[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 15, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H3801-H3813]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5, EQUALITY ACT; PROVIDING FOR 
    CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 312, MASHPEE WAMPANOAG TRIBE RESERVATION 
    REAFFIRMATION ACT; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 987, 
 MARKETING AND OUTREACH RESTORATION TO EMPOWER HEALTH EDUCATION ACT OF 
                                  2019

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 377 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 377

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5) to 
     prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, 
     and sexual orientation, and for other purposes. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be 
     considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) 90 minutes of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion 
     to recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 312) to 
     reaffirm the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe reservation, and for 
     other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute recommended by the Committee on Natural Resources 
     now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The 
     bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of 
     order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to 
     final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour 
     of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural 
     Resources; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.
       Sec. 3.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     987) to amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 
     to provide for Federal Exchange outreach and educational 
     activities. 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 
     amendments specified in this section and shall not exceed 90 
     minutes, with 60 minutes equally divided and controlled by 
     the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Energy and Commerce and 30 minutes equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Education and Labor. After general debate the 
     bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 
     rule. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute 
     recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now 
     printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 
     116-14 shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the 
     Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as the original bill for the purpose of further 
     amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, 
     as amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as 
     amended, shall be in order except those printed in the report 
     of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each 
     such further amendment may be offered only in the order 
     printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
     the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 
     further amendments are waived. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such 
     further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 
     amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit with or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), 
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

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and 
reported a rule, House Resolution 377, providing for consideration of 
H.R. 5 under a closed rule, with 90 minutes of debate equally divided 
and controlled by the Chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  The resolution also provides for consideration of H.R. 312 under a 
closed rule, with 1 hour of general debate equally divided and 
controlled by the Chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Natural Resources.
  Lastly, this resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 987 under 
a structured rule, with 90 minutes of general debate, 60 minutes 
equally divided and controlled by the Chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and 30 minutes equally divided 
and controlled by the Chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Education and Labor. Twenty-seven amendments are made in 
order.
  Madam Speaker, we are here today to debate the rule for three 
important pieces of legislation: H.R. 987, H.R. 312, and H.R. 5.
  H.R. 987 is the Strengthening Health Care and Lowering Prescription 
Drug Costs Act, a package of several bills, many of them bipartisan, 
that went through the House Energy and Commerce Committee under regular 
order. This bill combines three key bills to lower drug costs by 
promoting generic competition and four key bills to strengthen 
healthcare, reverse the sabotage of the ACA by this administration with 
respect to marketing and outreach, and rescind the Trump 
administration's efforts to promote junk plans that lack the 
protections of the Affordable Care Act.
  The American people are justifiably demanding action by Congress to 
make prescription drugs more affordable. Prices are so high that recent 
data show 24 percent of Americans didn't fill a prescription in the 
past year due to high costs.
  My constituents have been vocal in demanding action on drug pricing, 
patients like Bill, a senior with diabetes who attends my church, 
parents like Sarah with children who have special health needs. Folks 
like these need help now.
  This package would lower costs by banning anticompetitive practices 
that large drug companies employ to keep generics off the market.
  This bill will also tackle many of the reasons we have seen 
enrollment

[[Page H3802]]

through the Affordable Care Act decline in recent years.
  Since coming into office, President Trump has cut paid advertising 
and outreach efforts for healthcare exchanges by 90 percent. This 
wanton political decision to cut these efforts is but one part of the 
administration's attempts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act.
  Furthermore, lack of transparency on the part of Health and Human 
Services around funding levels for outreach plan enrollment rates and 
other vital statistics has created an information vacuum on the 
performance of the ACA.
  Greater transparency is required in order for Congress to hold the 
administration accountable for its efforts to defund education and 
outreach for the Affordable Care Act.
  Second, we have H.R. 312, the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe Reservation 
Reaffirmation Act. This important bill recognizes and respects the 
Tribal sovereignty of the Mashpee Wampanoag, a Tribe that has inhabited 
New England for over 12,000 years and, in fact, welcomed the Pilgrims 
to the new world.
  This legislation has strong bipartisan support in Massachusetts among 
other Tribal nations and with Tribal allies in Congress. Had President 
Trump not tweeted about this bill last week, it would have likely 
passed on suspension and been sent to the Senate for consideration. The 
members of this Tribe cannot wait any longer for recognition, and we 
need to pass this critical legislation without further delay.
  Finally, Madam Speaker, this is a week that will be remembered in our 
history books because, at long last, this body is taking up 
consideration of the Equality Act. Forty-five years ago this week, the 
legendary Congresswoman Bella Abzug introduced the first version of the 
Equality Act, a bill that will give full legal protections to LGBTQ 
people all across our country.
  This version of the Equality Act that we consider today is the result 
of years of careful legislative drafting and amends existing civil 
rights laws to provide protections from discrimination based on sexual 
orientation and gender identity in key areas of public life: 
employment, housing, credit, education, public spaces and services, 
federally funded programs, and jury service.
  Additionally, the Equality Act updates the public spaces and services 
covered in current law to include retail stores, services such as 
banks, legal services, and transportation services. These important 
updates will strengthen existing protections for everyone.
  The journey to this final version of the Equality Act was led by a 
man who is a history maker in his own right, co-chair of the LGBTQ 
Equality Caucus and my colleague on the Judiciary Committee, 
Congressman   David Cicilline from Rhode Island.

                              {time}  1230

  Congressman Cicilline worked with lawyers and advocates from the left 
and the right, religious groups, and myriad civil rights groups to make 
sure that the language of the Equality Act achieved full legal equality 
while doing nothing to undermine existing civil rights protections for 
other marginalized groups.
  The resulting bill is supported by 130 of the largest employers in 
the country, our largest labor unions, and hundreds of organizations, 
including, to name just a few, the Leadership Conference for Civil and 
Human Rights, the NAACP, the National Women's Law Center, the Episcopal 
Church, the Union for Reform Judaism, and the United Church of Christ.
  Most importantly, it is supported by a clear and overwhelming 
majority of the American people. Seventy-one percent of Americans 
support legislation like the Equality Act to protect LGBTQ people 
against discrimination in employment, housing, and public 
accommodations.
  Rarely does Congress have the chance to take up legislation so 
clearly supported by our constituents. That is probably why, since the 
day that Congressman Cicilline first introduced this version of the 
Equality Act in 2015, it has always earned bipartisan support and 
currently has Republican cosponsors in both the House and the Senate.
  The clear majority of both this Chamber and the American people 
recognize that, for far too long, LGBTQ people have faced 
discrimination with no Federal legal recourse. It is beyond dispute 
that LGBTQ people, especially transgender people and especially 
transgender women of color, face discrimination across this country.
  This is a personal issue for me. It has been personal since my baby 
sister came out to me about 40 years ago.
  For many people in this country, that is when the fight hits home. It 
gets personal when someone you love says, ``This is who I am,'' and you 
know and value that person, and you will do whatever you can to make 
sure that your loved one can live life to the fullest, free from hate 
and discrimination.
  I am sad to say that my home in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is 
one of the 30 States that defies the will of its people by not having 
legal protections for LGBTQ people. The idea that my sister, someone 
who put her life on the line for our country when she served in the 
armed forces, could drive across State lines and lose protections is 
heartbreaking.
  The Equality Act ends the patchwork of State laws and creates uniform 
nationwide protections. LGBTQ people won't have to worry that being 
transferred to another State by their employer or needing to move home 
to take care of ailing parents will cause them to lose civil rights 
protections. From sea to shining sea, LGBTQ people will have the 
security and stability that comes from knowing that if they face 
discrimination, they have legal recourse.
  It is also important to note what the Equality Act does not do. The 
Equality Act does not impinge on religious liberty. Religious liberty 
is a cornerstone value of our Constitution and our country. Religious 
organizations are able to prefer their own members and their version of 
morality in hiring for religious positions such as ministers, rabbis, 
or schoolteachers. The Equality Act does nothing to change that.
  The Equality Act clarifies what has long been held, though, that 
religious freedom laws do not create an exemption to civil rights laws. 
Just like a person can't use a claim of religious freedom to refuse to 
sell a house to an interracial couple, under the Equality Act, LGBTQ 
families will be protected from discrimination, regardless of its 
motivation.
  Consider the stakes facing LGBTQ people too often across this 
country. A same-sex couple walks into a restaurant. They hired a 
babysitter to look after their young children and are hoping to have a 
relaxing night out. They are seated and looking at the menu when the 
manager comes over and tells them they have to leave. They are not 
welcome there.
  This kind of insecurity and humiliation occurs on a daily basis 
across this country. In 30 States, the couple would have no legal 
recourse. Often, humiliation is just the tip of the iceberg.
  Same-sex couples are far more likely to be denied housing. Qualified 
and high-performing transgender people are more likely to be fired from 
their jobs. LGBTQ young people face rejection, homelessness, and 
discrimination in school, denying them an education. These injuries 
compound and lead to poverty, homelessness, and violence.
  The impact is felt hardest by transgender women of color, who 
confront racial discrimination, sex discrimination, and gender-identity 
discrimination. The intersection of these forms of discrimination can 
even be deadly, as it was for Shantee Tucker, a transgender woman of 
color from Philadelphia who was murdered last fall.
  The protections provided by the Equality Act give LGBTQ people an 
equal chance at the American Dream. While discrimination and rejection 
have ended the lives of too many transgender people, many are 
succeeding, despite discrimination.
  In Pennsylvania, Dr. Rachel Levine, a transgender woman, serves in 
the Governor's cabinet as secretary for health. Mara Keisling, a 
Pennsylvania native, is the founder and executive director of the 
National Center for Transgender Equality and a pioneer for civil rights 
protections. Danica Roem, the first transgender State legislator, 
serves in the Virginia House of Delegates. LaLa Zannell is fighting 
violence in New York City. Raffi Freedman-Gurspan was the first openly 
transgender White House staffer. Miss Major Griffin-Gracy, who was at 
Stonewall, has spent her life fighting to end

[[Page H3803]]

the over-incarceration of transgender people. The list goes on and on.
  I am proud that the House will finally act to provide Federal 
protections to LGBTQ people with passage of the Equality Act. The fight 
for equal rights is far from over, but I am proud to be part of a 
majority that prioritizes equal treatment for all of its 
citizens, regardless of whom they love.

  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the gentlewoman from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), my good friend, for yielding me the 
customary 30 minutes.
  We, Madam Speaker, are here today on three very different pieces of 
legislation, which, unfortunately, makes this a complicated rule. One 
of our bills concerns civil rights, one concerns healthcare, and one 
concerns Native Americans. I will move through each of these bills 
relatively quickly, and then I want to address the process we followed 
to get here today.
  The first bill, Madam Speaker, H.R. 5, is a complicated and complex 
piece of legislation that would make sweeping changes to our Nation's 
civil rights laws, if enacted. In general, the bill adds the terms 
``sexual orientation'' and ``gender identity'' to the list of protected 
classes under the Civil Rights Act, joining classes like race, gender, 
religion, and national origin.
  As I noted in our hearing yesterday, most Republicans in the House 
will oppose this bill not because we do not believe that all people 
should receive equal treatment under the law but because we have real 
concerns about how this bill will work in practice. A term like 
``gender identity'' has such a vague definition that even proponents of 
the bill do not agree on exactly what the term means.
  That should cause legislators to be especially thoughtful and provide 
clarity about what the term means and how the law will be applied. But 
we have not done so here.
  Republicans have raised numerous questions about how this bill will 
work in practice. Will female athletes in junior high, high school, and 
college be forced to compete in women's athletics against competitors 
who were born biologically male? Will female sexual assault victims be 
forced to share vulnerable same-sex spaces like locker rooms and 
dressing rooms with other individuals who were born biologically male? 
And since the legislation appears to allow people to define their own 
gender identity, will it allow people to shift back and forth between 
gender as it suits them?
  These are not rhetorical questions. They are real concerns that we 
have raised, with good reason, throughout the process.
  H.R. 5 is known as the Equality Act, and I know every Member of the 
House, Republican and Democrat, agrees with the principle that all 
people should be treated equally under the law. But even as we strive 
toward that goal, when we are dealing with legislation of this 
magnitude, we must consider how the bill will work in practice.
  Unfortunately, I don't think my friends in the majority have clear 
answers to very legitimate questions. Last night, during debate at the 
Rules Committee, our concerns were dismissed as we were told that the 
courts and administrative bureaucrats would sort out these unanswered 
issues. That is simply unacceptable.
  Why would we want any ambiguity when it comes to a person's civil 
rights? We should be very clear about congressional intent, and the 
only way to do that is to write a law the way you intend for it to be 
carried out. Sadly, this bill falls well short of that certainty.
  The second bill, H.R. 987, is actually seven bills: three genuinely 
bipartisan bills addressing prescription drug costs and four partisan 
and controversial bills addressing ObamaCare.
  As I pointed out last night in our hearing, I don't particularly 
understand what the majority is trying to accomplish here. There are 
three bills that are all bipartisan that could easily progress to 
becoming law. I am even a cosponsor of one of those bills. Yet, I have 
to vote against the entire package because I do not support the 
partisan and controversial bills attached by Democrats.
  Madam Speaker, at some point, the majority needs to decide if they 
are here to score political points or if they are here to govern. If 
they want to continue scoring rhetorical victories, then by all means, 
they should keep doing what they are doing, keep putting up partisan 
bills that won't go anywhere in the Senate and won't be signed into 
law, keep putting up messaging bills for the purpose of signaling to 
their primary voters, and keep spending their days engaged in show 
votes that won't ever improve the lives of those they were elected to 
represent.
  If they want to govern for the American people, then the majority 
must move forward with real legislation that can get real support here, 
in the Senate, and at the White House.
  We had the chance to do that with this package. The majority chose 
not to do so. I think that is a real missed opportunity for us, both as 
an institution and as a country.
  Finally, the third bill, H.R. 312, the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe 
Reservation Reaffirmation Act, is a matter I want to discuss at some 
length because I think there has been, frankly, a lot of misinformation 
put out about this particular piece of legislation.
  The Mashpee Wampanoag is a federally recognized Tribe based in 
Mashpee, Massachusetts. H.R. 312 would simply reaffirm the taking of 
land into trust for the benefit of this Tribe.
  When the Federal Government takes land into trust for a Tribe, it is 
reserving that land for the benefit of the Tribe and Tribal members 
both now and into the future. It ensures that the Tribes have a home, 
that they have a stable place to build communities and to marshal their 
resources and conduct business. It ensures that the land that was 
promised to Tribes, and that was held by those Tribes, in many cases 
for many centuries, remains in Tribal hands.
  Holding land in trust is a commitment made to Tribes by the Federal 
Government. It affirms Tribes will continue to be able to exercise 
sovereignty over their own land. That is really all this issue is about 
today, whether or not the Mashpee Wampanoag will be able to exercise 
their own sovereignty over their own land.
  Unfortunately, some who oppose this bill are doing so because they 
are viewing this issue through a purely political lens rather than what 
our own Constitution says about Tribal sovereignty. This isn't a bill 
about a particular use for the land, and it isn't a bill about 
particular Members of this institution or the Senate. Instead, this is 
a bill about keeping Federal promises to Tribes.
  Our country hasn't always kept those promises, and we have an 
opportunity today to step up and make clear that regardless of what 
happened in the past, today, the Federal Government keeps its promises 
to Tribes, no ifs, ands, or buts.
  Before I close, I would like to make a couple of points about the 
process this week, particularly on the Equality Act and the healthcare 
issue.
  On the Equality Act, 35 amendments were proposed. I thought that 
many, if not most, of these should have been considered on the floor. 
Yet, in the final rule, not one amendment was made in order, and we are 
considering this bill under a closed rule.
  The majority is choosing not to make in order many amendments that 
deserve our consideration on the floor, like Ms. Holmes Norton's 
amendment to clarify that Washington, D.C., residents cannot be 
excluded or disqualified from jury service based on sexual orientation 
or gender identity, or the bipartisan amendment that would restore the 
application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to this bill, or 
Representative Johnson's commonsense amendment clarifying that nothing 
in the act should be construed as to deny parents the right to be 
involved in their minor child's medical care. These are all deserving 
amendments that should have been heard on the floor, and yet the 
majority chose to make precisely none in order.
  On H.R. 987, the majority went in a different direction. In total, 51 
amendments were submitted to the Rules Committee, and 15 of those were 
sponsored by Republicans. Yet with today's rule, 27 amendments were 
made in order, but just one amendment was made in order that was 
sponsored by a Republican, along with one bipartisan

[[Page H3804]]

manager's amendment--one out of 15. All the remaining amendments, 92 
percent of those made in order, were sponsored solely by Democrats.
  Madam Speaker, I think we can do better than that.
  Last week, I reminded the House that when my party was in charge of 
the last Congress, we went out of our way to make minority and 
bipartisan amendments in order. Forty-five percent of all amendments 
made in order in the last Congress were sponsored solely by Democrats, 
while a further 17 percent were bipartisan.
  As of today's rule, the stats are looking much worse for the current 
majority. Seventy-three percent of all amendments made in order were 
solely sponsored by Democrats through May 14. Thirteen percent are 
bipartisan. Just 14 percent were sponsored by Republicans.
  We had an opportunity today, particularly on H.R. 5 and H.R. 987, to 
take steps toward remedying this issue.
  I must continue to encourage my good friend, and he is my good 
friend, the chairman of the Rules Committee, to work with us to make 
more bipartisan and minority amendments in order and to ensure that all 
Members, regardless of party, have an opportunity to be heard on the 
floor, as he has often promised.
  Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.

                              {time}  1245

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I would just note that, with respect to 
H.R. 5, we had regular order. H.R. 5, the Equality Act, went through 
the Committee on the Judiciary. It had a hearing, and then we also had 
a markup. This is a new process, apparently, since the last Congress. 
And then, of course, we had the Rules hearing last night.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Speier).
  Ms. SPEIER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
for her leadership and for the time.
  Today is, indeed, a historic day. It is a day that we will say to the 
LGBTQ community across the land that you matter, that you count, that 
the Equality Act will be the new law of this country. It is a basic 
heralding of human decency.
  America stands at a crucial crossroads in this generation's fight for 
civil rights. We should not have to remind our Republican colleagues 
that no one should ever be discriminated against because of who they 
are, yet here we are.
  Without the explicit Federal protection provided in the Equality Act, 
the LGBTQ community is at risk of being marginalized, or worse, in the 
workplace, housing, education, and even in the military.
  This administration is seeking to make our LGBTQ families and friends 
not just second-class citizens, but to deny them the fundamental 
American rights etched into our Constitution.
  Congress cannot erase hatred with legislation, but Congress has an 
obligation to lead, to stamp out discrimination wherever it exists.
  We can and must all rise for the LGBTQ community.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself a few seconds to respond to 
my friend from Pennsylvania.
  We don't consider the markup in committee a very good markup. Only 
four amendments were considered, none were accepted, and, frankly, a 
number of Members seeking recognition for amendments were not 
recognized. So to think that this was anything other a train moving 
through a station, I think, is to mischaracterize how that particular 
markup worked.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Burgess), my very good friend, fellow member of the Rules 
Committee, and also a leading member of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Madam Speaker, you can imagine my surprise this morning checking the 
email and the Health 202, an email put out by The Washington Post--The 
Washington Post, for crying out loud--and here is the headline: 
``Democrats Are Putting a Political Pothole in the Way of Bipartisan 
Drug Pricing Bills.'' They go on to say: ``ObamaCare battles threaten 
even the most bipartisan healthcare efforts on Capitol Hill.''
  What a strange turn of events.
  So here we have a rule today that will allow a bill to be brought to 
the floor where the Democrats are using bipartisan drug pricing bills 
to pay for partisan politics.
  Look, I am on the Energy and Commerce Committee as well as the Rules 
Committee, so I am on the oldest and second oldest committees in the 
United States House of Representatives. We worked in a bipartisan 
manner to ensure that the BLOCKING Act, the CREATES Act, and the 
Protecting Consumer Access to Generic Drugs Act would deliver drug 
pricing solutions to Americans.
  In the Rules Committee, I offered an amendment that keeps the three 
drug policies and uses the savings--some $5 billion from those 
policies--to pay for bipartisan public health priorities.
  I also introduced the standalone bill, H.R. 2700, if you are keeping 
score at home. This is the Lowering Prescription Drug Costs and 
Extending Community Health Centers and Other Public Health Priorities 
Act. H.R. 2700 couples the bipartisan drug pricing policies with 
reauthorization of programs such as community health centers, special 
diabetes programs, and the National Health Service Corps.
  Every Republican member of the Energy and Commerce Committee is a 
cosponsor of H.R. 2700, signifying the broad Republican support for 
both the drug pricing and the public health priorities.
  Look, it is pretty clear: You can say that it is more important to 
have a navigated program that would never pass any cost-benefit 
analysis; you can say it is more important to have an earmark for the 
State of New Jersey to set up an ObamaCare exchange; or you can say it 
is more important to reauthorize Community Health Centers.
  Reauthorizations are tough. We did multiple reauthorizations in the 
last Congress, and they are difficult to get across the line because so 
many people have so many opinions.
  All of these programs are going to expire in September, and we have 
taken no activity towards reauthorization in the Energy and Commerce 
Committee.
  These reauthorizations, again, take a substantial amount of time. The 
clock is ticking, and we should act as soon as possible.
  Again, unfortunately, that amendment was not made in order, but I do 
encourage Members to look at H.R. 2700, a good bill. For this morning, 
I think The Washington Post had it right.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the distinguished chairman of the 
Committee on Rules.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon) for yielding me the time.
  So maybe it is just me. You know, I am still suffering from trauma, 
having served in the minority under my Republican friends for 8 years 
where, routinely, we were given a process where we were almost always 
shut out.
  In the last Congress, we had a record-breaking 103 closed rules on 
major bills--completely closed. You can't amend it. And they talk about 
all the amendments they made in order, but they don't talk about the 
thousands they did not make in order.

  Now, look, I don't want them to feel the same way that I did in the 
minority. I want them to not have to go through the trauma that so many 
of us went through where we were routinely shut out. And that is why, 
when we came up with the Rules package, we did things like required 
that bills had to have hearings in committees of jurisdiction before 
they came to the Rules Committee, that they had to have markups in the 
committee of jurisdiction before they came to the Rules Committee.
  I mean, they routinely brought legislation to the floor where 
committees of jurisdiction never had a hearing, never had a markup. 
They mysteriously appeared. They would come to the Rules Committee; 
they would get a closed rule; and then we were forced to vote up or 
down on it.
  So I don't really appreciate being lectured on process. Yes, we need 
to do better, and, yes, I understand that my

[[Page H3805]]

Republican friends want more amendments in order, but let's not forget 
why we are here today. We are here to pass a historic civil rights 
bill. We are here to pass the Equality Act.
  When I look at the amendments that were brought to the Rules 
Committee, amendment after amendment would target trans Americans and 
carve out ways for discrimination to continue. This is on a bill that 
is meant to eliminate discrimination. They were trying to enshrine 
discrimination. They were trying to weaken the Civil Rights Act. And, 
quite frankly, I think most of us felt: You know what? We are not going 
to allow that to happen.
  That is not an appropriate use of the rules of the House, to try to 
take away the rights of people in this country, to try to allow 
discrimination to continue.
  We believe too strongly in the ideals of the Civil Rights Act to risk 
letting it be transformed into another weapon for division and 
discrimination. I mean, we listened to groups like the National Urban 
League, the National Action Network, the NAACP, the Leadership 
Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and others that asked us to give 
this bill a straight up-or-down vote.
  And let's be clear, Madam Speaker, a good process is about more than 
just amendments, as I mentioned. This bill had a hearing, and it had a 
markup.
  On the healthcare bill that we are going to deal with, it is about 
lowering the cost of prescription drugs.
  My friends on the other side of the aisle spent what seemed like an 
eternity trying to rip away healthcare protections for people, I mean, 
bringing up one bill after another after another to the floor that 
never went through regular order, that would literally take away 
protections from people with preexisting conditions.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Massachusetts 
an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, they did nothing to lower the cost of 
prescription drugs.
  Then we had an election in November, and the big issue was 
healthcare. People didn't want to have their healthcare protections 
ripped away. And now, all of a sudden, they are converts, and they say 
they want to protect people's healthcare and expand healthcare 
protections.
  The bottom line is this: We are not perfect all the time, and we need 
to do better, but I believe that we are improving the process. I look 
forward to working with the gentleman, the ranking member from 
Oklahoma, to try to find ways forward.
  But on the legislation here today that we are going to consider, this 
is important legislation. This is historic legislation. Quite frankly, 
every Member of this House who wants to end discrimination in this 
country ought to support the Equality Act, and every Member of this 
House who wants to deal with the high cost of prescription drugs ought 
to support that bill as well.
  Madam Speaker, with that, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
for just a few minutes to respond to my good friend, the chairman. I 
want to tell you, there is nobody I hold in higher regard in the House 
of Representatives than Chairman McGovern, nobody I consider a better 
personal friend, nobody I consider a more responsible Member.
  On this, we disagree. The gentleman is right, neither side is 
perfect. In this case, we are going to bring attention to this 
amendment issue until we see results. That is precisely what my friend 
did when he was in the minority, and there are some times we should 
have listened to him and we did not.
  In this case, I think the imbalance is so egregious that we are going 
to continue to make that case until we see a change. Maybe we won't. 
Hopefully we will, because I know my friend approaches this with good 
intentions.
  Secondly, I would say this bill was so important, the Equality Act, 
it ought to have amendments. That is the point. That is how you build 
consensus. I think they are missing the opportunity to get a lot of 
people who would support the basic concept that they are trying to 
advance.
  And, finally, on the drug bill, I have just got to be honest with 
you. When they had a chance to pass something that would work and chose 
to bundle it with something that they knew couldn't pass, that makes me 
wonder how serious they are about dealing with that problem.
  But, hopefully, we will get an opportunity to deal with that again. 
And that is an area we know we can work together on. We have proved it 
in committee.
  So, with that, I look forward to continuing to work with my good 
friend, the chairman. I know that we will occasionally have 
differences. That is what this is all about. We will work those 
differences out.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman 
from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler), my very good friend, who also is a 
distinguished member of the House Armed Services Committee.
  Mrs. HARTZLER. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rule 
and to the underlying legislation, H.R. 5.
  Contrary to what has just been said on the floor, this bill does not 
end discrimination. In fact, the Equality Act imposes top-down, 
government-led discrimination against all Americans who hold a 
differing view of human sexuality and gender.
  This grossly misnamed bill punishes everyday citizens, silences free 
speech and viewpoint disagreements, and discriminates against people of 
faith. In reality, this bill should be called the women's inequality 
act.
  The policies of H.R. 5 have already been used to trample female 
athletics, eliminate safe spaces for women, harm children, terminate 
parental rights, and undermine the free exercise of religious freedom.
  The legislation also provides for a universal right to abortion, 
compromises taxpayers' safeguards against funding abortion, and 
eliminates conscious protections for healthcare providers that do not 
want to participate in an abortion.
  As a former track coach, I am deeply committed to providing women and 
girls with a level playing field. Title IX, however, becomes irrelevant 
under the women's inequality act.
  Vulnerable women seeking haven in homeless women's shelters will be 
revictimized under H.R. 5. This is already happening.
  In California, women who were sexually harassed in the shower by a 
biological male were threatened with expulsion from the women's 
shelter.
  In Alaska, a women's shelter is being sued for sending a 
transitioning individual to the hospital instead of letting him sleep 3 
feet away from rape victims.
  This is absurd. Under H.R. 5, women-only spaces will be a thing of 
the past.
  This bill also places children at risk of medical experimentation and 
bleak futures when they are given the right to hormone blockers and sex 
change operations.

                              {time}  1300

  Most children, 98 percent of boys and 88 percent of girls, who 
question their gender identity will grow into their birth gender after 
passing through puberty.
  Parents who dare to oppose doctors using off-label drugs that may 
sterilize their child, or performing life-altering surgical procedures, 
will be considered abusive and neglectful. This has already happened 
with an Ohio couple who lost custody of their daughter.
  For the first time ever, H.R. 5 waives the Religious Freedom 
Restoration Act, enabling unhindered government discrimination against 
the faith community. It also actively prohibits the religious community 
from partnering with the Federal Government.
  Catholic schools will no longer be able to participate in the 
National School Lunch Program. Jewish synagogues will lose Federal 
grant funding to protect against terror threats, and houses of worship 
will lose FEMA disaster aid unless--here is the catch--they abandon 
their core teachings on morality, marriage, and sexuality.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman from Missouri.
  Mrs. HARTZLER. Madam Speaker, Members from both sides of the aisle,

[[Page H3806]]

especially those who claim to be pro-women and pro-children, need to 
stop this devastating legislation.
  The future of women's rights, privacy, protection, and athletic 
potential depends on it.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan).
  Mrs. TRAHAN. Madam Speaker, I rise to offer my strong support for the 
rule and for H.R. 5, the Equality Act.
  Recent years have brought extraordinary progress in the fight for 
full equality for our LGBTQ community. Like millions of others across 
the country, I joined with friends and family to celebrate Supreme 
Court rulings paving the way for same-sex couples to marry. But in the 
midst of these joyful and historic victories, we knew that the work was 
just beginning.
  Though LGBTQ people could now get married, in a majority of States 
they could still be fired for having a picture of their spouse on their 
desk or kicked out of their home just for being who they are. The fact 
is, LGBTQ people are still at risk of discrimination across key areas 
of life in huge swaths of our country.
  Recent national surveys of LGBTQ people show that 42 percent of 
lesbian, gay, and bisexual people; and 78 percent of transgender people 
have experienced discrimination or harassment on the job because of who 
they are.
  Only 21 States have explicit laws barring discrimination based on 
sexual orientation and employment, housing and public accommodations, 
and only 20 States have such protections for gender identity.
  The time to end this patchwork of protections once and for all is 
now, and to do that, we must pass this important legislation.
  The promotion of fairness and justice is a hallmark of who we are as 
Americans. Everyone should be afforded all of the rights provided for 
in our Constitution and outlined in our Declaration of Independence. 
These rights are fundamental to all human beings, and all Americans 
deserve the same civil rights regardless of gender, race, and sexual 
orientation. We don't need to amend that.
  Let's pass the rule and let's pass the Equality Act.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to inform the House 
that if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to 
the rule to immediately bring up H.R. 336, the Strengthening America's 
Security in the Middle East Act of 2019.
  This bill includes four titles, three of which passed the House last 
Congress, and one of which has already passed the House this Congress 
on suspension.
  My amendment will also include three additional provisions agreed to 
by the Senate when they considered their version of this bill, so that 
what we will debate will be identical to what the Senate passed with an 
overwhelming majority vote in February.
  The most critical title of H.R. 336, in my opinion, is the Combating 
BDS Act of 2019, which will allow a State or local government to adopt 
measures to divest assets from entities using boycotts, disbursements, 
or sanctions to influence Israel's policy.
  Madam Speaker, yesterday was the 71st anniversary of the founding of 
the State of Israel. I can think of no better way to celebrate Israel's 
independence, reaffirm our support for Israel, and indicate our ongoing 
commitment to a peaceful and more secure Middle East than to consider 
and pass H.R. 336 immediately.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oklahoma.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous 
question, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record four letters, first, a letter 
from the National Partnership for Women & Families urging support; 
second, a letter from the Human Rights Campaign, also urging support 
for H.R. 5; third, a letter from the American Federation of Government 
Employees; and finally, a letter from several civil rights groups, all 
urging support for H.R. 5.

                                              National Partnership


                                         for Women & Families,

                                     Washington, DC, May 14, 2019.
       Dear Representative: The National Partnership for Women & 
     Families is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that has 
     fought for decades to advance the rights and well-being of 
     America's women and families. We work to foster a society in 
     which workplaces are fair, equitable and family friendly; 
     where everyone has access to quality, affordable health care, 
     including reproductive health care; and where every person 
     has the opportunity to achieve economic security and live 
     with dignity.
       We write to voice our strong support for the Equality Act 
     (H.R. 5) and to urge you to vote YES on this groundbreaking 
     legislation. We also urge you to vote NO on any motion to 
     recommit that may be offered to undermine or alter the 
     Equality Act or otherwise harm civil liberties.
       Despite significant progress, lesbian, gay, bisexual, 
     transgender and queer (LGBTQ) people still face considerable 
     discrimination and lack necessary protections across the 
     country. While some states have enacted laws that protect 
     against discrimination, the patchwork nature of these 
     protections means that millions of people continue to face 
     harassment, exclusion and uncertainty that negatively impact 
     their safety, their day-to-day lives, their families and 
     their ability to participate fully in society.
       Part of achieving our nation's promise of equality, dignity 
     and fairness is ensuring that all people, regardless of 
     sexual orientation or gender identity, have equal opportunity 
     to succeed. No one should have access to services or doors to 
     opportunity closed because of outdated gender stereotypes 
     about how people should act, look or behave. This requires 
     stronger national nondiscrimination protections based on sex, 
     sexual orientation and gender identity.
       The Equality Act is historic civil rights legislation that 
     would amend and supplement the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 
     other key federal nondiscrimination laws that provide 
     protection from discrimination on the basis of race, color, 
     national origin or religion. This legislation would 
     strengthen protections from discrimination on the basis of 
     sex, and add critical new protections from discrimination on 
     the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. 
     Specifically, it would provide clear, explicit protection 
     against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender 
     identity in education, employment, housing, credit, federally 
     funded programs and federal jury services. These protections 
     are essential in ensuring that LGBTQ people have the right to 
     live with dignity and equality.
       While the primary focus of the Equality Act is on LGBTQ 
     people, the Act would also close longstanding gaps in federal 
     law and provide important new legal protections for all women 
     by, for the first time, prohibiting discrimination on the 
     basis of sex in public spaces and services and in all 
     federally-funded activities. This means that, for example, 
     when women experience harassment as customers in restaurants, 
     stores, hotels, taxis or airports, there will now be a 
     remedy. The law will also ensure that breastfeeding parents 
     aren't excluded from or treated less favorably in public 
     places just for feeding their children, and it will make 
     clear that pharmacies can't refuse to fill a woman's birth 
     control prescription.
       The bill's provisions that would ensure that sex does not 
     stand as a barrier to full participation in federally funded 
     programs or activities will mean, for example, that a 
     developer with a federal grant couldn't discriminate against 
     women-owned businesses in its contracting. Women would also 
     have new tools to challenge a police department's 
     systematically inadequate response to sexual violence and 
     intimate partner violence, if the police department received 
     federal funds; and would be able to challenge denials of 
     reproductive health care where a federally-funded entity 
     otherwise provides comparable or comprehensive health care.
       These protections against sex discrimination are a critical 
     step forward in advancing women's equality in this country.
       As a leading national women's rights organization we also 
     feel compelled to state emphatically that the Equality Act's 
     protections for transgender and gender nonconforming people 
     in no way undermine the rights or protections afforded to 
     women and do not jeopardize women's safety or their ability 
     to participate fully or equally in sport or in any other 
     aspect of our society. Transgender women are women, and any 
     attempt to mischaracterize their gender identity or suggest 
     that they are trying to ``take advantage'' of protected class 
     status fundamentally misunderstands the reality of 
     transgender people's lives and experiences. Furthermore, it 
     causes real harm to the more than one million Americans who 
     identify as transgender, a population already subject to high 
     rates of violence and abuse, negative mental and physical 
     health outcomes, and experiences with discrimination and 
     stigmatization.
       The Equality Act is a long-overdue step forward in 
     extending civil rights protections to millions of women and 
     LGBTQ people. Establishing clear protections is critical at a 
     time when vulnerable communities are

[[Page H3807]]

     under attack. The Equality Act would provide a consistent, 
     national standard and ensure that everyone has the 
     opportunity to live safely and with dignity, to advance at 
     work, to provide for one's family and to thrive economically.
           Sincerely,
     National Partnership for Women & Families.
                                  ____



                                        Human Rights Campaign,

                                     Washington, DC, May 14, 2019.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the Human Rights 
     Campaign, the nation's largest civil rights organization 
     working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and 
     queer (LGBTQ) equality, I write to urge you to vote in favor 
     of H.R. 5, the Equality Act, and against any Motion to 
     Recommit. We will consider both key votes.
       Everyone--including LGBTQ people--should have an 
     opportunity to earn a living and provide a home for their 
     families without fear of constant harassment or 
     discrimination. The Equality Act would update our nation's 
     existing civil rights laws to explicitly include sexual 
     orientation and gender identity, which would finally provide 
     consistent non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ people 
     across key areas of life, including employment, housing, 
     credit, education, public spaces and services, federally 
     funded programs, and jury service. This would ensure LGBTQ 
     people have access to the exact same protections as are 
     currently provided under federal law based on other protected 
     characteristics.
       Currently, 30 states lack non-discrimination protections 
     for LGBTQ people. The patchwork nature of current laws leaves 
     millions of people subject to uncertainty and potential 
     discrimination that impacts their safety, their families, and 
     their day-to-day lives. In fact, two-thirds of LGBTQ 
     Americans report having experienced discrimination. The 
     Equality Act would provide a nationwide standard for non-
     discrimination protections.
       The Equality Act has unprecedented support. More than 200 
     major corporations have endorsed the legislation, as well as 
     more than 40 trade associations including U.S. Chamber of 
     Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. 
     Recent polling finds that a growing majority of Americans--
     including Republicans, Democrats and Independents--support 
     LGBTQ non-discrimination protections and LGBTQ equality. A 
     recent survey by PRRI found that nearly seven in 10 Americans 
     support laws like the Equality Act. More than 500 national, 
     state, and local organizations have endorsed the legislation, 
     including social justice, religious, medical, and child 
     welfare organizations.
       Again, I urge you to vote in favor of the Equality Act and 
     against any Motion to Recommit.
       Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions 
     or need more information, please do not hesitate to reach out 
     to me.
           Sincerely,

                                                  David Stacy,

                                      Government Affairs Director,
     Human Rights Campaign.
                                  ____

                                            American Federation of


                                Government Employees, AFL-CIO,

                                     Washington, DC, May 14, 2019.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the 700,000 federal and 
     District of Columbia government employees represented by the 
     American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE) I 
     write to urge you to vote yes on H.R. 5, the Equality Act. 
     The Equality Act is long overdue legislation with bipartisan 
     support that affirms in the United States all people should 
     be treated equally.
       Currently, it is not a violation of federal civil rights 
     law for employers to fire, landlords to deny housing, or for 
     schools to withhold educational opportunities from people 
     solely because they are a member of the LGBTQ community. 
     While some jurisdictions provide protections to the LGBTQ 
     community, the federal government cannot remain silent in the 
     face of continued discrimination. The Equality Act extends 
     protections against discrimination based on sexual 
     orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, access 
     to public places, federal funding, credit education, and jury 
     service. Federal workers provide services to all members of 
     the public without discrimination and expect our nation's 
     laws to protect all individuals in the same manner.
       The Equality Act is endorsed by civil and human rights 
     advocates, educators, the business community, and labor 
     unions because the United States can only move forward 
     together when all, including citizens who are LGBTQ, have 
     full protection under the law from discrimination. Again, I 
     urge you to vote in support of H.R. 5, the Equality Act.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Alethea Predeoux,
     Director, Legislative Department.
                                  ____

                                                   March 12, 2019.
     Charles E. Schumer,
     Senate Minority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
     Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker of U.S. House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Schumer and Speaker Pelosi: We write today to 
     memorialize the shared agreement of African American civil 
     rights groups regarding the importance of ensuring the 
     protection of the provisions of core civil rights statutes 
     e.g. the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Fair Housing Act, the 
     Equal Credit Opportunity Act, etc., even as legislators 
     pursue amendments to those statutes to add additional 
     protections against discrimination. We stand in solidarity 
     and support with our partners and colleagues in a shared 
     commitment to ensuring that these protections are extended. 
     But we have also collectively agreed that these efforts must 
     not result in a weakening of the provisions and protections 
     of our bedrock civil rights statutes, each of which 
     represents the powerful and unrelenting demand of civil 
     rights activists and leaders--often at risk to their own 
     lives. While we have been gratified during our conversations 
     with House and Senate committee leaders and bill sponsors, we 
     regard this matter as one of such importance that we are 
     memorializing by this letter the understanding we have shared 
     in our conversations for efforts that may arise by individual 
     legislators or groups during the process of advancing these 
     bills.
       The reasons for our caution and concern are, no doubt, 
     evident to you. The current environment is one in which we 
     have seen alarming animus and hostility to various ethnic and 
     minority groups, as well as legal challenges to what were 
     once regarded as unassailable civil rights legal standards. 
     Without question we are confronting a concerted and 
     unrelenting effort to chip away and eviscerate existing civil 
     rights protections. This means that there are inherent 
     dangers in opening any civil rights statutes to legislative 
     debate and review. Thus, the efforts currently underway to 
     extend anti-discrimination protection in our core civil 
     rights statutes, must not be advanced without the clear and 
     explicit agreement among sponsors, committee leadership and 
     party leadership that proposed amendments to our civil rights 
     statutes will be withdrawn should efforts be introduced to 
     weaken or diminish the existing provisions of those statutes.
       Bills which are of immediate concern include, The Equality 
     Act and the American Housing and Mobility Act; however, it is 
     our understanding that there may be others. Below is a list 
     of some of the safeguards/guardrails we feel must be in place 
     if/when legislation proposing to amend civil rights statutes 
     is introduced. Each of these have been discussed and agreed 
     to by civil rights groups, as well as the current sponsors of 
     the Equality Act. They include:
       Establish a strong legislative record for any proposed 
     changes to core Civil Rights statutes. This standard must be 
     maintained; Hearings, reports, testimony, etc.
       Written assurances from Party Leadership that existing 
     protections will be preserved.
       Written assurances from Sponsors that existing protections 
     will be preserved.
       Written assurances from Party Leadership that if an 
     amendment(s) to existing protections or amendment(s) creating 
     restrictions on any of the existing protections is advanced 
     the bill will be pulled and no vote(s) will be taken.
       Written assurances from Sponsors that if an amendment(s) to 
     existing protections or amendment(s) creating restrictions on 
     any of the existing protections is advanced* they will 
     withdraw their introduction of the bill and work to have the 
     bill pulled and no vote(s) will be taken.
       A demonstrated and shared understanding from party 
     leadership and legislative sponsors of the ability to impact 
     the process once legislation is introduced given current 
     political dynamics, including an explanation of the 
     procedural path forward and the procedural path for 
     withdrawal if that becomes necessary.
       Inclusion of Congressional Findings section in every bill.
       Rollout strategies which include explicit statement(s) 
     about need to preserve existing protections and intent to 
     withdraw the bill if existing protections are threatened in 
     any manner.
       Continue to explore standalone legislation that does not 
     amend the existing statute(s), should this prove to be the 
     safer course.
       The history of civil rights in this country is one fraught 
     with violence, hostility and long suffering. The fight to 
     enforce those rights continues to this day with resistance 
     and opposition morphing and growing. As stewards of these 
     critical laws, we all have a responsibility and obligation to 
     ensure that the protections they embody are preserved. We 
     therefore want to be clear and direct in expressing our 
     insistence that any legislation proposing to amend legacy 
     civil rights statutes which is permitted to move forward, do 
     so ONLY when there is a commitment and agreement to do no 
     harm to the existing statutes and where the safeguards/
     guardrails outlined in this letter are put in place.
           Sincerely,
     Sherrilyn Ifill,
       President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense and 
     Educational Fund, Inc.
     Hillary O. Shelton,
       Director, Washington Bureau/SVP for Advocacy and Policy, 
     NAACP.
     Reverend Al Sharpton,
       President and Founder, National Action Network.
     Melanie L. Campbell,

[[Page H3808]]

       President and CEO, National Coalition on Black Civic 
     Participation.
     Marc H. Morial,
       President and Chief Executive Officer, National Urban 
     League.
     Kristen Clarke,
       President & Executive Director, Lawyers' Committee for 
     Civil Rights Under the Law.
     Vanita Gupta,
       President and CEO, Leadership Conference for Civil and 
     Human Rights.

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Cartwright).
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Madam Speaker, for nearly a decade, the Patient 
Protection and Affordable Care Act has helped millions of Americans get 
the care that they need. It has allowed parents to keep their kids on 
their own insurance plans, and it has protected millions and millions 
of Americans who are living with preexisting conditions, and that piece 
is so important.
  It means that Americans living with cancer, living with heart 
disease, and living with diabetes can no longer be thrown off their 
plans or denied coverage simply because of their medical history.
  In my own State of Pennsylvania, more than 5.4 million people depend 
on these protections to treat their asthma, to afford their insulin, 
and to receive treatments for other preexisting illnesses.
  Madam Speaker, I promise these families that I will keep fighting to 
keep them healthy, which is why this week I am voting for the 
Strengthening Health Care and Lowering Prescription Drugs Costs Act 
which will ban junk insurance plans that don't offer sufficient 
coverage, bring lower-priced generic prescription drugs to market more 
quickly, and invest in helping Americans sign up for healthcare.
  That is what Democrats are focused on, moving forward, making sure 
seniors, veterans, and working families across our Nation have the 
healthcare they need. I hope the current administration will see this 
as an opportunity to work with our House majority in order to lower the 
cost of prescription medications, and I hope Republicans in Congress 
will join us in our mission to keep working for the people and to make 
sure that every American can afford their prescription medications and 
their healthcare.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, in closing, I want to urge opposition to the rule. The 
majority has proposed three different measures today, and while I am a 
supporter of the bill concerning Tribal rights, I am opposed to H.R. 5 
and H.R. 987, and I regret that.
  Quite frankly, had the process on these bills been different, I think 
the vote that we would see in this Chamber would be very different 
today. I think, literally, a more fulsome and more open process and 
amendments on H.R. 5 might have unlocked dozens of additional votes for 
that legislation.
  I think with H.R. 987 we don't have to speculate. We know three of 
those bills passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee with 
unanimous, bipartisan support, all of them dealing with drug prices. 
That would have been an easy vote. We could have moved that through.
  My friends could have still brought the other four matters that they 
cared about under a rule, brought it to the floor. They have got the 
votes to move it. It would have precisely the same prospects of success 
it is going to have in the United States Senate.
  The President has already made it clear, since he issued a statement, 
that he is very likely to veto it if it were to make it to his desk. So 
why in the world we threw away an opportunity to do some good for the 
American people in an area where we agree, in order to advance 
something that we know cannot become law, is mystifying to me, to say 
the least.
  Again, H.R. 5 is well-intentioned and designed to expand civil 
rights, but it also adds a term with no clear definition to our civil 
rights laws without regard for how it will work in practice.
  H.R. 987 has four bills that are unacceptable, three bills that are 
eminently acceptable. I do want to close though on a positive note.
  Madam Speaker, I do applaud my friends for bringing the Native 
American issue to fruition today. I am going to be opposing them on the 
rule but supporting them on that legislation. I think it was a very 
wise decision to put it under a rule, quite frankly, and I applaud my 
good friend Chairman Grijalva for working with my good friend Chairman 
McGovern and making sure that that happened. This important piece of 
legislation, which, quite frankly, is important not just to the Tribe 
in question, but establishes the principle that we won't let land going 
into trust be taken out of trust, is very important.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous 
question, ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a list of 364 organizations 
endorsing the Equality Act, as well as a list of companies supporting 
H.R. 5 who employ over 9.8 million workers in the United States.

                              EQUALITY ACT

              364 Organizations Endorsing the Equality Act


                         NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

       9 to 5, National Association of Working Women; A Better 
     Balance; ACRIA; ADAP Advocacy Association; Advocates for 
     Youth; AFL-CIO; African American Ministers In Action; AIDS 
     United; Alan and Leslie Chambers Foundation; American 
     Association for Access, Equity and Diversity; American 
     Association of University Women (AAUW); American Atheists; 
     American Bar Association; American Civil Liberties Union; 
     American Conference of Cantors.
       American Counseling Association; American Federation of 
     State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME); American 
     Federation of Teachers; American Humanist Association; 
     American Medical Association; American Psychological 
     Association; American School Counselor Association; amfAR, 
     Foundation for AIDS Research; Anti-Defamation League; Asian 
     Americans Advancing Justice  AAJC; Asian Pacific 
     American Labor Alliance (APALA); Association of Flight 
     Attendants--CWA; Athlete Ally; Auburn Seminary; Autistic Self 
     Advocacy Network.
       BALM Ministries; Bend the Arc Jewish Action; Black and 
     Pink; Campaign for Youth Justice; Caring Across Generations; 
     Catholics for Choice; Center for American Progress; Center 
     for Black Equity; Center for Inclusivity; Center for Inquiry; 
     Center for LGBTQ and Gender Studies; CenterLink: The 
     Community of LGBT Centers; Central Conference of American 
     Rabbis; Child Welfare League of America; Coalition of Labor 
     Union Women.
       Communications Workers of America; Community Access 
     National Network (CANN); Consortium for Children; Council for 
     Global Equality; DignityUSA; Disciples Justice Action 
     Network; Disciples LGBTQ+ Alliance; Disability Rights 
     Education & Defense Fund (DREDF); Equal Rights Advocates; 
     Equality Federation; Estuary Space; Faith in Public Life; 
     Family Equality Council; Feminist Majority; The Fenway 
     Institute.
       FORGE, Inc.; Forward Together; Freedom Center for Social 
     Justice; Freedom for All Americans; Freedom to Work; Gay 
     Men's Health Crisis (GMHC); Gender Spectrum; Generation 
     Progress; Georgetown University Law Center--Civil Rights 
     Clinic; Girls Inc.; GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing 
     LGBTQ Equality; Global Justice Institute, Metropolitan 
     Community Churches; GLSEN; Guttmacher Institute; Hadassah, 
     The Women's Zionist Organization of America, Inc.
       Harm Reduction Coalition; HealthHIV; Hindu American 
     Foundation; Hispanic Federation; Hispanic Health Network; HIV 
     Medicine Association; Human Rights Campaign; Human Rights 
     Watch; Impact Fund; In Our Own Voice: National Black Women's 
     Reproductive Justice Agenda; Indivisible; Integrity USA: 
     Episcopal Rainbow; Interfaith Alliance; International 
     Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers; International 
     Association of Providers of AIDS Care.
       Japanese American Citizens League; Jewish Women 
     International; Justice in Aging; Keshet; Labor Council for 
     Latin American Advancement (LCLAA); Lambda Legal; Latino 
     Commission on AIDS; LatinoJustice PRLDEF; League of United 
     Latin American Citizens; Lesbian and Gay Veterinary Medical 
     Association (LGVMA); LGBT Technology Partnership & Institute; 
     Main Street Alliance; MANA, A National Latina Organization; 
     MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger; Men of Reform Judaism.
       Methodist Federation for Social Action; Metropolitan 
     Community Churches; MomsRising; More Light Presbyterians; 
     Movement Advancement Project; Muslim Advocates; Muslim Public 
     Affairs Council; Muslims for Progressive Values; NAACP; NARAL 
     Pro-Choice America; NASTAD (National Alliance of State & 
     Territorial AIDS Directors); National AIDS Housing Coalition; 
     National Alliance for Partnerships in

[[Page H3809]]

     Equity (NAPE); National Alliance to End Sexual Violence; 
     National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum (NAPAWF).
       National Association for Female Executives; National 
     Association of County and City Health Officials; National 
     Association of School Psychologists; National Association of 
     School Superintendents; National Association of Secondary 
     School Principals; National Association of Social Workers; 
     National Black Justice Coalition; National Center For Lesbian 
     Rights; National Center for Transgender Equality; National 
     Center on Adoption and Permanency; National Coalition for 
     LGBT Health; National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs; 
     National Council for Occupational Safety and Health (COSH); 
     National Council of Jewish Women; National Crittenton.
       National Education Association; National Employment Law 
     Project; National Employment Lawyers Association; National 
     Fair Housing Alliance; National Hispanic Media Coalition; 
     National Hispanic Medical Association; National Latina 
     Institute for Reproductive Health; National Latinx 
     Psychological Association; National LGBT Chamber of Commerce; 
     National LGBTQ Task Force Action Fund; National Organization 
     for Women; National Partnership for Women & Families; 
     National PTA; National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance 
     (NQAPIA); National Taskforce on Tradeswomen Issues.
       National Trans Bar Association; National Urban League; 
     National Women's Health Network; National Women's Law Center; 
     NEAT--National Equality Action Team; NETWORK Lobby for 
     Catholic Social Justice; New Ways Ministry; NMAC; North 
     American Council on Adoptable Children; Out & Equal 
     Workplace Advocates; OutServe-SLDN; Oxfam America; Parity; 
     People For the American Way; PFLAG National.
       Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America; 
     Physicians for Reproductive Health; Planned Parenthood 
     Federation of America; Population Connection Action Fund; 
     Positive Women's Network-USA; Pride at Work; Promundo-US; 
     Public Justice; Rabbinical Assembly; Reconciling Ministries 
     Network; ReconcilingWorks: Lutherans for Full Participation; 
     Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice; Religious 
     Institute; RootsAction; Ryan White Medical Providers 
     Coalition.
       SafeBAE; SAGE; Secular Coalition for America; Secular 
     Policy Institute; SER Jobs for Progress National Inc.; 
     Service Employees International Union; Sexuality Information 
     and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS); Soulforce; 
     Southern HIV/AIDS Strategy Initiative (SASI); Stop Sexual 
     Assault in Schools (SSAIS); SurvJustice; T'ruah: The Rabbinic 
     Call for Human Rights; The AIDS Institute; The Episcopal 
     Church; The lnanna Project.
       The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; The 
     National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs; The National 
     LGBTQ Workers Center; The TransLatin@ Coalition; The Trevor 
     Project; The Tyler Clementi Foundation; The Williams 
     Institute; Transgender Law Center; Transgender Legal Defense 
     & Education Fund; Treatment Action Group; True Colors United; 
     UFCW OUTreach; Ultra Violet; UMForward; (un)common good 
     collective; UnidosUS.
       Union = Fuerza Latinx Institute; Union for Reform Judaism; 
     Union of Affirming Christians; Unitarian Universalist 
     Association; Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation; 
     United Church of Christ, Justice and Witness Ministries; 
     United State of Women; United Synagogue of Conservative 
     Judaism; URGE: Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity; Voice 
     for Adoption; Voices for Progress; Vote Common Good, Greater 
     Things; Voto Latino; Witness to Mass Incarceration; Women's 
     Alliance for Theology, Ethics, and Ritual (WATER); Young 
     Feminists & Allies: National Organization for Women's (NOW) 
     Inaugural Virtual Chapter.


                     STATE AND LOCAL ORGANIZATIONS

       Alaskans Together For Equality, AK.
       AIDS Alabama, AL.
       Equality Alabama, AL.
       Arizona Coalition to End Sexual & Domestic Violence, AZ.
       Equality Arizona, AZ.
       9to5 California, CA.
       Bienestar Human Services, CA.
       California Employment Lawyers Association, CA.
       California LGBTQ Health and Human Services Network, CA.
       Equality California, CA.
       Hollywood NOW, CA.
       Latino Equality Alliance, CA.
       Legal Aid At Work, CA.
       LGBT Center OC, CA.
       LGBT Community Center of the Desert, CA.
       Missiongathering Christian Church, CA.
       Religious Coalition for Reproductive Right--California, CA.
       Stonewall Democratic Club, CA.
       The Diversity Center of Santa Cruz County, CA.
       The Los Angeles LGBT Center, CA.
       The Source LGBT+ Center, CA.
       9to5 Colorado, CO.
       One Colorado, CO.
       Out Boulder County, CO.
       Rocky Mountain CARES, CO.
       Triangle Community Center Inc., CT.
       Asian/Pacific Islander Domestic Violence Resource Project, 
     DC.
       GLAA, DC.
       The DC Center for the LGBT Community, DC.
       Trans-Latinx DMV (DC, Maryland and Virginia), DC.
       Whitman-Walker Health, DC.
       Compass LGBTQ Community Center, FL.
       Equality Florida, FL.
       QLatinx, FL.
       The Pride Center at Equality Park, FL.
       Visuality, Inc., FL.
       9to5 Georgia, GA.
       Georgia Equality, GA.
       Lake Oconee Community Church, GA.
       The Rush Center, GA.
       One Iowa, IA.
       AIDS Foundation of Chicago, IL.
       Arab American Family Services, IL.
       Association of Latinas & Latinos Motivating Action (ALMA), 
     IL.
       Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation, Chicago 
     Metropolitan Battered Women's Network, Life Span, & 
     Resilience, IL.
       Equality Illinois, IL.
       Illinois Accountability Initiative, IL.
       Pride Action Tank, IL.
       Resilience, formerly Rape Victim Advocates, IL.
       United Latinx Pride, IL.
       Women Employed, IL.
       Indiana Youth Group, IN.
       End Rape on Campus, LA.
       Louisiana Progress Action, LA.
       Lousiana Trans Advocates, LA.
       MassEquality, MA.
       FreeState Justice, MD.
       Gender Rights Maryland, MD.
       Public Justice Center, MD.
       EqualityMaine, ME.
       Affirmations, MI.
       Equality Michigan, MI.
       Kalamazoo Gay Lesbian Resource Center, MI.
       Ruth Ellis Center, Inc., MI.
       Gender Justice, MN.
       OutFront MN, MN.
       PROMO, MO.
       St. Louis Effort for AIDS, MO.
       Montana Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence, MT.
       Charlotte Clergy Coalition for Justice, NC.
       Equality North Carolina, NC.
       Latinos in the Deep South, NC.
       National Organization for Women Charlotte chapter, NC.
       North Dakota Human Rights Coalition, ND.
       OutNebraska, NE.
       New Hampshire Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual 
     Violence, NH.
       Garden State Equality, NJ.
       Hudson Pride Center, NJ.
       Equality New Mexico, NM.
       KWH Law Center for Social Justice & Change, NM.
       Southwest Women's Law Center, NM.
       Tewa Women United, NM.
       Association of Legal Aid Attorneys (ALAA) of UAW 2325, 
     LGBTQ+ Caucus, NY.
       Brooklyn Community Pride Center, NY.
       Callen-Lorde Community Health Center, NY.
       Empire State Pride Agenda, NY.
       Equality New York, NY.
       Forefront Church NYC, NY.
       Gay & Lesbian Independent Democrats (GLID), NY.
       Gender Equality Law Center, NY.
       LGBT Bar Association of Greater New York, NY.
       LGBT Bar Association of New York, NY.
       Sakhi for South Asian Women, NY.
       The Volunteer Lawyers Project of Onondaga County, Inc., NY.
       Theatre of the Oppressed NYC, NY.
       VillageCare, NY.
       Equality Ohio, OH.
       Ohio Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, OH.
       TransOhio, OH.
       Freedom Oklahoma, OK.
       Basic Rights Oregon, OR.
       Cascade AIDS Project, OR.
       Christ Church: Portland, OR.
       Oregon Abuse Advocates & Survivors in Service, OR.
       Mazzoni Center, PA.
       Ni-ta-nee NOW (Centre County, PA), PA.
       PA Religious Coalition for Reproductive Justice, PA.
       The Montgomery County LGBT Business Council, PA.
       PA Religious Coalition for Reproductive Justice, PA.
       Washington County Gay Straight Alliance, Inc., PA.
       Women's Law Project, PA.
       New Voices for Reproductive Justice, PA and OH.
       Women's Rights and Empowerment Network (WREN), SC.
       Equality South Dakota, SD.
       Tennessee Equality Project, TN.
       American Association of University Women Texas (AAUW 
     Texas), TX.
       Cathedral of Hope United Church of Christ, TX.
       Equality Texas, TX.
       Esperanza Peace and Justice Center, TX.
       Open Arms Rape Crisis Center & LGBT+ Services, TX.
       Resource Center, TX.
       Texas Freedom Network, TX.
       The Afiya Center, TX.
       Transgender Education Network of Texas (TENT), TX.
       Equality Utah, UT.
       Diversity Richmond, VA.
       Equality Virginia, VA.
       Entre Hermanos, WA.
       Gay City: Seattle's LGBTQ Center, WA.
       Gender Justice League, WA.
       Legal Voice, WA.
       Oasis Youth Center, WA.
       Rainbow Center, WA.

[[Page H3810]]

       9to5 Wisconsin, WI.
       AIDS Resource Center of Wisconsin, WI.
       FAIR Wisconsin, WI.
       Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault, WI.

                              EQUALITY ACT

       The Business Coalition for the Equality Act is a group of 
     leading U.S. employers that support the Equality Act, which 
     would finally guarantee explicit, permanent protections for 
     lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people under our 
     existing civil rights laws.
       The companies:
       Employ over 9.8 million workers in the U.S.
       Have combined revenue that exceeds $4.2 trillion.
       Have operations in all 50 States:

       A.T. Kearney Inc., Chicago, IL.
       Abercrombie & Fitch Co., New Albany, OH.
       Accenture, New York NY.
       Adobe Systems Inc., San Jose, CA.
       ADP, Roseland, NJ.
       Advanced Micro Devices Inc., Sunnyvale, CA.
       Airbnb Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Alaska Airlines, Seattle, WA.
       Alcoa Corp., Pittsburgh, PA.
       Ally Financial Inc., Detroit, MI.
       Amalgamated Bank, New York, NY.
       Amazon.com Inc., Seattle, WA.
       American Airlines, Fort Worth, TX.
       American Eagle Outfitters Inc., Pittsburgh, PA.
       American Express Global Business Travel, Jersey City, NJ.
       Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA.
       Arconic, New York, NY.
       Ascena Retail Group Inc., Mahwah, NJ.
       Aspen Skiing Company LLC, Aspen, CO.
       AT&T Inc., Dallas, TX.
       Atlassian, San Francisco, CA.
       Bain & Co. Inc./Bridgespan Group, Boston, MA.
       Bank of America Corp., Charlotte, NC.
       Bayer U.S. LLC, Whippany, NJ.
       BD, Franklin Lakes, NJ.
       Best Buy Co. Inc., Richfield, MN.
       Biogen, Cambridge, MA.
       Boehringer Ingelheim USA Corp., Ridgefield, CT.
       Booz Allen Hamilton Inc., McLean, VA.
       Boston Scientific Corp., Marlborough, MA.
       Box Inc., Redwood City, CA.
       Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., New York, NY.
       Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc., Lake Success, NY.
       Brown-Forman Corp., Louisville, KY.
       Caesars Entertainment Corp., Las Vegas, NV.
       Capital One Financial Corp., McLean, VA.
       Cardinal Health Inc., Dublin, OH.
       Cargill Inc., Wayzata, MN.
       Chevron Corp., San Ramon, CA.
       Chobani, Norwich, NY.
       Choice Hotels International Inc., Rockville, MD.
       Cisco Systems Inc., San Jose, CA.
       Citigroup Inc., New York, NY.
       Citrix Systems Inc., Fort Lauderdale, FL.
       CME Group Inc., Chicago, IL.
       CNA Financial Corporation, Chicago, IL.
       Coca-Cola Co., The, Atlanta, GA.
       Compass Bancshares Inc. (BBVA Compass), Birmingham, AL.
       Corning, Corning, NY.
       Converse Inc., Boston, MA.
       Cox Enterprises Inc., Atlanta, GA.
       CSAA Insurance Group, Walnut Creek, CA.
       Cummins Inc., Columbus, IN.
       CVS Health Corp., Woonsocket, RI.
       Danone North America, White Plains, NY.
       Darden Restaurants Inc., Orlando, FL.
       Deloitte LLP, New York, NY.
       Dell Technologies Inc., Round Rock, TX.
       Depository Trust & Clearing Corp., The, New York, NY.
       Diageo North America, Norwalk, CT.
       Dow Chemical Co., The Midland, MI.
       Dropbox Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. (DuPont), Wilmington, DE.
       Eastern Bank Corp., Boston, MA.
       Eaton Corp., Cleveland, OH.
       eBay Inc., San Jose, CA.
       Ecolab Inc., St. Paul, MN.
       Edison International, Rosemead, CA.
       Ernst & Young LLP, New York, NY.
       Estee Lauder Companies Inc., The, New York, NY.
       Evolent Health Inc., Arlington, VA.
       Exelon Corp., Chicago, IL.
       Expedia Group, Bellevue, WA.
       Facebook Inc., Menlo Park, CA.
       First Data Corp., Atlanta, GA.
       Food Lion, Salisbury, NC.
       Gap Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       General Electric Co., Boston, MA.
       General Mills Inc., Minneapolis, MN.
       General Motors Co., Detroit, MI.
       Giant of Maryland LLC, Landover, MD.
       Gilead Sciences Inc., Foster City, CA.
       Glassdoor Inc., Mill Valley, CA.
       Google Inc., Mountain View, CA.
       Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America, The, New York, NY.
       Gusto, San Francisco, CA.
       HERE North America LLC, Chicago, IL.
       Hershey Co., The, Hershey, PA.
       Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co., Palo Alto, CA.
       Hilton Inc., McLean, VA.
       HP Inc., Palo Alto, CA.
       HSF Affiliates LLC, Irvine, CA.
       HSN Inc. St., Petersburg, FL.
       Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP, New York, NY.
       Hyatt Hotels Corp., Chicago, IL.
       IBM Corp., Armonk, NY.
       IHS Markit Ltd., New York, NY.
       IKEA Holding US Inc., Conshohocken, PA.
       Ingersoll-Rand Company, Davidson, NC.
       Insight Enterprises Inc., Tempe, AZ.
       Intel Corp., Santa Clara, CA.
       Intercontinental Hotels Group Americas, Atlanta, GA.
       Iron Mountain Inc., Boston, MA.
       John Hancock Financial Services Inc., Boston, MA.
       Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, NJ.
       JPMorgan Chase & Co., New York, NY.
       Juniper Networks Inc., Sunnyvale, CA.
       Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA.
       Kellogg Co., Battle Creek, MI.
       Kenneth Cole Productions Inc., New York, NY.
       KPMG LLP, New York, NY.
       Lendlease Americas Inc., New York, NY.
       Levi Strauss & Co., San Francisco, CA.
       Linden Research Inc., Davis, CA.
       Lush Fresh Handmade Cosmetics, Wilmington, NC.
       Lyft Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Macy's Inc., Cincinnati, OH.
       Marriott International Inc., Bethesda, MD.
       Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., Springfield, MA.
       Mastercard, Purchase, NY.
       Medtronic PLC, Minneapolis, MN.
       Merck, Kenilworth, NJ.
       Meredith Corp. Des Moines, IA.
       MGM Resorts International, Las Vegas, NV.
       Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA.
       Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams, Taylorsville, NC.
       Moody's Corp., New York, NY.
       Morgan Stanley, New York, NY.
       Nationwide, Columbus, OH.
       Navient, Wilmington, DE.
       Navigant Consulting Inc., Chicago, IL.
       Netflix Inc., Los Gatos, CA.
       Nike Inc., Beaverton, OR.
       Northrop Grumman Corp., Falls Church, VA.
       Nuance Communications, Burlington, MA.
       Office Depot Inc., Boca Raton, FL.
       Oracle Corp., Redwood City, CA.
       Patreon Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Paul Hastings LLP, Los Angeles, CA.
       PepsiCo Inc., Purchase, NY.
       Pfizer Inc., New York, NY.
       Pinterest Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       PNC Financial Services Group Inc., The, Pittsburgh, PA.
       PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, New York, NY.
       Procter & Gamble Co., Cincinnati, OH.
       Pure Storage Inc., Mountain View, CA.
       QUALCOMM Inc., San Diego, CA.
       Realogy Holdings Corp., Madison, NJ.
       Replacements Ltd., McLeansville, NC.
       Royal Bank of Canada, New York, NY.
       S&P Global Inc., New York, NY.
       Salesforce, San Francisco, CA.
       SAP America Inc., Newtown Square, PA.
       Seagate Technology plc, Cupertino, CA.
       Shire PLC, Lexington, MA.
       Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP, Kansas City, MO.
       Shutterstock Inc., New York, NY.
       Siemens Corp., Washington, DC.
       Sodexo Inc., Gaithersburg, MD.
       Spotify USA Inc., New York, NY.
       Square Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       SurveyMonkey Inc., San Mateo, CA.
       Symantec Corp., Mountain View, CA.
       Synchrony, Stamford, CT.
       Takeda Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., Deerfield, IL.
       Target Corp., Minneapolis, MN.
       Tech Data Corp., Clearwater, FL.
       TIAA, New York, NY.
       T-Mobile USA Inc., Bellevue, WA.
       TPG Global LLC, Forth Worth, TX.
       TransUnion, Chicago, IL.
       Turner Construction Co., New York, NY.
       Twitter Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       U.S. Bancorp, Minneapolis, MN.
       Uber Technologies Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Ultimate Software, Weston, FL.
       Under Armour Inc., Baltimore, MD.
       Unilever, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
       United Airlines, Chicago, IL.
       United Parcel Service Inc., Atlanta, GA.
       Univision Communications Inc., New York, NY.
       Verizon Communications Inc., New York, NY.
       Visa, Foster City, CA.
       Warby Parker, New York, NY.
       WeddingWire Inc., Chevy Chase, MD.
       Wells Fargo & Co., San Francisco, CA.
       Whirlpool Corp., Benton Harbor, MI.
       Williams-Sonoma Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Workday Inc., Pleasanton, CA.
       Wyndham Hotels & Resorts Inc., Parsippany, NJ.
       Xerox Corp., Norwalk, CT.
       Yelp Inc., San Francisco, CA.
       Yext Inc., New York, NY.
       Zillow Group, Seattle, WA.
       Zimmer Biomet Holdings Inc., Warsaw, IN.

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, today we will move forward on three 
pieces of legislation whose timely consideration is long overdue. We 
will move to protect Americans' access to health insurance; provide 
much-needed relief on prescription drug prices; provide Federal 
recognition to a Native American community; and at long last, pass the 
Equality Act, to remove the burden of discrimination and move us closer 
to a country where members of the LGBTQ community have an equal 
opportunity to achieve the American Dream.
  The Equality Act will not be the end of our long journey towards full 
LGBTQ equality, but it will finally get

[[Page H3811]]

our laws in line with the values our country was founded upon. As was 
recognized in our founding documents, we must continually take steps to 
make our country more perfect.
  Acknowledging in law the challenges facing LGBTQ people, and taking 
concrete action to correct them, brings us one step closer to that 
perfect union.
  Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous 
question.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule 
governing debate of H.R. 5, the Equality Act, and the underlying 
legislation.
  I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of this legislation and I 
commend once more the tireless work of my colleague, the gentleman from 
Rhode Island, Mr. Cicilline.
  I was proud to stand by him at its introduction, and championed it 
during our hearing on the matter in this committee, the first such 
hearing on the matter, for which I would also like to commend the 
Judiciary Committee Chairman, Jerry Nadler.
  Much has changed in recent years about Americans' attitude towards 
members of the LGBTQ community.
  While Americans can be happy that we as a society have made strides 
in marriage equality, there is much work to do.
  Despite significant legal advances over the past several years--
including marriage equality, LGBTQ Americans remain vulnerable to 
discrimination on a daily basis and too often have little recourse.
  Fifty percent of the national LGBTQ community live in states where, 
though they have the right to marry, they have no explicit non-
discrimination protections in other areas of daily life.
  In most states, a same-sex couple can get married one day and legally 
denied service at a restaurant, be fired from their jobs or evicted 
from their apartment the next.
  The Equality Act is historic legislation that says, unequivocally, 
that LGBTQ Americans deserve the full protections guaranteed by the 
landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964.
  The Equality Act extends anti-discrimination protections to LGBTQ 
Americans with regard to employment, education, access to credit, jury 
service, federal funding, housing, and public accommodations.
  No American should ever be treated as less than equal in the eyes of 
the law.
  The Equality Act will guarantee that LGBTQ Americans in Texas and 
across the country cannot be discriminated against because of who they 
are or whom they love.
  It is long past time for this legislation to become law and that is 
why I proudly joined my colleagues today to get the job done.
  In some areas, federal law prohibiting sex discrimination has already 
been properly interpreted by federal courts and administrative agencies 
to include discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender 
identity.
  The Equality Act affirms these interpretations of existing law and 
makes the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of sexual 
orientation or gender identity explicit, in order to provide greater 
clarity to members of the public, employers, schools, businesses and 
others.
  In areas where sex discrimination is not already prohibited, the bill 
amends existing law to bar discrimination on the basis of sex, as well 
as sexual orientation and gender identity.
  The need for this legislation is all the more urgent following recent 
news that the Supreme Court has granted a writ of Certiorari to a trio 
of three cases to test the reach of the Civil Rights act to determine 
if they cover gay and transgendered individuals.
  With the political reality on the Court as it is, this body--the 
House of Representatives--owes it to our constituents to ensure that 
critical issues related to the civil rights of our fellow citizens are 
handled by their elected representatives, and not left to the whims of 
a reconstituted Trump Court demonstrably antagonistic towards the 
interests of minorities.
  This is why the Equality Act has the bipartisan support of Members of 
Congress, the strong support of the business community, and the 
overwhelming support of the American people--with more than 7 in 10 
supporting the Equality Act.
  On behalf of LGBTQ Texans and all Americans, I am proud to be one of 
the original co-sponsors of H.R. 5, the Equality Act.
  I look forward to voting YES when it comes to the House Floor, 
tomorrow and working towards full enactment.
  With this critical legislation, we will finally, fully end 
discrimination against LGBTQ Americans, and move our nation closer to 
fulfilling the promise of equality, opportunity and justice for every 
American.
  In the meanwhile, I support the rule governing debate of H.R. 5 and 
the underlying legislation.
  The text of the material previously referred to by Mr. Cole is as 
follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 377

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 4. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (H.R. 336) to make improvements to certain defense and 
     security assistance provisions and to authorize the 
     appropriation of funds to Israel, to reauthorize the United 
     States-Jordan Defense Cooperation Act of 2015, and to halt 
     the wholesale slaughter of the Syrian people, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The amendment described in section 5 of this 
     resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as 
     amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, 
     as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader 
     and the Minority Leader or their respective designees; and 
     (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 5. The amendment referred to in Section 4 is an 
     amendment to H.R. 336 to add at the end of the bill the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 406. CLARIFICATION OF DEADLINE FOR REPORT ON 
                   ESTABLISHING AN ENTERPRISE FUND FOR JORDAN

       ``For purposes of section 205(a), the term `establishment 
     of the United States Development Finance Corporation' means 
     the end of the transition period, as defined in section 1461 
     of the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to 
     Development Act of 2018 (division F of Public Law 115-254).

     ``SEC. 407. FORM OF REPORT ON THE COOPERATION OF THE UNITED 
                   STATES AND ISRAEL WITH RESPECT TO COUNTERING 
                   UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS

       ``The report required under section 123(d) shall be 
     submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified 
     annex.

     ``SEC. 408. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON WITHDRAWALS OF UNITED STATES 
                   FORCES FROM SYRIA AND AFGHANISTAN

       ``(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       ``(1) The foreign terrorist organization al Qaeda, 
     responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001, maintains 
     a presence in Afghanistan.
       ``(2) The Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham, better known 
     by its acronym ISIS, flourished in the chaos unleashed by the 
     civil war in Syria and at one point controlled extensive 
     territory in Iraq and Syria.
       ``(3) Al Qaeda, ISIS, and their affiliates have murdered 
     thousands of innocent civilians.
       ``(4) Al Qaeda, ISIS, and their affiliates have proven 
     resilient and have regrouped when the United States and its 
     partners have withdrawn from the fight against them.
       ``(b) Sense of Congress.--Congress--
       ``(1) acknowledges that the United States military and our 
     partners have made significant progress in the campaign 
     against al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham 
     (ISIS), and honors the contributions and sacrifice of the 
     members of the United States Armed Forces who have served on 
     the front lines of this fight;
       ``(2) recognizes the continuing threat to the homeland and 
     our allies posed by al Qaeda and ISIS, which maintain an 
     ability to operate in Syria and Afghanistan;
       ``(3) expresses concern that Iran has supported the Taliban 
     in Afghanistan and Hizballah and the Assad regime in Syria, 
     and has sought to frustrate diplomatic efforts to resolve 
     conflicts in these two countries;
       ``(4) recognizes the positive role the United States and 
     its partners have played in Syria and Afghanistan fighting 
     terrorist groups, countering Iranian aggression, deterring 
     the further use of chemical weapons, and protecting human 
     rights;
       ``(5) warns that a precipitous withdrawal of United States 
     forces from the ongoing fight against these groups, without 
     effective, countervailing efforts to secure gains in Syria 
     and Afghanistan, could allow terrorists to regroup, 
     destabilize critical regions, and create vacuums that could 
     be filled by Iran or Russia, to the detriment of United 
     States interests and those of our allies;
       ``(6) recognizes that al Qaeda and ISIS pose a global 
     threat, which merits increased international contributions to 
     the counterterrorism, diplomatic, and stabilization efforts 
     underway in Syria and Afghanistan;
       ``(7) recognizes that diplomatic efforts to secure 
     peaceful, negotiated solutions to the conflicts in Syria and 
     Afghanistan are necessary to long-term stability and 
     counterterrorism efforts in the Middle East and South Asia;
       ``(8) acknowledges the progress made by Special 
     Representative Khalilzad in his efforts to promote 
     reconciliation in Afghanistan;
       ``(9) calls upon the Administration to conduct a thorough 
     review of the military and diplomatic strategies in Syria and 
     Afghanistan, including an assessment of the risk that 
     withdrawal from those countries could strengthen the power 
     and influence of Russia and Iran in the Middle East and South 
     Asia and undermine diplomatic efforts toward negotiated, 
     peaceful solutions;
       ``(10) requests that the Administration, as part of this 
     review, solicit the views of Israel, our regional partners, 
     and other key troop-contributing nations in the fight against 
     al Qaeda and ISIS;
       ``(11) reiterates support for international diplomatic 
     efforts to facilitate peaceful, negotiated resolutions to the 
     ongoing conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan on terms that 
     respect the rights of innocent civilians and deny safe havens 
     to terrorists;

[[Page H3812]]

       ``(12) calls upon the Administration to pursue a strategy 
     that sets the conditions for the long-term defeat of al Qaeda 
     and ISIS, as well as the protection of regional partners and 
     allies, while ensuring that Iran cannot dominate the region 
     or threaten Israel;
       ``(13) encourages close collaboration between the Executive 
     Branch and the Legislative Branch to ensure continuing 
     strong, bipartisan support for United States military 
     operations in Syria and Afghanistan; and
       ``(14) calls upon the Administration to certify that 
     conditions have been met for the enduring defeat of al Qaeda 
     and ISIS before initiating any significant withdrawal of 
     United States forces from Syria or Afghanistan.
       ``(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of 
     the use of military force.''.
       Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 336.

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam 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. COLE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of adoption of the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 228, 
nays 189, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 205]

                               YEAS--228

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Axne
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brindisi
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten (IL)
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Cisneros
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cox (CA)
     Craig
     Crist
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Cunningham
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny K.
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Engel
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Finkenauer
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill (CA)
     Himes
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Kaptur
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McAdams
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mucarsel-Powell
     Murphy
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Rose (NY)
     Rouda
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Suozzi
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres Small (NM)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Van Drew
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--189

     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks (AL)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cook
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Hill (AR)
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lesko
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Meuser
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose, John W.
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spano
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Young
     Zeldin

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

       
     Richmond
       

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Brooks (IN)
     Cummings
     Davis, Rodney
     Higgins (LA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Keating
     Norcross
     Pence
     Roby
     Ryan
     Swalwell (CA)

                              {time}  1341

  Messrs. TURNER, PALAZZO, MULLIN, and DIAZ-BALART changed their vote 
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. LARSON of Connecticut, SCOTT of Virginia, and Mrs. BUSTOS 
changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  Mr. RICHMOND changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``present.''
  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.
  Mr. COLE. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 229, 
nays 188, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 206]

                               YEAS--229

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Axne
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brindisi
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten (IL)
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Cisneros
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Cox (CA)
     Craig
     Crist
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Cunningham
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny K.
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Engel
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Finkenauer
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green (TX)
     Grijalva
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Hill (CA)
     Himes
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lamb
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney

[[Page H3813]]


     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mucarsel-Powell
     Murphy
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rose (NY)
     Rouda
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Suozzi
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres Small (NM)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Van Drew
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--188

     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks (AL)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cook
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duffy
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Hill (AR)
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Langevin
     Latta
     Lesko
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McAdams
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Meuser
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose, John W.
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spano
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Young
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Brooks (IN)
     Cummings
     Davis, Rodney
     Higgins (LA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Pence
     Roby
     Ryan
     Swalwell (CA)
     Thompson (PA)
     Walker
     Weber (TX)

                              {time}  1350

  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.

                          ____________________