S.
Pea and Lentil Trade Association; United Dairymen of Arizona;
United Fresh Produce Association; United Onions USA, Inc.;
University of Tennessee at Martin College of Agriculture and
Applied Sciences; US Beet Sugar Association; US Canola
Association; US Dry Bean Council.
US Rice Producers Association; US Sweet Potato Council; USA
Dry Pea & Lentil Council; USA Rice; Vermont Farm Bureau;
Vermont Insurance Agents Association; Virginia Agribusiness
Council; Virginia Cotton Growers Association; Virginia Farm
Bureau; Virginia Soybean Association; Washington Association
of Wheat Growers; Washington Farm Bureau; Washington State
Potato Commission; Washington State Sheep Producers;
Washington State University; Washington State University,
CAHNRS; Washington State University, College of Veterinary
Medicine.
Weed Science Society of America; Western AgCredit, ACA;
Western Equipment Dealers Association; Western Growers;
Western Peanut Growers Association; Western Pulse Growers
Association; Western Sugar Cooperative; Western United
Dairymen; Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation; Wisconsin Maple
Syrup Producers Association; Wisconsin Soybean Association;
Women Involved in Farm Economics; Wyoming Sugar Company, LLC;
Wyoming Wheat Growers Association; Yankee Farm Credit, ACA;
Yosemite Farm Credit, ACA; Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association;
Zurich North America.

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the
rule and the conference report to accompany H.R. 2, the Agriculture and
Nutrition Act
The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

An Amendment to H. Res. 1176 Offered by Mr. McGovern

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 VIII, declare
the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on
the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R.
7264) making further additional continuing appropriations for
fiscal year 2019, 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 Appropriations. 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. Cause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the
consideration of H.R. 7264.
____

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

[[Page H10127]]

[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. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I
move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. 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:
Adoption of the resolution, if ordered; and
Agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220,
nays 191, not voting 21, as follows:

[Roll No. 431]

YEAS--220

Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Balderson
Banks (IN)
Barr
Barton
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Blum
Bost
Brady (TX)
Brat
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Cheney
Cloud
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
Denham
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Dunn
Emmer
Estes (KS)
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
Hensarling
Hern
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Holding
Hollingsworth
Hudson
Huizenga
Hultgren
Hurd
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
Labrador
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Lesko
Lewis (MN)
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Marshall
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Messer
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Posey
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney, Francis
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce (CA)
Russell
Rutherford
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smucker
Stefanik
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

NAYS--191

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
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Engel
Eshoo
Espaillat
Esty (CT)
Evans
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Heck
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (MI)
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kihuen
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan, Ben Ray
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Halleran
O'Rourke
Pallone
Panetta
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rosen
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Smith (WA)
Soto
Speier
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--21

Aderholt
Barletta
Black
Blackburn
Buchanan
Comstock
Ellison
Hartzler
Hastings
Hunter
Jones (NC)
Keating
Knight
Lujan Grisham, M.
Noem
Polis
Rooney, Thomas J.
Roskam
Shuster
Stewart
Walz

{time} 1400

Ms. CASTOR of Florida, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Ms. FUDGE, Mr. PETERS,
Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Messrs. SCHNEIDER, and PASCRELL changed their vote
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. AMASH and BROOKS of Alabama 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. McGOVERN. 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 206,
noes 203, not voting 24, as follows:

[Roll No. 432]

AYES--206

Abraham
Allen
Amodei
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Balderson
Banks (IN)
Barr
Barton
Bergman
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brady (TX)
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Cheney
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Costa
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Curtis
Davis, Rodney
Denham
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donovan
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Dunn
Emmer
Estes (KS)
Faso
Ferguson
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frelinghuysen
Gallagher
Gianforte
Gibbs
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guthrie
Handel
Harper
Harris
Hensarling
Hern
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Holding
Hollingsworth
Hudson
Huizenga
Hultgren
Hurd
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Joyce (OH)
Katko
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Lawson (FL)
Lesko
Lewis (MN)
LoBiondo
Long
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Marshall
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Messer
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Peterson
Pittenger
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rice (SC)
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney, Francis

[[Page H10128]]

Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce (CA)
Ruppersberger
Russell
Rutherford
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Smucker
Stefanik
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--203

Adams
Aguilar
Amash
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Biggs
Bishop (GA)
Blum
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brat
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
Cloud
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Courtney
Crist
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Engel
Eshoo
Espaillat
Esty (CT)
Evans
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gaetz
Gallego
Garamendi
Garrett
Gohmert
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gosar
Gottheimer
Graves (LA)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Heck
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones (MI)
Jordan
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kihuen
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Labrador
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan, Ben Ray
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Massie
Matsui
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meadows
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Halleran
O'Rourke
Pallone
Panetta
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Pingree
Pocan
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rosen
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez
Sanford
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Smith (WA)
Soto
Speier
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters, Maxine
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--24

Aderholt
Barletta
Black
Blackburn
Buchanan
Comstock
Davidson
Ellison
Grijalva
Hartzler
Hastings
Hunter
Jones (NC)
Keating
Knight
Lujan Grisham, M.
Noem
Polis
Rooney, Thomas J.
Roskam
Shuster
Smith (NJ)
Stewart
Walz

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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

{time} 1408

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

____________________