[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 39 (Thursday, February 27, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H1233-H1239]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2339, REVERSING THE YOUTH TOBACCO 
                          EPIDEMIC ACT OF 2019

  Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 866 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 866

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2339) to 
     amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect 
     to the sale and marketing of tobacco products, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. 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 116-51, modified by the amendment printed in the report 
     of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall 
     be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) 90 minutes of debate equally 
     divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and 
     the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with or 
     without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rose of New York). The gentlewoman from 
Florida is recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), 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. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be 
given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

[[Page H1234]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, on Wednesday, the Rules Committee met and 
reported a rule, House Resolution 866, providing for the consideration 
of H.R. 2339, Protecting American Lungs and Reversing the Youth Tobacco 
Epidemic Act of 2020 under a closed rule.
  The rule provides 90 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled 
by the chair and the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce and the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment to make technical 
corrections and provides one motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the bill in this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, as our Nation anticipates the probability of a pandemic, 
here today in the people's House we have the opportunity to save almost 
six million young lives that would be cut short by nicotine if we fail 
to act.
  I am not exaggerating. The CDC has predicted that if the children of 
our country continue to use tobacco products at the current rate, 5.6 
million children will have premature deaths.
  This is a test of our courage. Let's look at the facts:
  In 1997, 24.6 percent of all 12th graders reported daily use of 
cigarettes, and 36.5 percent reported some use in the past 30 days. 
Thanks to smart, tough policies and a national commitment to reduce 
cigarette use by children, those numbers dropped to 3.6 percent and 7.6 
percent by 2018.
  Nearly 90 percent of adult smokers began smoking before the age of 
18. If you do not start smoking as a child, it is very unlikely you 
will smoke as an adult. This is not a secret. Public health officials 
know this, and tobacco companies know this, too. They also know that 
nicotine is a highly addictive substance.
  This dramatic reduction in cigarette use by children put tobacco 
companies in a bind. If children and teenagers have stopped using 
cigarettes, and 90 percent of all adult smokers began smoking as 
children, how can they maintain their pipeline of customers?
  Their answer arrived in the form of a new technology, e-cigarettes 
and vaping products. Companies knew that the pipeline of lifetime 
smokers was dwindling, so they started marketing new vaping products to 
young people through Instagram ads and influencers and other social 
media platforms. They also handed out free vaping products at music 
events and movies. They clearly targeted children, our children, and 
their strategy worked.
  Today, 26.7 percent of 12th graders vaped in the last month. This 
rate has more than doubled in the last 2 years alone. In 2010, only 1.5 
percent of 12th graders reported vaping.
  We banned flavored cigarettes in 2009 because they appealed to 
children and encouraged them to take up smoking. Tobacco companies 
switched to flavored vape products and flavored cigarillos because 
these products are not held to the same standard, even though they are 
tobacco products and contain nicotine.
  In 2018, 67 percent of high school students and 49 percent of middle 
school students who used tobacco products in the past 30 days reported 
using a flavored tobacco product.
  So while kids can't buy cotton candy or banana smash cigarettes, they 
can buy those flavors in vaping products or in cigarillos.
  For the record, nicotine has health effects beyond addiction. 
Nicotine exposure damages adolescent brain development, and brains are 
not fully done developing until the mid-20s. Nicotine also contributes 
to the hardening of arterial walls, which in turn, may lead to a 
cardiac event.
  It is time, Mr. Speaker, to ensure our children do not face a 
lifetime of nicotine addiction. It is time to finally pass a bill that 
protects their health, and that is what the Protecting American Lungs 
and Reversing the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act will do.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Shalala) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself 
such time as I may consume.

  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule providing for the 
consideration of H.R. 2339, the Protecting American Lungs and Reversing 
the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act of 2019. This bill is a misnomer. It is 
not aimed at curbing youth tobacco or e-cigarette use, it is aimed at 
tobacco generally.
  Both parties in the House and Senate agreed that we needed to act in 
order to prevent youth access to these products. In December, we 
fulfilled that commitment by sending a bill to the President's desk, 
which he signed, that raised the legal age to purchase all tobacco 
products to 21 years of age. President Trump signed what has been 
termed ``T21`` into law on December 20 of 2019.
  This policy will break down youth access through social networks in 
schools where 18-year olds could purchase tobacco products legally and 
then disseminate those products to younger students.
  Other significant efforts such as the flavor ban by the Trump 
administration will help limit youth tobacco use. The Food and Drug 
Administration has issued a ban on flavored e-cigarette products that 
appeal to children, including fruit and mint flavors. This ban will 
help deter youth use in the future and prevent companies from targeting 
children with appealing flavors.
  When we first held a hearing on the vaping lung injury at the start 
of the outbreak back in October, the cause of this lung injury was 
unclear, however, these lung injuries were disproportionately affecting 
the young population. After diligent efforts by the Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention and State health departments, we have since 
found that the vast majority of these lung injuries were caused by 
tetrahydrocannabinol and the vaping products containing vitamin E 
acetate, an additive.

                              {time}  1230

  Let me point out that none of these products are legal, and children 
are buying them on the black market.
  An article from National Public Radio, published September 27, 2019, 
titled ``Many Vaping Illnesses Linked to Black Market `Dank Vapes' or 
Other THC Products,'' walks through how two brothers in Wisconsin were 
arrested for running a THC vape ring. Captain Mike Martin of the 
Waynesboro Police Department in Virginia said that these products are 
labeled ``Dank Vapes'' and ``appear commercially packaged, and there 
are a variety of different flavors.'' His police department has 
recovered $35,000 worth of vaping products.
  At this point, Madam Speaker, I think it is worthwhile to point out 
it is probably not a good idea for anyone to take into their lungs 
something that is labeled ``Dank Vapes.''
  According to the CDC, ``Dank Vapes appears to be the most prominent 
in a class of largely counterfeit brands, with common packaging that is 
easily available online and that is used by distributors to market THC-
containing cartridges.''
  H.R. 2339 does absolutely nothing to crack down on that black market. 
These deliciously named vaping products, with flavors such as lemon 
slushie, bubble gum, and sour diesel, will likely continue to be sold 
illegally, especially online.
  The Trump administration has already released guidance to ban 
flavors. The Food and Drug Administration is requiring companies to 
stop the manufacture, distribution, and sale of certain unauthorized 
flavored e-cigarette products within 30 days of their published 
guidance. This guidance took effect on February 6, 2020, and is now in 
effect and enforceable.
  This bill takes the flavor ban further and bans all flavored tobacco 
products, including menthol. This will take flavored cigarettes, 
cigars, and smokeless tobacco away from law-abiding adults, who must 
now, by law, be 21 years of age to purchase any tobacco product.
  Additionally, this bill contains a potential infringement on the 
First Amendment by requiring health warnings on cigarette labels and 
advertising. There are other ways to educate individuals, particularly 
our young population, of the harmful effects of smoking without 
impinging on freedom of speech.
  Congress has already taken steps to protect our young people from a 
future of tobacco addiction when we passed Tobacco 21, and the Trump 
administration has stepped up and banned flavored e-cigarette products. 
The House

[[Page H1235]]

also passed H.R. 3942, the Preventing Online Sales of E-Cigarettes to 
Children Act, which requires age verification by all retailers at the 
time of sale and delivery.
  These policies will prevent young people from accessing e-cigarettes 
and will deter future use. On the other hand, H.R. 2339 does not 
address youth tobacco use. This bill would ban all flavored tobacco 
products from all ages, taking away choices for law-abiding adult 
Americans.
  So, let's be clear. Tobacco is not healthy; however, law-abiding 
adults are capable of making these decisions for themselves.
  Traditional cigarettes remain the leading cause of preventable death 
in the United States, claiming an estimated 480,000 lives or more each 
year. This is a personal issue for me, as I lost both parents to 
tobacco-related disease.
  Now, according to the CDC, an estimated 34 million adults in the 
United States currently smoke cigarettes, and more than 16 million 
Americans live with a smoking-related disease.
  While I am certainly concerned about the effect of e-cigarettes on 
our young people, we do need to remember that there is a large adult 
population with a whole host of health problems related to tobacco. 
Some early studies show that current adult tobacco users may benefit 
from the less harmful alternative that e-cigarettes pose.
  Additionally, the adult population will seek out alternatives if 
their tobacco product of choice is eliminated from the legal market. A 
bill like this that makes illegal the products used by many Americans 
could contribute to an already existing and thriving black market for 
tobacco products.
  As we saw last year, the outbreak of lung injuries was linked to 
counterfeit and black market products. There were reports of illicit 
operations by individuals taking THC vape cartridges and cutting the 
product with other oils to maximize their profit.
  If H.R. 2339 becomes law, it could inspire similar black market 
operations to create products that law-abiding Americans currently 
enjoy.
  This bill is not about youth use of vaping products. It is about 
eliminating all adult use of tobacco products.
  We have seen a surge of lung injuries in the United States, an issue 
that is not adequately addressed in this bill. The Centers for Disease 
Control has linked these injuries to THC products, not tobacco.
  Protecting our youth from tobacco is an important priority. However, 
H.R. 2339 does not do that, and it goes too far. Therefore, I cannot 
support it.
  Madam Speaker, I urge Members to oppose the bill, oppose the rule 
that delivers the bill, and oppose this assault on free choice for the 
American people.
  Madam Speaker, with opposition to the rule, I reserve the balance of 
my time.
  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume, and let me simply say we can never go too far when we are 
protecting our children.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a February 5 NBC News article 
titled ``Federal flavor ban goes into effect Thursday, but many 
flavored vape products will still be available.''

                     [From NBC News, Feb. 5, 2020]

 Federal Flavor Ban Goes Into Effect Thursday, but Many Flavored Vape 
                    Products Will Still Be Available

                           (By Erika Edwards)

       A nationwide ban on many flavored e-cigarette products goes 
     into effect Thursday, but teenagers will still have access to 
     nicotine vapes, experts say.
       The ban covers a number of kid-friendly flavorings, such as 
     mint and fruit, though menthol and tobacco flavorings will 
     remain legal. However, the ban only applies to specific types 
     of devices: cartridge or pre-filled pod devices, like the 
     ones made popular by Juul. All other devices will be left on 
     the market.
       But limiting access to Juul, which stopped selling all non-
     menthol and tobacco flavored pods in November, is unlikely to 
     have much of an effect on teens already addicted to nicotine.
       ``Kids have moved on,'' Meredith Berkman, co-founder of 
     Parents Against Vaping E-cigarettes, or PAVE, told NBC News.
       Teenagers know that teachers are now educated about how to 
     detect vaping in classrooms, she said. So they're getting 
     their nicotine fix in other ways, including products not 
     covered by the looming ban.
       ``Kids are sucking on flavored nicotine pouches to get 
     through the day until they can get home to their device,'' 
     Berkman said. The pouches are reminiscent of chewing tobacco, 
     but are advertised as being ``tobacco-free.''
       Experts in teen addiction also said there's plenty of 
     evidence that teens now favor highly concentrated, refillable 
     nicotine vape products called Smok and Suorin Drops as well 
     as cheaper, disposable vape pods called Puff Bars--also to be 
     left on the market after Thursday.
       ``I'm not very optimistic,'' Bonnie Halpern-Felsher, a 
     professor at Stanford University who studies teen vaping, 
     said. ``We really do need to have enforcement of the law 
     across all tobacco products, regardless of these loopholes.''
       ``The new policy does not solve the problem,'' Matthew 
     Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, said, 
     adding parents need to keep their guard up and educate their 
     teenagers about the harms of nicotine addiction. ``Millions 
     of flavored products will remain available.''
       Plans for restricting e-cigarette flavors on a federal 
     level first came up in September, when key national data on 
     teen vaping was released. It was revealed that from 2017 to 
     2019, rates of vaping had more than doubled among 8th, 10th 
     and 12th grade students.
       New cases of those lung illnesses have declined 
     considerably since then. As of Jan. 21 (the latest data 
     available), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
     reports that there have been 2,711 cases of people who've 
     been hospitalized with EVALI, or e-cigarette, or vaping, 
     product use-associated lung injury.
       All 50 states, plus Washington, D.C., have reported EVALI 
     cases. Sixty people have died. Many others were left with 
     lasting lung damage.
       Investigations suggested most cases were not associated 
     with vaping nicotine, but instead THC, the psychoactive 
     ingredient found in marijuana. Most of those THC vapes came 
     from drug dealers or friends. Vitamin E oil has been the 
     leading culprit in the lung damage, though other chemicals 
     and additives can't be ruled out, according to the CDC.
       After Thursday, companies that make any vape products--
     including those covered in the ban--will have to meet a May 
     12 deadline to apply to the Food and Drug Administration to 
     continue selling their products.
       It will take one year for the FDA to review those 
     applications, during which time products can, and likely 
     will, remain on the market.
       ``It's not a `forever' ban,'' Halpern-Felsher said. ``We 
     have a long way to go.''

  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, many teens today have moved from using 
flavored e-cigarettes to other flavored nicotine-laced products. That 
includes things like flavored pouches, drops, and pods.
  These products are still on the market today. The recent national 
ban, which my distinguished colleague referred to, didn't take them off 
the shelves. Something more is needed to make sure our children don't 
go from one bad addictive product to the next.
  The products might be different, but the impacts are the same. It is 
a distinction without a difference, Madam Speaker.
  That is why we have to pass this bill to keep life-threatening 
products out of the hands of our children.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut 
(Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, I rise to support the rule and this 
comprehensive legislation, which prohibits all flavored tobacco 
products.
  Madam Speaker, I commend Chairman Frank Pallone and Congresswoman 
Donna Shalala for their leadership.
  The youth vaping epidemic is a public health emergency that threatens 
our youngsters. According to the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention, one in four high schoolers are using e-cigarettes, and not 
just occasionally. More than a third of users in high school said that 
they were smoking e-cigarettes at least 20 days a month.
  My granddaughter, who is a high schooler, when I asked her about 
this, she said it is everywhere, that everyone is smoking e-cigarettes.
  Last year, I hosted a hearing on the youth vaping crisis in the 
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee. As 
experts have said, the flavors are a key factor in this. Seven out of 
10 current youth e-cigarette users said that they used e-cigarettes 
because ``they come in flavors I like.''
  Nearly all, or 97 percent, had used a flavored e-cigarette in the 
past month. Mango, mint, cotton candy, and gummy bears are just some of 
the 15,000 flavors still available, thanks to the loophole-laden action 
the Trump administration took in January.
  The President made a promise in the Oval Office to American families 
to

[[Page H1236]]

ban flavors, which are hooking our youngsters. They are becoming 
addicted. But special interests appear to be more important. He allowed 
popular flavors like menthol to remain for products like the popular 
Juul device. He allowed disposable vapes of all flavors to remain on 
the market.
  It is unacceptable. The health of our children must be our priority. 
So, the Democratic majority of the United States House of 
Representatives is stepping up for our children by voting for this bill 
and this rule. We can ban flavors and take comprehensive action to 
defend our kids.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote for the rule and the 
bill.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article from The Hill 
today, written by Yvette Clarke, making a point about the unintended 
consequences of this legislation.
  The bill carves out an exemption for certain cigar products, but it 
also creates a ban on menthol products, which would have the unintended 
consequence of adversely and selectively affecting individuals, tobacco 
users, in communities of color.

                     [From The Hill, Feb. 27, 2020]

   Youth Tobacco Use Legislation Would Have Unintended Life-or-Death 
                  Consequences for Black Tobacco Users

                       (By Rep. Yvette D. Clarke)

       This week marks a critical, life-changing moment for the 
     black community, specifically for black tobacco users. The 
     Reversing the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act (H.R. 2339) is set 
     for a vote this week in the House of Representatives, and 
     while this bill seemingly makes a lot of sense in curbing 
     youth tobacco use, there are some glaring unintended dire 
     consequences for communities of color with this legislation.
       H.R. 2339 does many things with the goal to reduce youth 
     tobacco use, like providing resources for a substantive 
     public awareness campaign to educate about the dangers of 
     tobacco use and reducing access to online purchases of 
     flavored tobacco products. However, this legislation does not 
     treat all tobacco products equally, carving out an exemption 
     for one flavored product, premium cigars preferred by white 
     smokers. A ban that makes an exception for one flavor--
     premium cigars--while banning menthol puts black lives at 
     risk. Let me explain.
       Considering the fact that 90 percent of black smokers use 
     menthol products, menthol tobacco users would live in fear of 
     new stop and frisk opportunities under this legislation, 
     because menthol would now be considered an illegal flavor. A 
     ban that targets menthol products but ignores other premium 
     tobacco products unduly burdens the black community. This 
     asymmetrical ban feels more like a targeted attack than a 
     value-neutral health care policy decision. In effect, white 
     adult smokers would see little difference in their lives 
     after this ban while black smokers could face even more 
     sweeping harassment from law enforcement if the hint of 
     menthol smoke can justify a stop.
       Make no mistake, banning all electronic and combustible 
     tobacco products would save lives and while the premise of 
     this legislation to address the uptick in youth tobacco use 
     is positive, we cannot support an asymmetrical ban that 
     disproportionately endangers the black community.
       While the debate has not made this clear, we are 
     unfortunately not currently considering a ban on all tobacco 
     products. In fact, we are not even debating a uniform ban on 
     vaping products or combustible cigarettes. Instead, the ban 
     would focus solely on flavored tobacco products, including 
     menthol. Considering how often teenagers develop smoking 
     habits after starting with flavored products, I understand 
     why the Energy and Commerce Committee has focused on this 
     issue. However, including menthol in the flavored products 
     ban will disproportionately imperil the black community 
     putting them at increased risk of additional over-policing.
       I do not take this position lightly, but as an elected 
     official I must make the hard decisions--not the easy ones. I 
     have a responsibility, to my constituents and the 
     Constitution, to be the voice of the marginalized among us. 
     To do so, I worked with the committee to find solutions to 
     the criminal justice concerns of my community but was 
     ultimately rebuffed. Nonetheless, I introduced an amendment 
     promoting an education program to increase awareness about 
     the dangers of tobacco use and the implications of this 
     legislation. Constructive efforts like this will make 
     considerable headway towards reducing tobacco use without 
     laying the foundation for disparate enforcement of a ban.
       While I would love to assume the best intentions of all 
     involved parties and hope for the best in regard to 
     enforcement, lived experience demands caution. In the world 
     created by this asymmetrical ban where menthol tobacco 
     products provide justification for police stops, I fear that 
     we would have handed law enforcement another excuse to 
     harass, detain and otherwise endanger marginalized 
     communities. Despite the clear health benefits of this ban, I 
     cannot in good conscious expose already vulnerable 
     communities to this risk.
       As a duly elected representative of Brooklyn, it would be 
     an abdication of duty to disregard our painful history of 
     over-policing or to ignore the very real potential of this 
     history repeating itself. While no one would enjoy the 
     political pressure this has exposed, I cannot ignore my 
     nightmares of a jumped turnstile and a loosie turning into a 
     far more serious matter of life and death potentially 
     creating an additional health crisis. As Eric Garner's mother 
     knows all too well, and relayed in a letter to the New York 
     delegation regarding this ban, in New York a single cigarette 
     can become a death sentence.
       If the committee decides to improve this bill by making it 
     a categorical ban on tobacco products, I will throw my full 
     support behind the effort. When I asked for a carve out for 
     menthol products, similar to the carve out that was granted 
     for the on line sales of premium tobacco products like the 
     Cuban cigars favored by Wall Street executives, I was soundly 
     rebuffed. I would proudly support a categorical tobacco ban, 
     but the committee so far has denied this opportunity. 
     Nonetheless, and regardless of the political pressures, I 
     will continue to do everything in my power to protect the 
     people of the 9th District of New York and all black tobacco 
     users across America.

  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I would like to clarify some misunderstandings related 
to the bill that I have just heard.
  Some have suggested that H.R. 2339 allows certain cigars to be exempt 
from the flavor prohibition.
  I want to be very clear. Under this legislation, all tobacco products 
are subject to the flavor prohibition, including cigars. In fact, the 
text of the definition of cigar product explicitly states that these 
cigars cannot contain a characterizing flavor. Under the legislation, 
menthol is a characterizing flavor.
  The only way to tackle the youth tobacco epidemic is to prohibit all 
flavors in all products, which is exactly what H.R. 2339 does.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California 
(Mr. DeSaulnier), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
  Mr. DeSAULNIER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding 
and for her leadership on issues of public health, particularly this 
bill.
  I rise in support of the Reversing the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act.
  I am proud of the long history in the San Francisco Bay Area, which I 
have been privileged to represent and live in for many years, starting 
in the 1980s with the amazing work by Stan Glantz, a researcher in San 
Francisco who discovered the tobacco industry was pathologically lying 
to the American public and hiding the effects of their products.
  We responded to that by trying to pass laws here in Congress, but we 
were unable to because of the tobacco lobby. We tried State legislative 
opportunities but failed to do that. But in local government, we passed 
hundreds of local ordinances banning secondhand smoke to protect 
employees and to protect customers.
  At the time, I was a member of the California Restaurant Association 
and a restaurant owner. Many of my colleagues were part of the same 
arguments we hear today, that you will put retailers out of business, 
that this is all legal product.
  We listened to those, and we enacted these laws, and we worked with 
people who were affected by it. The economic impacts were positive, not 
negative. Restaurants are more successful than they have ever been in 
the bay area. We lead the country in many ways.
  When we passed these ordinances, public health people came together 
with labor and others to make sure that the truth came out.
  In the early 1990s, as the mayor of a city of 130,000 people, 
Concord, California, I authored one of the first efforts in the Nation 
to curb secondhand smoke. In fact, it has been illegal to smoke in 
bars, restaurants, and other public places in California entirely since 
1998.
  We worked together then to stop Big Tobacco's hold over millions of 
addicted Americans, and we won.
  Unfortunately, Big Tobacco has a new partner, the vaping industry. 
Companies like Juul, unfortunately headquartered in San Francisco, in 
my view, represent the very worst of the bay area business culture. 
They don't ask for permission. They apologize

[[Page H1237]]

after they have addicted millions of Americans, particularly young 
people. They deceptively and illegally marketed their poisonous 
products to children, much like Big Tobacco did decades ago.
  Our efforts led to an almost 70 percent decrease in the use of 
tobacco products across the country, according to the Centers for 
Disease Control.
  In 2016 alone, on the other hand, 7 out of 10 U.S. middle and high 
school students saw e-cigarette ads on TV, in stores, and online.
  With marketing campaigns that make vaping look safe and fun, they use 
flavors like cotton candy to attract young people to try vaping and get 
hooked on nicotine.
  But we know better. We have a long history of this. These products 
are not safe. They are not smoking-cessation devices. And we need to 
take action to protect our children, just as we did years ago.

                              {time}  1245

  In local government in the bay area, we have started to do what we 
did in the 1990s: passing bans on these products. So, if we won't do it 
here, we will do it at a local level; but we should do it here, and we 
should pass this bill.
  The longer we wait, millions are addicted, and millions more are 
being targeted. The Reversing the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act will help 
save lives and keep widespread nicotine addiction in the past in the 
United States.
  We beat Big Tobacco once before, and we can do it again. I urge my 
colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Curtis).
  Mr. CURTIS. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule 
underlying the bill.
  Reducing the alarming rate of youth e-cigarette use is and must 
remain a top priority for public health officials and lawmakers. Our 
children are the future of our country, and my greatest joy in this 
life has been watching my children grow into the men and women that 
they are today.
  Protecting their health and safety and of that their children in 
order to ensure their future success is, personally, a top priority of 
mine in Congress. However, H.R. 2339, the bill before us today, is 
concerning for numerous reasons.
  First, this one-size-fits-all bill was drafted without Republican 
input. The committee of jurisdiction passed the legislation virtually 
along partisan lines.
  This legislation was finalized just Monday night but is receiving a 
vote this week, with details negotiated outside of public view. A bill 
of this magnitude, which includes over $100 million in new taxes, 
deserves a lengthy public debate.
  Second, Congress recently passed needed legislation to raise the 
minimum age to purchase tobacco products from 18 to 21 on a bipartisan 
basis.
  Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration already has the 
ability to regulate flavored e-cigarette products, and this bill would 
permanently undermine ongoing efforts to combat youth vaping by the 
FDA.
  Most importantly, this bill would undercut ongoing efforts by the 
State of Utah to combat youth vaping. The Utah Legislature and 
Governor's office acted decisively to keep these products out of the 
hands of our youth and are considering additional steps to protect the 
welfare of our kids. The State of Utah is a great example of what we 
can accomplish when partisanship is put aside for the greater good.
  In closing, I want to reiterate the importance of keeping these 
products out of the hands of children. But we can't do that without a 
lengthier, bipartisan conversation, and especially if we are ignoring 
the work State and local governments have been doing to keep our 
children safe.
  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Madam Speaker, I will include in the Record a letter from Mothers of 
the Movement. They state, in part: ``We ask that, at the same time you 
consider health issues, you look carefully at the criminal justice 
impact of such a change in health policy. Our community has had plenty 
of experience living under laws passed with the best of intentions. 
Under your bill, cigarettes preferred by African Americans would be 
illegal; cigarettes preferred by non-African Americans would be 
legal.''

                                      Mothers of the Movement,

                              Miami Gardens, FL, October 11, 2019.
     Hon. Frank Pallone,
     Chairman, House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Chairman Pallone: We appreciate your focus on 
     reviewing the health effects of tobacco and e-cigarettes in 
     young people. We urge you to pay very close attention to the 
     unintended effects of a ban on menthol cigarettes and what it 
     would mean in the Urban community.
       We both strive hard to do our best and set examples in our 
     community amongst the black youth. Our focus is within 
     various cities throughout the country. We have witnessed 
     encounters with law enforcement and negative policing which 
     has been spread throughout our community.
       H.R. 2339, the Reversing the Youth Tobacco Epidemic Act, 
     contains a provision that bans menthol cigarettes. We are 
     concerned of the rising numbers of Black Americans who prefer 
     menthol cigarettes. We are alarmed that 80% Black Americans 
     in Urban communities invest in purchasing of these good. As a 
     result of this ban, we recognize the effects which may happen 
     within the Urban community and the justice system.
       We do not encourage, support, or promote smoking especially 
     in our Urban communities. We are concerned that this ban in 
     many cases will reintroduce another version of stop-and-frisk 
     in black low socio-economic communities. We experience and 
     are forced to tolerate aggressive behaviors from law 
     enforcement. This is our reality and is displayed throughout 
     different levels of government, locally and nationally daily. 
     This ban will introduce or replay many hard to employ young 
     black Americans to the criminal justice system. We do not 
     want to take parents, sons, and daughters out of households 
     for small infractions that carry financial obligations. We 
     ask that, at the same time you consider health issues, you 
     look carefully at the criminal justice impact of such a 
     change in health policy. Our community has had plenty of 
     experience living under laws passed with the best of 
     intentions. Under your bill, cigarettes preferred by African-
     Americans would be illegal; cigarettes preferred by non-
     African-Americans would be legal.
       Small violations can quickly escalate to consequential 
     events. We refuse to witness another mother join us in death 
     of a loved one because of readily available products and 
     decisions available in our Black communities
           Best Regards,
     Gwendolyn Carr,
       Mother of Eric Garner.
     Sybrina Fulton,
       Mother of Trayvon Martin.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I 
will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately bring up a 
resolution condemning the comments of Democratic Socialist Presidential 
candidate Bernard Sanders.
  Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. DeGette). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, to explain this amendment, I yield 5 
minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart).
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous 
question so that we can amend, as the gentleman just explained the 
rule, to immediately consider my resolution condemning Senator Sanders' 
blatantly false comment regarding the racist, terrorist, murderous 
Castro regime in Cuba.
  I have said this before: If anybody wants to know the devastation of 
socialism and the tyranny that so often accompanies it, I invite you to 
speak to some of my constituents, including thousands of former 
political prisoners now in exile. Let me just mention some of those.
  Jorge Luis Garcia Perez, ``Antunez''; Angel de Fana; and Roberto 
Martin Perez. There are so many others who are in south Florida who 
have suffered in the prisons of Cuba just because they have asked for 
and fought for freedom.
  But there are also former political prisoners who are still on the 
island, and I can mention many of them. Let me just mention Dr. Oscar 
Elias Biscet, who just recently was arrested, harassed, and then it 
looks like potentially released; and the relatives of current political 
prisoners such as: Jose Daniel Ferrer, Mitzael Diaz Paseiro, Miguel 
Diaz Bauza, and Yanet Perez Quevedo. You can't speak to

[[Page H1238]]

them because they are in prison currently, but you can speak to their 
relatives.
  All of them have witnessed firsthand the destruction that socialism 
causes. All of these political prisoners have to be released at once. 
That is what we should be demanding.
  Now, unfortunately, this is not new coming from the Progressive 
movement. But I remind Senator Sanders and the Progressive movement 
that the Castro regime is not only a threat to the national security 
interests of the United States, but also to the democracies in our 
hemisphere.
  I want to remind Senator Sanders of the Cuba regime's close 
relationship with some of the world's worst thugs, such as Iran. Iran 
and the Cuban regime held the first Iran-Cuban business forum in Tehran 
in August of 2019 and have signed memorandums of understanding 
affirming their commitment to expanded trade and coordination. There 
were, just recently, two high-profile visits of the Iranian so-called 
Foreign Minister and also the so-called President of Iran to Cuba in 
2016.
  For years, the Cuban regime has been on the list of State Sponsors of 
Terrorism for their support of other terrorist states, terrorist 
organizations, and violence around the world and in this hemisphere.
  In 2013, the Cuban regime, I remind folks, was caught smuggling 
weapons to North Korea in the largest violation of international 
sanctions against that rogue regime.
  It has been propping up the Maduro regime with thousands of 
intelligence operatives to oppose the Venezuelan people and, in some 
cases, to kill the Venezuelan people.
  The Cuban regime has been harboring fugitives from U.S. justice, 
including FBI's most wanted terrorist Joanne Chesimard and terrorist 
bomb maker William Morales. That is just to name a few.
  So that is why, Madam Speaker, I filed the resolution that condemns 
the blatantly false comments of Democratic Socialist candidate for 
President Senator Bernie Sanders.
  This resolution also rejects the false claims that Cuba's healthcare, 
education, and literacy rate have improved as a result of the Castro 
regime, the Castro dictatorship. Those claims have been debunked by 
numerous sources.
  Let me just go over a couple of facts.
  According to a State Department report, Cuba's infant mortality rate 
was 32 of 1,000 live births, one of the best in the Western Hemisphere. 
But, Madam Speaker, this was not Castro. This is in the 1950s, pre-
Castro.
  Cuba's life expectancy was also one of the highest in Latin America 
in the 1950s, pre-Castro. No, it wasn't Castro. This was pre-Castro.
  Cuba's literacy rate was one of the highest in the Western 
Hemisphere, pre-Castro in the 1950s.
  Those are the facts, Madam Speaker, the realities of Cuba.
  In Cuba now, over 1 million people--in a country of just 11 million--
have risked everything to try to find freedom, to try to get away from 
that socialist tyranny. Many have perished on rafts as they place 
themselves and their children at risk in shark-infested waters for just 
a chance at freedom.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Florida an 
additional 3 minutes.
  Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Madam Speaker, why would they do this if things in 
Cuba are just not all that bad?
  Again, in contrast, during the pre-Castro Cuba, more Americans were 
traveling to Cuba and going to Cuba than Cubans coming to the United 
States.
  Today, now, Madam Speaker, here we have an opportunity to condemn 
Senator Bernie Sanders' blatantly false and hurtful comments regarding 
the racist, terrorist Castro regime. Join me in standing in solidarity 
with the Cuban people and, by extension, also solidarity with the 
Venezuelan people who are working to regain their freedom against what 
the OAS Secretary General has called the Cuban army of occupation in 
Venezuela.

  So join me in standing in solidarity with the people and not with the 
regime that oppresses them.
  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, this bill claims to curb youth tobacco use, including 
vaping. The reality is it bans many types of tobacco products that are 
legally and voluntarily used by adults.
  While I do not support any form of tobacco use, it is a choice for 
law-abiding adults to make. The unintended consequences of suddenly 
making legal tobacco products illegal will likely push people to the 
black market to seek the same products--or worse. If we really want to 
address vaping, we need to target products containing 
tetrahydrocannabinol, THC.
  As I previously stated, we just recently made tobacco use illegal for 
those under the age of 21, and the Trump administration has banned 
certain flavored e-cigarette products.
  This is a problem that requires a multilayered approach. 
Unfortunately, the provisions in this bill will not produce the desired 
result, and could even create more harm than good for some populations.
  Republicans do stand ready to work on bipartisan solutions to 
increase the health of our population and to protect our young people, 
but I need to urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, a ``no'' 
vote on the rule, and a ``no'' vote on the underlying measure.
  Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SHALALA. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I am a little confused. I may be a freshman, but I 
know that my good friend, Mario Diaz-Balart, usually gives me a little 
advanced notice before he presents something.
  My Republican colleagues are promising that, if we defeat the 
previous question, they will bring up a resolution to condemn the 
terrible comments Senator Sanders made regarding the dictator Fidel 
Castro.
  But let me be clear: Defeating the previous question means that 
Republicans can bring up any germane bill or amendment they want. The 
key word here being ``germane.''
  The resolution is not germane to the rule. That means, under the 
House rules, rules that have been in place since the founding of this 
institution, Republicans cannot bring to the floor the resolution they 
are promising to because it is not germane to the rule.
  The vote on the previous question is not a vote on the Diaz-Balart 
resolution. It is a vote to end debate on the rule and proceed to 
consideration of the legislation at hand, a bill to help prevent kids 
from taking up smoking.
  I am not disputing the merits of the resolution that my distinguished 
Republican colleague is offering as the previous question. In fact, I 
support this resolution; and to be very clear, I have requested to be 
added as a cosponsor. I was the first Democratic Member of Congress to 
speak out against these misguided, ill-informed, hurtful, and 
unacceptable comments made by Senator Sanders from Vermont.

                              {time}  1300

  Over the last six decades, hundreds of thousands of Cubans have 
risked their lives to escape the tyranny of the Castro regime, a regime 
of fear, paranoia, and oppression that regularly abuses human rights in 
order to stifle free thought and democracy in Cuba to this very day.
  Yesterday, my good friend and south Florida colleague, Mr. Diaz-
Balart, spoke about the horrors of Castro's Cuba. He so eloquently 
explained: ``If anybody wants to know the devastation of socialism and 
the tyranny that often is accompanied by socialism, I invite you to 
come and speak to some of my constituents, including the thousands--
thousands--of former political prisoners.''
  This is a joint invitation. Please, come to my south Florida 
community and meet Mr. Diaz-Balart's constituents and meet my 
constituents who will make it clear the Cuban regime and other similar 
authoritarian regimes across Latin America are instruments of evil and 
are not worthy of praise.
  I would like to close again by quoting my good friend, Mr. Diaz-
Balart: ``The Castro regime is a threat, not only to the national 
security of the United States but also to all the democracies in this 
hemisphere.''
  He is absolutely correct, and I stand with him. I have always stood 
with him and alongside our constituents in south

[[Page H1239]]

Florida to denounce the evil Cuban regime.
  But today we are here to debate a bill that protects our children 
from the dangers of tobacco and nicotine use. I hope my Republican 
colleagues will join us in voting ``yes'' on the previous question and 
``yes'' on this rule, so we can move on to consideration of a bill to 
reverse the youth tobacco epidemic.
  The minority is claiming that they will do something that has been 
against the Rules of the House since the very first Congress in 1789. 
Clause 7 of rule XVI clearly states: ``No motion or proposition on a 
subject different from that under consideration shall be admitted under 
color of amendment.''
  It doesn't matter whether or not a Member would support my 
colleague's resolution, which I have not had the opportunity to fully 
read since it was introduced just minutes ago. It is completely 
unrelated to the public health bill we are discussing right now and 
could not actually be offered. The right way to do this would have been 
to consult with all of us who have spoken out on this issue and build 
support in the traditional way.
  I have always joined my colleague, Mr. Diaz-Balart, to consult with 
other Members and to join together to denounce tyranny wherever it may 
exist.
  Madam Speaker, I will close by saying that I have worked on tobacco 
issues for years. When I was Secretary of Health and Human Services, we 
knew we were facing a problem with youth usage of tobacco products, 
particularly e-cigarettes. Thanks to smart and tough policies and 
comprehensive outreach campaigns, we succeeded in dramatically reducing 
youth cigarette use.
  It was an extraordinary public-health achievement.
  But here we are again with flavored e-cigarettes and vape products. 
Tobacco companies will not give up, but we will not either.
  Nicotine exposure during youth and young adulthood is particularly 
dangerous. The children who are using flavored e-cigarettes and vaping 
products are people who likely wouldn't have taken up smoking 
otherwise. This is the public health crisis of the 21st century.
  Children don't vote or contribute to our campaigns, but they are our 
future. In fairy tales, children are saved by caring adults. We must 
save them from disease and death. We are the caring adults of this 
generation. We must save them from an industry that would trade their 
lives for profit.
  It is important to acknowledge that we have made a lot of bipartisan 
progress on this public health issue. We have raised the age to buy 
tobacco products to 21. But the administration has enacted a very 
narrow flavor ban. It is too narrow. It only restricts flavors in 
closed pod products like Juul. Further, disposable flavored e-cigarette 
products like Puff Bar will still be available in flavors like mango, 
banana ice, or lychee. There is clear evidence that teens are already 
switching to use these products.
  We need a comprehensive policy, and that is what this bill does. H.R. 
2339 prohibits the sale of all flavored tobacco products and bans the 
marketing of e-cigarettes to people under 21 years of age. This is a 
comprehensive solution. We need to curb this epidemic now. It is our 
responsibility to protect our children's future.
  Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and on the previous 
question.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Burgess is as follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 866

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 2. That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, 
     the House shall resolve into the Committee of the Whole House 
     on the state of the Union for consideration of the resolution 
     (H. Res. 868) condemning the comments of Senator and 
     Democratic Socialist Presidential candidate, Bernie Sanders 
     (I-VT), disregarding the history of systemic human rights 
     abuses, forced indoctrination, and authoritarian actions of 
     the literacy and education policies of the Communist Castro 
     dictatorship in Cuba. The first reading of the resolution 
     shall be dispensed with. All points of order against 
     consideration of the resolution are waived. General debate 
     shall be confined to the resolution and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs. After 
     general debate the resolution shall be considered for 
     amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order 
     against provisions in the resolution are waived. When the 
     committee rises and reports the resolution back to the House 
     with a recommendation that the resolution be adopted, the 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     resolution and preamble and amendments thereto to adoption 
     without intervening motion. If the Committee of the Whole 
     rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on the 
     resolution, then on the next legislative day the House shall, 
     immediately after the third daily order of business under 
     clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole 
     for further consideration of the resolution.
       Sec. 3. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H. Res. 868.

  Ms. SHALALA. 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. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________