[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 6 (Friday, January 10, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H153-H164]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PFAS ACTION ACT OF 2019
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Garcia of Texas). Pursuant to House
Resolution 779 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further
consideration of the bill, H.R. 535.
Will the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar) kindly take the chair.
{time} 0919
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 535) to require the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to designate per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances as
hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, with Mr. Cuellar (Acting
Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Wednesday,
January 9, 2020, amendment No. 18 printed in part B of House Report
116-366 offered by the gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Axne) had been
disposed of.
Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Tlaib
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19
printed in part B of House Report 116-366.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Speaker, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 36, line 18, after ``a disadvantaged community''
insert ``or a disproportionately exposed community''.
Page 37, after line 13, insert the following new paragraph:
``(3) Disproportionately exposed community.--The term
`disproportionately exposed
[[Page H154]]
community' means a community in which climate change,
pollution, or environmental destruction have exacerbated
systemic racial, regional, social, environmental, and
economic injustices by disproportionately affecting
indigenous peoples, communities of color, migrant
communities, deindustrialized communities, depopulated rural
communities, the poor, low-income workers, women, the
elderly, the unhoused, people with disabilities, or youth.''.
Page 37, line 14, strike ``(3)'' and insert ``(4)''.
Page 37, line 18, strike ``(4)'' and insert ``(5)''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentlewoman
from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chairman, it is an honor to fight alongside
Representatives Dingell and Kildee in protecting our water and
environment. I also appreciate Chairman Pallone for working with us on
this critical issue to Michigan and the Nation.
The amendment ensures frontline communities like mine who have been
directly harmed by the lack of urgency to address the public health
impacts due to environmental injustices have a true seat at the table
when it comes to addressing this crisis.
I grew up in southwest Detroit which houses the most polluted ZIP
Code in the State; where the smell isn't normal; where our kids go to
schools that don't have clean drinking water, where our parks are
closed down, literally, barred away from residents having access to it
because the soil is too contaminated; and where so many of our
residents live in fear that the polluting industry nearby is killing
them.
Two communities I represent within Wayne County, Michigan, found PFAS
contamination. In the recent Metro Times publication, there was a
powerful, yet tragic, statement on what residents in 48217 are forced
to live with. ``Gone are the fruit trees and vegetable gardens.
Residents no longer grow produce because the air and the ground are too
contaminated with hazardous substances.''
The amendment before us clearly defines disadvantaged, exposed
communities and ensures that priority for infrastructure funding to
combat PFAS go to these frontline communities like our own 48217 and
other neighborhoods.
If we are not intentional about where we put our resources to address
this crisis, then we are not serious about universal clean air and
water. This amendment will ensure that we have equitable funding that
goes to neighborhoods that have been ignored for far too long.
I urge you to support the frontline communities amendment and
safeguard the health and environmental justice of the neighborhoods
that have historically been victim of structural racism and
disinvestment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Barragan), my good colleague and partner in this fight who is the
cosponsor of this amendment.
Ms. BARRAGAN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Too often our communities of color are left behind. Too often, they
are on the front lines of environmental injustice. That is why I am
proud to cosponsor this bill with Representatives Tlaib and Ocasio-
Cortez.
Our amendment makes sure that help gets to the people who need it the
most. It requires the newly established PFAS community water systems
grant program to prioritize communities that are disproportionately
exposed to environmental harms and public health impacts from
pollution.
Many of those communities are communities like my very own district.
Communities of color and low-income communities are disproportionately
exposed to PFAS contamination. They often face a variety of
environmental threats, such as: exhaust from congested highways, water
runoff or air pollution from toxic chemical facilities, and close
proximity to landfills.
When a grant application to address PFAS contamination is under
consideration, these communities that have exposure first and worst
should get priority. It shouldn't be an afterthought. That is why this
is a critical first step to ensuring the Safe Drinking Water Act
prioritizes environmental justice.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chair, again, I support this amendment and thank my
colleagues for working on this.
Growing up in southwest Detroit, the stories of the smell, but not
only the fact that we didn't understand why parks and certain chemicals
and so forth were exposed to us, is so important. That is why this
amendment is so critically important; not only for 48217, but the
cities of Melvindale, as well as the Delray neighborhood within
southwest Detroit, again, have been exposed to PFAS contamination.
These are two communities, literally, steps away from the Detroit
riverfront, and that is why it is critically important for us to push
forward on addressing the PFAS contamination across this Nation.
I want to thank my colleagues in understanding why it is important
for the Great Lakes State of Michigan that we need to be able to take
care of our frontline communities first to really be able to ensure
that we have access to clean water universally.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, we obviously support the amendment.
Ms. TLAIB. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the Safe Drinking Water Act already makes special
priority for what is termed ``disadvantaged communities'' which is
based on affordability criteria.
I wish my colleagues who offered this amendment would have been here
last night when we passed an amendment to support rich communities who
have already funded their cleanup and are allowing them then to dip
back into Federal funds to make the payment.
So they may have, if they had a chance to be here for that amendment,
voted against communities that have already been able to afford to
clean up, but we are going to dip into this money at the expense of
poor communities. So that is kind of what occurred last night.
This covers a range of low-income communities that may have trouble
paying for infrastructure needs and has been widely supported as an
appropriate function of taxpayer support. This amendment creates a
broad new category that disproportionately exposes, and which would
appear to expand coverage beyond economic factors which may actually
undermine the straightforward support for the poor and the
disadvantaged already in statute.
I respect the desire to ensure prioritization to communities that may
be particularly hard hit with other economic and environmental issues,
but the workability of the new definition has not been closely examined
and may complicate the provisions of resources to those communities
that need it. A better way to do this would be to require a rulemaking
to sort out the best approach to prioritize funding to disadvantaged
people.
In a letter written by the water communities, one paragraph says--and
I would hope my colleagues would listen to this--because in every
community we have water companies that are supposed to provide safe
drinking water to our citizens. So the water companies have written to
us about this bill. And that is the American Water Works Association,
the Metropolitan Water Agencies, the National Association of Water
Companies, the National Water Resources Association, the National Rural
Water Association, and Water Environment Federation.
These are the people who are going to provide clean drinking water to
our constituents, and this is what they say about this bill:
``Unfortunately, H.R. 535 would leave municipal water and wastewater
system customers subject to financial liability for PFAS cleanup under
CERCLA,'' i.e., the Superfund, ``even in cases where the system
followed all applicable laws and regulations related to
[[Page H155]]
PFAS disposal. This is in direct contrast to the objective of holding
polluters responsible.''
I include their letter in the Record.
January 8, 2020.
Re Opposition to H.R. 535, the PFAS Action Act.
Dear Representative: The undersigned organizations
representing the nation's drinking water and wastewater
utilities are writing to express our opposition to H.R. 535,
the PFAS Action Act of 2019. Unfortunately, the legislation
fails to protect water system customers from liability for
PFAS cleanup costs.
We believe that per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
should be kept out of our nation's water supplies, and that
PFAS polluters should be held responsible. The fundamental
mission of water and wastewater utilities is to protect
public health and the environment, and in doing so they must
also be mindful of affordability and the financial burden
borne by their customers and the communities they serve.
Utilities are tremendously concerned about what PFAS is doing
in their communities and, as they have done with all previous
public health and environmental challenges, are committed
partners in finding a solution to this problem.
However, Congress must make a distinction between entities
that introduced PFAS into the environment, and water and
wastewater systems that are on the front lines of cleaning up
the contamination. Utilities are not the producers of PFAS,
but the receivers of PFAS and must dispose of water and
wastewater treatment byproducts containing traces of the
chemicals. A water system that follows all applicable laws in
its disposal of water treatment byproducts containing PFAS
should not be held liable under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA) for any further environmental cleanup costs related
to these chemicals. Doing so would penalize customers twice:
once when they make investments to remove PFAS from their
waters, and again when they are forced to pay to cleanup PFAS
contamination elsewhere.
Unfortunately, H.R. 535 would leave municipal water and
wastewater systems customers subject to financial liability
for PFAS cleanup under CERCLA--even in cases where the system
followed all applicable laws and regulations related to PFAS
disposal. This is in direct contrast to the objective of
holding polluters responsible.
It is particularly disappointing that the manager's
amendment proposed for H.R. 535 would offer a CERCLA
liability shield to airports that are required to use
firefighting foam containing PFAS, but fails to extend that
same protection to water and wastewater systems who may be
required to remove and dispose of PFAS. As receivers of PFAS,
water utilities should be afforded the same liability
protections that airports are being awarded in the
legislation.
Again, we share the goal of keeping the nation's waters
free of PFAS and holding accountable those entities that are
responsible for environmental contamination. But because H.R.
535 would leave water system customers unprotected against
liability for environmental cleanup of PFAS, we have no
choice but to oppose the legislation in its current form.
Sincerely,
American Water Works Association.
Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies.
National Association of Clean Water Agencies.
National Association of Water Companies.
National Water Resources Association.
National Rural Water Association.
Water Environment Federation.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chair, it is just amazing that last night, the
National Journal published an article called: ``PFAS Bill Could Spark
Tort `Bonanza'.''
{time} 0930
I will read from that: ``An association of U.S. trial lawyers with
deep lobbying pockets and the ear of influential Democrats is helping
to push a sweeping chemical-regulation package that could pave the way
for a prolific legal bumper crop.''
This is not just a forever chemical debate. This is a forever
litigation debate, litigation after litigation as Superfund sites get
established. They are there for decades, as I quoted last night
numerous times. We have Superfund sites that have been identified that
are still unremediated 30 to 40 years after they were established.
This bill attempts to use the Superfund as the silver bullet to
address this concern. I mentioned last night, but it is a new day: This
is the first time in the history of the Superfund legislation that, in
the Clean Water Act, we are legislatively identifying a chemical as
hazardous not using the scientific process.
For that and all the other reasons, I ask for a ``no'' vote on this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Malinowski
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20
printed in part B of House Report 116-366.
Mr. MALINOWSKI. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 46, line 12, strike ``or cooking utensil'' and insert
``cooking utensil, or stain resistant, water resistant, or
grease resistant coating not subject to requirements under
section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act''.
Page 46, beginning on line 14, strike ``or cooking
utensil'' and insert ``cooking utensil, or stain resistant,
water resistant, or grease resistant not subject to
requirements under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act''.
Page 46, beginning on line 17, strike ``or cooking
utensil'' and insert ``cooking utensil, or stain resistant,
water resistant, or grease resistant coating not subject to
requirements under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Malinowski) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Modification to Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Malinowski
Mr. MALINOWSKI. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the
amendment be modified in the form I have placed at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the modification.
The Clerk read as follows:
Modification to Amendment No. 20 Printed in Part B of House Report No.
116-366
Offered By Mr. Malinowski of New Jersey
The amendment is modified to read as follows:
__ Page 46, line 12, insert ``, or a stain resistant, water
resistant, or grease resistant coating not subject to
requirements under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act'' before ``to meet''.
__ Page 46, line 15, insert ``, or stain resistant, water
resistant, or grease resistant coating'' before ``does not
contain''.
__ Page 46, line 18, insert ``, or stain resistant, water
resistant, or grease resistant coating not subject to
requirements under section 409 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act'' before ``that the Administrator''.
Mr. MALINOWSKI (during the reading). Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous
consent to dispense with the reading of the modification.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman
from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the original request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The amendment is modified.
The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. MALINOWSKI. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 535, the
PFAS Action Act, and my amendment to the bill, which gives
manufacturers an opportunity to be transparent with consumers and make
clear that their products are indeed free of PFAS.
PFAS chemicals are found in coatings that line products like nonstick
pots and pans, waterproof clothing, and grease-resistant and fast-food
containers, items that we use every day and rarely think about. We are
now well aware of the devastating harm that these chemicals can cause,
like growth and learning delays in infants and children, an increased
risk of birth defects, weakened immune systems, decreased fertility,
and an increased risk of cancer.
Each year, billions of pounds of these products are dumped into
landfills or burned in incinerators, releasing PFAS pollutants into the
air, water, and soil, contaminating the food we eat and the water we
drink. In my district in New Jersey, there are over 133 contaminated
sites, more than 30 of which are schools.
Right now, consumers have no way of knowing for sure whether products
like
[[Page H156]]
the water-resistant spray that we put on our shoes and jackets or the
stain-resistant sprays we put on our furniture, rugs, and carpets are
or are not contaminated with PFAS coatings that can harm our health.
My amendment would alleviate this problem. It will add stain-, water-
, and grease-resistant coatings to the list of products eligible for a
voluntary label indicating the absence of PFAS, which will allow
consumers to make safer and more informed decisions about the products
that we purchase.
We must start holding polluting companies accountable for the
chemicals that they are putting into the products that we bring to our
homes and give to our children, but we should also be giving companies
that do the right thing and that protect consumers a way to be
recognized and a way to be rewarded for responsible behavior.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to voting for this legislation, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MALINOWSKI. Once again, this is simply about greater
transparency. It is about giving consumers choice. It is about American
companies that have done the right thing that are facing competition
often from abroad, often from companies that have not done the right
thing, giving them a chance to put a credible label on their products
that says: This is safe. This is PFAS-free.
Mr. Chairman, this is a commonsense amendment. I hope that everybody
accepts it, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we addressed an amendment like this last night from the
gentlewoman from Maine (Ms. Pingree). Very similar, and I will raise
the same objections.
I have been here a long time, and I actually remember the Alar scare.
I also remember BPA, bisphenol A. That is the plastic--it was a kind of
the same type--that was going to kill everybody, and we ought to ban
it. We went through the scientific process and found out that it
wasn't.
In the meantime, did we need the government to offer labeling a ``-
free'' product? The answer in the example of BPA is no.
Bisphenol A was used in baby bottles. Company retailers that made
bottles with other substances had no problems. In fact, it was a great
marketing attempt for them to say that it was BPA-free.
They didn't need government to do that. They did it because of the
advertising and the consumer potential to do that.
There will be, and there are, companies trying to do the right thing.
They should take advantage of that opportunity, especially in this
environment when we are dealing with 7,866 per- and polyfluorinated
compounds. The debate is that every one of those 7,866 compounds is
hazardous and destructive to individuals. If you are making a product,
this is a perfect time to be able to do that and say that it is PFAS-
free.
Why would we have the government do that? Some could argue that this
is a corporate perk, that we are incentivizing and rewarding companies
through government action to do something that if they are good
stewards, they should be able to do on their own. That is why I have
some concerns with this.
Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record another letter from numerous of
these companies--some you would label bad actors; some you would label
good actors--as they submitted a letter in opposition to this overall
bill.
January 8, 2020.
To the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: PFAS
are a large and diverse group of chemicals with unique
properties that have been used in a broad number of
beneficial applications for years. Heightened attention to
potential health effects of certain PFAS has led to an
increased public concern and interest in new regulatory
protections in this area.
We understand these concerns and are committed to working
with legislators, regulators, and all stakeholders to
establish risk-based standards that protect human health and
the environment. We also support the development of a
consistent approach and clear timelines for assessing and
regulating specific PFAS across all relevant federal agencies
to ensure that government regulations, actions, and
communications are coordinated for maximum effectiveness.
Any federal action should not address PFAS as a class or
with predetermined outcomes, but rather should be based on
sound science and the weight of the scientific evidence.
Further, Congress should not circumvent existing regulatory
authorities. The Environmental Protection Agency, as well as
other relevant agencies, should retain their traditional
power to study PFAS and determine whether to regulate certain
PFAS. Many provisions included in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, signed into law at
the end of last year, took important steps towards meeting
those goals.
We look forward to working with you on this important
matter as the legislative process continues. We oppose H.R.
535, the ``PFAS Action Act of 2019.''
Sincerely,
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Advamed, Airlines for America,
American Chemistry Council, American Coatings Association,
American Forest & Paper Association, American Fuel &
Petrochemical Manufacturers, American Petroleum Institute,
Associated General Contractors of America, Flexible Packaging
Association, Foodservice Packaging Institute.
International Liquid Terminals Association, National
Association of Chemical Distributors, National Association of
Manufacturers, National Cattlemen's Beef Association,
Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS), Single Ply Roofing
Industry, Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates,
Specialty Graphic Imaging Association, TRSA--The Linen,
Uniform and Facility Services Association.
Mr. SHIMKUS. They say in this letter: ``Any Federal action should not
address PFAS as a class or with predetermined outcomes, but rather
should be based on sound science and the weight of the scientific
evidence.''
As I said before, this is the first time in the history of the
country that we are labeling a chemical formulation as toxic
politically using political science, not science.
They go on to say: ``Further, Congress should not circumvent existing
regulatory authorities. The Environmental Protection Agency, as well as
other relevant agencies, should retain their traditional power to study
PFAS and determine whether to regulate certain PFAS. Many provisions
included in the National Defense Authorization Act''--we talked about
that a lot last night--``for Fiscal Year 2020, signed into law at the
end of last year, took important steps toward meeting those goals.''
There is a list of 30 or 40 organizations. I am not going to read them
all this morning.
I appreciate my colleague's amendment. We actually were close when we
were thinking about getting a bipartisan bill to bring to the floor.
This was one of the provisions that was on the table. My friends, I
believe, couldn't say yes, so here we are, fighting this bill that the
Senate will not take up, and the President will not sign, and you will
have to wait for the next Congress to address this issue.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment, as modified,
offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Malinowski).
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Levin of Michigan
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21
printed in part B of House Report 116-366.
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 2, after line 15, insert the following new subsection:
(c) Review.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency shall submit to the
appropriate congressional committees a report containing a
review of actions by the Environmental Protection Agency to
clean up contamination of the substances designated pursuant
to subsection (a).
(2) Matters included.-- The report under paragraph (1)
shall include an assessment of cleanup progress and
effectiveness, including the following:
(A) The number of sites where the Environmental Protection
Agency has acted to remediate contamination of the substances
designated pursuant to subsection (a).
(B) Which types of chemicals relating to such substances
were present at each site
[[Page H157]]
and the extent to which each site was contaminated.
(C) An analysis of discrepancies in cleanup between Federal
and non-Federal contamination sites.
(D) Any other elements the Administrator may determine
necessary.
(3) Appropriate congressional committees defined.--In this
subsection, the term ``appropriate congressional committees''
means the following:
(A) The Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of
Representatives.
(B) The Committee on the Environment and Public Works of
the Senate.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Levin) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires, within 5
years, a comprehensive report to Congress by the Environmental
Protection Agency, the EPA, regarding the actions the Agency will take
to clean up and remediate PFAS contamination sites once we pass the
important bill before us into law.
I would like to begin by thanking my friend Chairman Pallone and his
staff for working with me on this, as well as my fellow Michiganders,
Congresswoman Dingell, Congressman Upton, and Congressman Kildee, for
their bipartisan leadership on this bill.
I am proud that this bill includes my bill cosponsored with
Representative Khanna, the PFAS Safe Disposal Act, which prohibits
unsafe incineration of PFAS. We need to ensure that when PFAS chemicals
are destroyed by incineration, PFAS particles are not emitted into the
air. The monumental effort of PFAS cleanup will be for naught if PFAS
is simply transmitted from water and soil into the air we breathe.
We in Michigan know all too well the growing threat that PFAS
chemicals pose to our communities and our water resources. They have
been linked to cancer, damage to both reproductive and immune systems,
developmental issues, and changes in liver, immune, and thyroid
functions.
The troubling reality is that both industry and the EPA itself have
known about the risks from PFAS chemicals for decades. We know, for
example, that industry studies have demonstrated the adverse health
effects of these chemicals since as early as 1950. That is 70 years
ago. We also know that even though the EPA has recognized the risks of
PFAS since at least 1995, the Agency is continuing to allow new PFAS
chemicals onto the market to this day.
By passing H.R. 535 into law, we can finally begin to reverse decades
of the EPA's failure and finally deliver the protections impacted
communities need in both the short and long term. But after decades of
the EPA failing to treat this matter with urgency, we need to make sure
that the cleanup process that will be set in place, once we finally
designate PFOA and PFAS as hazardous substances, is both timely and
effective.
My amendment is a commonsense transparency and accountability measure
that requires the EPA to submit a comprehensive review to Congress
after 5 years of cleanup efforts. The report required by my amendment
will include the number of sites that have to be remediated, the types
of PFAS chemicals present at each site, an analysis of discrepancies
and cleanup between Federal and non-Federal contamination sites, and
more.
For the sake of our constituents and after so many years of
inexcusable threats to their health, Congress must ensure that EPA's
PFAS cleanup efforts are effective.
Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), who is the Speaker of the
House.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding and
congratulate him on his important amendment. I hope this important
study will be part of that legislation.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to come to the floor to join our
colleagues, the distinguished chairman of the Energy and Commerce
Committee and the former chair, Mr. Upton, in their bipartisan support
of this legislation.
I salute Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, a crusader in this urgent
mission to protect our communities from PFAS chemicals.
I also thank Mr. Tonko, the chair of the Environment and Climate
Change Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
The list goes on and on, and I will name some more.
Last year, our Members worked relentlessly to pass bold legislation
to tackle the PFAS crisis. We salute the Members whose bills were
included in the bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act agreement
reached by the House.
{time} 0945
Unfortunately, at the end of the year, the Senate GOP refused to join
the House to secure full, robust protections against PFAS chemicals,
and key provisions were cut from the NDAA, the National Defense
Authorization Act. The Senate GOP obstruction is why we are here today.
We are also here today because our distinguished chairman, Mr.
Pallone, promised that we would have a chance to vote on robust
legislation after the first of the year. I thank the chairman.
PFAS chemicals are a serious public health threat, contaminating the
water we drink, the air we breathe, and the food we eat. These forever
chemicals--which do not break down easily--are exposing millions of
Americans to liver disease, asthma, thyroid dysfunction, multiple forms
of cancer, and further health threats.
Today, nearly all Americans, including newborn babies, expectant
mothers, and children, have PFAS in their blood; and up to 110 million
people may be drinking tainted water, including, as our colleagues from
Michigan have indicated, the challenge in their State indicated by the
leadership and demonstrated on the floor in a bipartisan way on this
issue.
Our colleague from Hoosick Falls, New York, Mr. Delgado, has been a
champion on this issue. Their contamination from a plastics factory
raised the level of PFAS chemicals in residents' blood to 100 times the
national average, Mr. Shimkus.
In Chincoteague, Virginia, near Maryland, where I grew up,
contamination from NASA Wallops Flight Center forced the local
community to find an entirely new drinking water supply. And we thank
Congresswoman Luria for her leadership in all of this.
And Mr. Pappas, also with Annie Kuster, has a situation in
Portsmouth, New Hampshire, where contamination from Pease Air Force
Base poisoned the drinking water of thousands of residents, including
children and infants.
Mr. Chair, before we won the majority, we had a hearing. It really
was about a number of issues, environmental justice being one of them.
Reverend Barbera brought people from all over the country to talk about
this. I particularly remember our conversations in the testimony of
Peggy Price.
She came and told the story of her family and how they were affected
by what was happening at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. It was a very
sad story. Their families suffered, the parents, the children--just a
horrible situation. They were serving our country at Camp Lejeune, and
they were victimized by the water supply there.
Particularly egregious, is the epidemic of contamination on military
sites, as I mentioned just now, and more than 400 sites across the
United States are affected. It is unacceptable that our men and women
who sacrifice to keep us safe around the world face this danger in
their health at home.
Sadly, some big corporations and the EPA have known about the risks
from PFAS chemicals for decades, but they have failed to prevent the
spread of contamination. The Trump administration's EPA is breaking its
own promises every day that it delays and puts polluters ahead of the
American people.
In stark contrast, the House is taking action. We are cleaning up
communities by designating PFAS as a hazardous substance by the EPA,
which is the key barrier to cleaning up military and industrial sites.
[[Page H158]]
We are also creating new, robustly funded grants, in partnership with
States, to help with cleanup and remediation efforts. Hopefully, we
will be adding this important study that Mr. Levin is proposing to this
legislation.
And we are helping stem the tide of further contamination with tough,
new testing reporting and monitoring requirements, strict limits on the
introduction of new PFAS chemicals, limits on air emissions, and
banning unsafe incineration--strong measures to hold contaminating
companies accountable.
Last month, the Senate GOP fought to prevent many of these lifesaving
measures from becoming law in the NDAA. Now, Senator McConnell will
have to explain once again to the American people why he is blocking
our bipartisan action to clean up contaminated communities.
I urge a strong vote on this legislation to keep the American people
healthy and safe and, again, salute all of those who have worked so
hard to bring this legislation to the floor in a bipartisan way.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time I
have remaining.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan has 45 seconds
remaining.
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to close, and I
yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, while people may have all kinds of opinions on the
underlying issue, this amendment is simply about sunshine. It simply is
about good government: Will our Federal agencies tell our Article I
body here what they are up to? I think it just makes all kinds of sense
to ask them to give us a comprehensive report after a reasonable period
of time, so I hope everyone can support this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I am happy to follow the Speaker, and I do have great respect for
her. It gets me in trouble in my district every now and then when I
talk about our relationship, but it has to be said that I can't allow a
revisionist history to report on what occurred, especially on the Safe
Drinking Water Act and in the final negotiations.
It is well-reported that there was a three-corner agreement. One
corner couldn't get there, and that is why we didn't have it. I won't
name names. I won't point fingers. But to point this over at our
friends in the other side of the building where they had come to an
agreement, that is just not accurate.
I would also point out that, in this bill, we are exempting airports
from Superfund liability. We are not exempting medical devices. We are
not exempting military contractors. We are not exempting water
companies. We are exempting airports who use, probably the most toxic
of all these chemicals: firefighter foam. Somehow, they were able to
get a carve-out where other companies, industries, could not.
The only other organization that benefited was the Trial Lawyer
Association. I want to mention that again. It is amazing, the article
came out last night. I am not sure how that happened, but it states in
the article:
An association of U.S. trial lawyers with deep lobbying
pockets and an ear of influential Democrats is helping to
push a sweeping chemical regulation package that could pave
the way for a prolific legal bumper crop.
Now, where would that happen in this bill? Well, it would happen in
the Kildee amendment that we passed last night, which would federalize
information publication that States should handle. We can get that at
the Federal level, then the trial bar could go through this
information. The Pappas amendment had unrealistic deadlines, so they
had this litigation based upon not being able to meet a deadline.
Then you have section 2 of the Superfund designation without science
and unrealistic review deadlines.
Section 4, toxic labeling of unrealistic risks without a review.
Section 15, Clean Air Act designation without science and unrealistic
review deadlines.
And the Brindisi amendment, we passed, that makes it marginally
better, but, of course, not good enough for us to be able to accept
that--or at least me--in the vote on the floor.
So, if this colleague of mine would amend this amendment and say
let's have transparency on the class action lawsuits, then the
litigation and the legal costs of doing this--we know that Superfund
designation is not a silver bullet to cleanup, and I used this numerous
times last night.
Old Springfield, Vermont, was added on the Superfund list, September
8, 1983. Guess where it is 36 years later? Still on the Superfund list.
Colbert Landfill, Spokane, Washington, added September 8, 1983. Guess
what it is? Still a Superfund site 36 years later.
We should do a transparency look at how much litigation and money has
been spent, both by the government and lawyers, on these Superfund
sites. And, if we want to talk about transparency, I think that would
also be a good way. Maybe we could have a bipartisan agreement on
timelines and remediation, but also follow the money. Where is the
money going?
So this amendment does not require informing Congress of private-
sector actions to clean up PFAS under Superfund and is unclear how much
cleanup is being done by other Federal agencies. Plus, this is
something that the Government Accountability Office or the
congressional committees could do without such expense to the Federal
Government.
Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 22 Offered by Ms. Slotkin
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 22
printed in part B of House Report 116-366.
Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 47, after line 15, insert the following:
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, in consultation with the head of the U.S.
Fire Administration and other relevant Federal departments or
agencies, shall report to Congress on the efforts of the
Environmental Protection Agency and other relevant Federal
departments and agencies to identify viable alternatives to
firefighting foam and other related equipment containing any
PFAS.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 779, the gentlewoman
from Michigan (Ms. Slotkin) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment to
the PFAS Action Act, which would require the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with other relevant
government agencies, to report to Congress on efforts to identify
viable alternatives to PFAS firefighting foam and other related
equipment containing PFAS.
PFAS contamination hits particularly close to home for me and my
constituents. We in Michigan are confronting widespread PFAS
contamination in our water, chemicals that we know are linked to cancer
and other diseases.
This past summer, I toured Strawberry Lake, part of Livingston
County's beautiful chain of lakes in my district, where foam resulting
from PFAS buildup is visible in plain sight.
I held a forum focused on PFAS contamination in Pinckney, Michigan, a
community that has been under a ``do not eat fish'' advisory for over a
year and a ``do not touch foam'' advisory for many months. The more
than 200 attendees expressed deep concern about the impact of PFAS
contamination on their health, safety, and livelihoods, and had simple
questions about how to know whether their water is safe to drink, eat
fish from, or even touch.
In September, I met with Brighton Fire Chief Michael O'Brien and fire
chiefs from across Livingston County and discussed their concerns about
exposure to firefighting foam that contains high concentrations of
PFAS.
PFAS presents alarming health risks. According to the CDC, exposure
to PFAS can affect growth, learning, and behavior in infants and older
children; lower a woman's chance of getting pregnant; increase the risk
of cancer; and impact the immune system. In
[[Page H159]]
fact, one of my constituents, who spent his career as an auto mechanic
and was exposed to PFAS-contaminated materials on a daily basis, is now
connecting his diagnosis of MS, or an autoimmune disease, to his
exposure to PFAS at work.
In Michigan, the high levels of PFAS have been detected in 34 sites,
including at Diamond Chrome Plating in my district.
In addition, these chemicals have been found at some level in
municipal drinking water serving more than 2 million people across the
State.
PFAS has been detected in 54 Michigan schools, including 5 schools in
my district.
Last summer, the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services
issued an emergency ``do not eat'' advisory regarding all fish from
sections of the Huron River in my district after fish from Kent Lake
were discovered to contain very high levels of PFAS.
Let me be clear: I believe that access to clean water out of your tap
is a right and not a privilege.
{time} 1000
I believe that environmental security is homeland security. If it is
threatening the safety and security of your family and preservation of
your way of life, that is homeland security.
When Michigan families can't be confident that the water they are
giving their children to drink won't make them sick or give them a
learning disability; when they can no longer fish the rivers or hunt in
the areas they have hunted for years with their families, that is a
threat to our security, to our way of life.
It doesn't matter if you are a Democrat, or a Republican, or an
Independent, if you are going to hand your child a glass of water, you
should be confident it won't cause cancer or other lifelong health
issues. That is your family, and that is their safety.
My amendment would simply require the EPA to report to Congress on
efforts to identify viable alternatives to products and equipment
containing PFAS, including firefighting foam used on our military
bases.
The PFAS Action Act of 2019 does a great deal to meet the threat of
PFAS contamination with robust legislation that responds to it. And my
amendment will hold Federal agencies accountable for finding viable
alternatives to prevent further PFAS contamination.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment,
although I do not believe I will oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Illinois is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. Chair, I have no speakers and I am prepared to close
after the gentleman closes.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois has the right to close.
The gentlewoman from Michigan is recognized.
Ms. SLOTKIN. Mr. Chair, I ask for the bill to be supported, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman brings up an issue about firefighter
foam. She talks about military installations. She does not talk about
commercial aviation and waterway issues which are exempted in this
bill.
Again, I am not sure why we are wanting to clean up all PFAS
contamination, the world is ending, but we exempt airports. We don't
exempt medical devices.
Let me hold up this. This was used last night. This is a medical
device that is inserted into a child, maybe an unborn child, to close a
hole in the heart. FDA said this is safe to insert into a heart. You
want to talk about daily exposure? Here is daily exposure in an infant
child.
So the nexus between the gentlewoman's amendment and this debate is
that maybe when we are investigating firefighter foam for alternatives,
maybe we are going to investigate alternatives for this type.
FDA has approved this. So why are we going to possibly ban chemicals?
We also mentioned last night that the Food and Drug Administration
has claimed PFAS lining for food packages is safe. So we already have
government entities that have investigated portions of the PFAS world.
Remember, we are talking about 7,866 different permutations; not one
chemical, not two chemicals, but 7,866. And this is the first time in
the history of our Nation that, without science and due diligence, we
are going to label a chemical as toxic. That is part of the objection.
Let's use real science. I get beat up all the time, being a science-
denier, climate change.
Here, my friends on the Democrat side aren't ready to rely on science
to address each of these 7,866 different applications. In fact, they
are trying to, in this legislation, cause a rush to judgment, create an
inability for the EPA to make a decision. So then, the companies can be
sued because there is no way they can meet the timelines based upon
this bill.
I would like to also read from the American Council of Engineering
Companies letter, a letter that I will ask, at the appropriate time, to
submit to the Record; and it says this: ``By designating certain PFAS
chemicals as hazardous substances under CERCLA,'' which is the
Superfund, ``as called for in H.R. 535, we are concerned that such
action could upset the progress already made to address this challenge,
divert resources away from more pressing threats to water quality, and
impose significant costs and liability on our water utility clients and
the ratepayers they serve.''
Mr. Chairman, I include the letter I just referenced in the Record.
American Council of
Engineering Companies,
Washington, DC, January 9, 2020.
Hon. Frank Pallone,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Greg Walden,
Ranking Member, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Pallone and Ranking Member Walden: On behalf
of the American Council of Engineering Companies (ACEC)--the
business association of the nation's engineering industry--we
wish to express our concerns over H.R. 535, the PFAS Action
Act. While we agree that aggressive steps are needed to
protect water resources from per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS) contamination, we believe that ongoing
efforts at the federal level to develop risk-based
regulations offer a more effective approach to address this
problem.
ACEC represents over 5,500 engineering companies and
thousands of engineering professionals who work on a daily
basis to improve the nation's water infrastructure and
protect human health and the environment. While PFAS
chemicals have been in wide use for many decades, concerns
have emerged in recent years regarding the health effects of
certain types of PFAS. In response to this, federal and state
regulators, as well as water supply, wastewater and other
stakeholders are working together to define the public health
risks of the PFAS chemicals as well as consideration of
technologies to cost-effectively mitigate those risks.
The Council supports this deliberative, consistent and
data-driven approach to developing risk-based PFAS standards.
By designating certain PFAS chemicals as hazardous substances
under CERCLA (Superfund), as called for in H.R. 535, we are
concerned that such action could upset the progress already
made to address this challenge, divert resources away from
more pressing threats to water quality, and impose
significant costs and liability on our water utility clients
and the ratepayers they serve.
We would respectfully urge the House to reconsider this
approach, and instead work to support and where necessary
enhance the existing regulatory framework and action plan.
Sincerely,
Linda Bauer Darr,
President & CEO.
Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Chairman, I already asked for inclusion in the
Record a letter from the local municipal water plants, or the rural
water associations, or the for-profit-owned water companies who said
this makes it more difficult for us to clean up the water. We are going
to be held to Superfund liability. We have to pay the court costs.
Now we have exempted airports. We haven't exempted the water
companies. That is really just a pass-through. They are receiving, they
are cleaning up, and then they are disposing, but we are not going to
exempt them. We are going to exempt airports.
We are not going to exempt medical device manufacturers who are
saving
[[Page H160]]
the lives of unborn children who have daily exposure of PFAS; and this
is a lifesaving application.
This is just one of many. I could pull up heart stents. Last night we
also talked about F-16s and our defense industry.
Maybe, with this amendment, we will do due diligence and find a
suitable chemical formula that will replace this. So I applaud it. I
think it is well thought of. It is meaningful.
I would also like to, in the end, because this will probably be my
last time to be able to talk on this. We, on both sides of the aisle,
really need to thank legislative counsel, because of the short
timeframe they had in the amendment offerings, their response to the
majority's concerns and writing. And actually, obviously, we are
probably more difficult because we are trying to really dig in and find
the fallacies of the coming amendments.
So my personal thanks to legislative counsel and professional staff
who worked tirelessly on behalf of both sides.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Slotkin).
The amendment was agreed to.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report
116-366 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Burgess of Texas.
Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Balderson of Ohio.
Amendment No. 13 by Mr. Pappas of New Hampshire.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Burgess
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Burgess) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 161,
noes 247, not voting 28, as follows:
[Roll No. 9]
AYES--161
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Cole
Collins (GA)
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson (OH)
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Ferguson
Fleischmann
Flores
Foxx (NC)
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gianforte
Gibbs
Gonzalez (OH)
Gooden
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Hartzler
Hern, Kevin
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill (AR)
Hollingsworth
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Marshall
Massie
McAdams
McCaul
McClintock
McKinley
Meadows
Miller
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Peterson
Ratcliffe
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Riggleman
Roby
Rodgers (WA)
Roe, David P.
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose, John W.
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Spano
Stauber
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Stivers
Taylor
Thornberry
Timmons
Tipton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waltz
Watkins
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Wright
Yoho
NOES--247
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
Finkenauer
Fletcher
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green (TN)
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Heck
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Holding
Horn, Kendra S.
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Hurd (TX)
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (TX)
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim
King (NY)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Mucarsel-Powell
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
Norton
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reed
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rooney (FL)
Rose (NY)
Rouda
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sablan
San Nicolas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Shalala
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stefanik
Stevens
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres Small (NM)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Van Drew
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young
Zeldin
NOT VOTING--28
Aderholt
Brady
Buchanan
Buck
Carter (TX)
Crawford
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Gohmert
Gonzalez-Colon (PR)
Granger
Hunter
Johnson (GA)
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Lewis
Loudermilk
Marchant
McHenry
Meuser
Nadler
Payne
Radewagen
Serrano
Simpson
Smucker
Thompson (PA)
Walker
{time} 1033
Ms. JAYAPAL, Mrs. DAVIS of California, Mr. COOPER, Ms. GARCIA of
Texas, Mr. POSEY, Mrs. AXNE, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, Messrs. ESPAILLAT
and VAN DREW changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 9.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Balderson
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Balderson) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 170,
noes 239, not voting 27, as follows:
[[Page H161]]
[Roll No. 10]
AYES--170
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Cole
Collins (GA)
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson (OH)
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Ferguson
Fleischmann
Flores
Foxx (NC)
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gianforte
Gibbs
Gonzalez (OH)
Gooden
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Hartzler
Hern, Kevin
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill (AR)
Holding
Hollingsworth
Hurd (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Marshall
Massie
McAdams
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meadows
Miller
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Riggleman
Roby
Rodgers (WA)
Roe, David P.
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose, John W.
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schrader
Schweikert
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Spano
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Stivers
Taylor
Thornberry
Timmons
Tipton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waltz
Watkins
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Wright
Yoho
Zeldin
NOES--239
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
Finkenauer
Fletcher
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Heck
Herrera Beutler
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horn, Kendra S.
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim
King (NY)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Mucarsel-Powell
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
Norton
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rooney (FL)
Rose (NY)
Rouda
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sablan
San Nicolas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Shalala
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stevens
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres Small (NM)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young
NOT VOTING--27
Aderholt
Brady
Buchanan
Carter (TX)
Crawford
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Gohmert
Gonzalez-Colon (PR)
Granger
Hunter
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Lewis
Loudermilk
Marchant
Meuser
Nadler
Payne
Radewagen
Scott, Austin
Serrano
Simpson
Smucker
Thompson (PA)
Van Drew
Walker
{time} 1038
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. VAN DREW. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 10.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Pappas
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New
Hampshire (Mr. Pappas) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 242,
noes 168, not voting 26, as follows:
[Roll No. 11]
AYES--242
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
Collins (GA)
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
Finkenauer
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Heck
Herrera Beutler
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horn, Kendra S.
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Hurd (TX)
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim
King (NY)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Mast
Matsui
McAdams
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Mucarsel-Powell
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
Norton
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Phillips
Pingree
Plaskett
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reed
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rooney (FL)
Rose (NY)
Rouda
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sablan
San Nicolas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Shalala
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stevens
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres Small (NM)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Van Drew
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOES--168
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Cole
[[Page H162]]
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson (OH)
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Ferguson
Fleischmann
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx (NC)
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gianforte
Gibbs
Gonzalez (OH)
Gooden
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Hartzler
Hern, Kevin
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill (AR)
Holding
Hollingsworth
Hudson
Huizenga
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Marshall
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
Meadows
Miller
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Ratcliffe
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Riggleman
Roby
Rodgers (WA)
Roe, David P.
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose, John W.
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Spano
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Stivers
Taylor
Thornberry
Timmons
Tipton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waltz
Watkins
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Wright
Yoho
Young
Zeldin
NOT VOTING--26
Aderholt
Brady
Buchanan
Carter (TX)
Crawford
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Gohmert
Gonzalez-Colon (PR)
Granger
Hunter
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Lewis
Loudermilk
Marchant
Meuser
Nadler
Payne
Radewagen
Scott, Austin
Serrano
Simpson
Smucker
Thompson (PA)
Walker
{time} 1044
Mr. VAN DREW changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 11 and
``yea'' on rollcall No. 10.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Clay). There being no further amendments, under
the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Cuellar) having assumed the chair, Mr. Clay, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 535) to
require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to
designate per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances as hazardous substances
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act of 1980, and, pursuant to House Resolution 779, he
reported the bill, as amended by that resolution, back to the House
with sundry further amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is
ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any further amendment reported from
the Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
Motion to Recommit
Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit
at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentlewoman opposed to the bill?
Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. I am in its current form.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mrs. Rodgers of Washington moves to recommit the bill H.R.
535 to the Committee on Energy and Commerce with instructions
to report the same back to the House forthwith, with the
following amendment:
Page 10, line 14, insert ``, including any unborn child (as
defined in section 1841(d) of title 18, United States Code)''
before the period at the end.
Mrs. RODGERS of Washington (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the motion be considered as read.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Washington?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Washington is recognized for 5 minutes in support of her motion.
Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, this motion is the last
opportunity to amend the bill, and it does so without delay in passage.
We all agree that PFAS chemicals that present health risks to the
public should be cleaned up as quickly as possible, but it should be
done according to the best available science.
The majority often likes to claim that they are the party of science.
Unfortunately, this bill ignores science and facts for scoring
political talking points by grouping together an entire class of PFAS
chemicals. Some of these chemicals are essential to lifesaving medical
devices; others provide for cutting-edge technologies in aerospace that
are critical to our national security.
By ignoring scientific evidence, this bill would kill innovations
that could help further lift people's standard of living and save
lives.
I understand and share frustrations for slow cleanup of the dangerous
PFAS chemicals. In my own district, Fairchild Air Force Base and Airway
Heights, Washington, are dealing with PFAS. However, we just passed
bipartisan legislation based on science through the NDAA that will
ensure that affected communities are cleaned up quickly. This bill
would ignore those efforts.
It is unprecedented that Congress would unilaterally classify
chemicals under CERCLA. By doing so, Congress will designate
communities like Airway Heights a Superfund site, significantly harming
their ability to attract new investments and hurting property values.
Instead of trying to score political points, we should be proud of
the bipartisan achievement of the NDAA and continue to work to clean up
our communities and get results.
This amendment is a good faith effort to improve this legislation in
a way that enhances its efforts to protect all Americans from harmful
chemicals.
Section 5 of H.R. 535 seeks to guarantee protection of vulnerable
populations from potential PFAS dangers in their drinking waters. It
states that the new rules ``shall be protective of the health of
subpopulations at greater risk.''
The Safe Drinking Water Act already identifies pregnant women as an
at-risk group. However, there is not just one. When it comes to
pregnant women who are at risk, there are two people at risk: the
pregnant woman and the unborn child.
The science is clear. Technology today allows us to look inside the
womb. We see the baby's development day by day, week by week. That
person is the most vulnerable population that should be protected.
This motion to recommit is simple; it is clear; it is direct. It
clarifies that the protection of vulnerable populations must include
any unborn child.
Yesterday, Chairman Pallone recognized the potential harm these
chemicals can have on child development. Today, Speaker Pelosi
reiterated the importance of protecting expectant mothers. By rejecting
this amendment, you would be further denying the science of the
development of a child in the womb.
This motion is consistent with policy that EPA itself has employed:
considering the impact of chemical exposures to babies in the womb. For
example, in 2011, the EPA, under President Obama, decided to regulate
certain chemicals in drinking water based in part on the impacts to the
in utero person.
Congress also passed bipartisan legislation, a law in 2004, the
Unborn Victims of Violence Act, recognizing the personhood of an unborn
child.
This motion makes a small but vital improvement to this bill. It is
an improvement that is necessary to preserve the central goal of the
bill's sponsors: protecting vulnerable populations.
If that is the majority's goal, then this amendment should be
accepted. It does not strike or delay anything in the bill. It only
clarifies what is considered a vulnerable population based
[[Page H163]]
on the same language in the bipartisan 2004 act.
Most importantly, it protects the unborn child, something that I hope
everyone in this room can agree should be one of our greatest
priorities: to protect people before they are born and at every stage
of their life.
I urge my colleagues to support science by supporting my motion to
recommit.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Clay). The gentlewoman from Michigan is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for my colleague, but
I oppose this amendment because it is really nothing more than a
political stunt.
This bill will protect communities across this country. The drinking
water standard in this bill will be protective of the health of
populations at greater risk, what we generally call vulnerable
populations.
That requirement was opposed by the Republicans. Mr. Shimkus had an
amendment to strike that provision of the bill. He opposed protecting
vulnerable populations. I deeply respect my colleague, but he opposed
it every step of the way; and yesterday, he withdrew that amendment.
If Republicans want to protect vulnerable populations, including
pregnant women, infants, and children, they should support this bill.
Let's be very clear: PFAS is an urgent health and environmental
threat, period, and no one can deny that.
The number of contamination sites, nationwide, is growing at an
alarming rate, including our military bases--almost 400 military
installations in this country.
Developed in the 1940s, PFAS is a forever chemical. It is in the
blood of more than 99 percent of Americans. It poses potential health
risks. We know it. EPA has known the risk for decades and allowed this
contamination to spread.
EPA is not going to take care of this problem. Congress needs to act.
The longer we wait, the worse the contamination becomes. The time is
now to act on the PFAS Action Act. We have got to do it together. The
American people count on us.
The bill is a strong and serious package, and it is supported by some
Republicans. It will jump-start cleanups. It will get PFAS out of our
drinking water. It will limit PFAS in the air. It will limit PFAS in
our rivers and streams. It will drive and require comprehensive testing
for PFAS, and it will give our first responders and consumers tools to
protect themselves.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this motion to recommit and
urge Members to support the underlining bill so we can work together to
enact laws that protect the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is
ordered on the motion to recommit.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 5-
minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a 5-minute
vote on passage of the bill.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187,
noes 219, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 12]
AYES--187
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Cole
Collins (GA)
Comer
Conaway
Cook
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Curtis
Davidson (OH)
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Ferguson
Fleischmann
Flores
Fortenberry
Foxx (NC)
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gianforte
Gibbs
Gonzalez (OH)
Gooden
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Hartzler
Hern, Kevin
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill (AR)
Holding
Hollingsworth
Hudson
Huizenga
Hurd (TX)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Lipinski
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Marshall
Massie
Mast
McAdams
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meadows
Miller
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Peterson
Posey
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Riggleman
Roby
Rodgers (WA)
Roe, David P.
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rooney (FL)
Rose, John W.
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Spano
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Stivers
Taylor
Thornberry
Timmons
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Van Drew
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waltz
Watkins
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Wright
Yoho
Young
Zeldin
NOES--219
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
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
Finkenauer
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel
Fudge
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Heck
Higgins (NY)
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
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu, Ted
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Mucarsel-Powell
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rose (NY)
Rouda
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Shalala
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stevens
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres Small (NM)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--24
Aderholt
Brady
Buchanan
Carter (TX)
Crawford
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Gabbard
Gohmert
Granger
Hunter
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Lewis
Loudermilk
Marchant
Meuser
Nadler
Payne
Serrano
Simpson
Smucker
Thompson (PA)
Walker
{time} 1105
Mr. DeFAZIO changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
[[Page H164]]
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 247,
nays 159, not voting 24, as follows:
[Roll No. 13]
YEAS--247
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
Cook
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
Finkenauer
Fletcher
Fortenberry
Foster
Frankel
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (TX)
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Heck
Herrera Beutler
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Holding
Horn, Kendra S.
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Hurd (TX)
Jackson Lee
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim
King (NY)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster (NH)
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Morelle
Moulton
Mucarsel-Powell
Murphy (FL)
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reed
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rooney (FL)
Rose (NY)
Rouda
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell (AL)
Shalala
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stefanik
Stevens
Stivers
Suozzi
Swalwell (CA)
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres Small (NM)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Van Drew
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young
Zeldin
NAYS--159
Abraham
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bergman
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bishop (UT)
Bost
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Cole
Collins (GA)
Comer
Conaway
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson (OH)
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Ferguson
Fleischmann
Flores
Foxx (NC)
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gianforte
Gibbs
Gonzalez (OH)
Gooden
Gosar
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Hartzler
Hern, Kevin
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill (AR)
Hollingsworth
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff (TN)
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
Lesko
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Marshall
Massie
McAdams
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
Meadows
Miller
Mitchell
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Ratcliffe
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Riggleman
Roby
Rodgers (WA)
Roe, David P.
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose, John W.
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Shimkus
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Spano
Stauber
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Thornberry
Timmons
Tipton
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walorski
Waltz
Watkins
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Wright
Yoho
NOT VOTING--24
Aderholt
Brady
Buchanan
Carter (TX)
Crawford
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Gohmert
Granger
Hunter
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Lewis
Loudermilk
Marchant
Meuser
Nadler
Payne
Serrano
Simpson
Smucker
Thompson (PA)
Walker
Webster (FL)
{time} 1119
So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated against:
Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, due to unforeseen circumstances, I could not
attend the vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on
rollcall No. 13.
personal explanation
Mrs. KIRKPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I was absent today due to a medical
emergency. Had I been present, I would have voted: ``no'' on rollcall
No. 9, ``no'' on rollcall No. 10, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 11, ``no'' on
rollcall No. 12, and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 13.
personal explanation
Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted
``yea'' on rollcall No. 9, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 10, ``nay'' on
rollcall No. 11, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 12, and ``nay'' on rollcall
No. 13.
personal explanation
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Speaker, for personal reasons, I was unable to vote
today. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No.
5--Prev. Question, ``nay'' on rollcall No. 6--H. Res. 781, ``nay'' on
rollcall No. 7--H. Con. Res. 83, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 8--H.R. 5078,
``yea'' on rollcall No. 9--Burgess of Texas Part B Amdt. 2, ``yea'' on
rollcall No. 10--Balderson of OH Part B Amdt. 6, ``nay'' on rollcall
No. 11--Pappas of NH Part B Amdt. 13, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 12--MTR,
and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 13--H.R. 535.
____________________