[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 43 (Wednesday, March 4, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H1477-H1484]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1230
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1140, RIGHTS FOR TRANSPORTATION 
  SECURITY OFFICERS ACT OF 2020; PROVIDING FOR MOTIONS TO SUSPEND THE 
   RULES; AND WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH 
   RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE 
                           COMMITTEE ON RULES

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 877 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 877

       Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1140) to enhance the security operations of 
     the Transportation Security Administration and stability of 
     the transportation security workforce by applying the 
     personnel system under title 5, United States Code, to 
     employees of the Transportation Security Administration who 
     provide screening of all passengers and property, and for 
     other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the 
     bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Homeland Security. After general debate the bill 
     shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. 
     The amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
     the Committee on Homeland Security now printed in

[[Page H1478]]

     the bill shall be considered as adopted in the House and in 
     the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as the original bill for the purpose of further 
     amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered 
     as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, 
     as amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as 
     amended, shall be in order except those printed in the report 
     of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each 
     such further amendment may be offered only in the order 
     printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
     the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 
     further amendments are waived. At the conclusion of 
     consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall 
     rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such 
     further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 
     amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
     recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2.  It shall be in order at any time on the 
     legislative day of March 5, 2020, for the Speaker to 
     entertain motions that the House suspend the rules as though 
     under clause 1 of rule XV, relating to a measure making 
     supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2020.
       Sec. 3.  The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a 
     two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on 
     Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived 
     with respect to any resolution reported through the 
     legislative day of March 5, 2020, relating to a measure 
     making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 2020.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Pennsylvania is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  On Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House 
Resolution 877, providing for consideration of H.R. 1140, the Rights 
for Transportation Security Officers Act of 2020, under a structured 
rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and 
controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
Homeland Security and makes in order nine amendments.
  Lastly, the rule provides suspension authority for Thursday and same-
day authority for Wednesday and Thursday, both limited to the 
consideration of a supplemental appropriations bill.
  Madam Speaker, when the Transportation Security Administration was 
established as a response to the September 11 terrorist attacks in 
2001, its Administrator was given broad authority over its workforce 
with respect to setting up pay and workplace conditions. As such, 
Transportation Security officers, TSOs, have been unable to benefit 
from Fair Labor Standards Act protections or fall under the general 
schedule pay scale. This distinction puts TSOs in a different class 
from other federal workers, preventing them from having the 
representational rights afforded through the Civil Service Reform Act 
of 1978.
  Each day, TSOs screen more than 2 million passengers at over 440 
airports nationwide. These workers are critical to helping Americans 
travel safely and make up more than 70 percent of the Transportation 
Security Administration's workforce. However, TSOs are among the lowest 
paid Federal workers and routinely have among the lowest retention rate 
of any Federal agency. TSO annual pay lags well behind industry 
counterparts, and even the top performing TSOs with exceptional 
performance find it difficult to advance within their pay bands.
  This was not Congress' intention when it gave the Administrator broad 
latitude to manage its own personnel system, nor was it Congress' 
intention that this authority should be used to benefit management over 
frontline TSOs, as is the case today.
  As a result, in the past decade TSA has come to rank near the bottom 
in Federal employee morale surveys. This has created a culture in which 
last year the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector 
General said that TSA must address its retention, hiring, and training 
challenges.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record excerpts from that 2019 report 
entitled ``TSA Needs to Improve Efforts to Retain, Hire, and Train Its 
Transportation Security Officers.''

      TSA Needs To Improve Efforts To Retain, Hire, and Train Its 
                    Transportation Security Officers


                             What We Found

       The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) needs to 
     continue to improve its retention, hiring, and training of 
     Transportation Security Officers (TSO). Specifically, TSA 
     needs to better address its retention challenges because it 
     currently does not share and leverage results of TSO exit 
     surveys and does not always convey job expectations to new-
     hires. Prior to August 2018, TSA did not always focus on TSO 
     career growth. Thus, the agency may be missing opportunities 
     to prevent early attrition. By improving its retention 
     efforts, TSA could save funds otherwise spent to hire and 
     train new TSOs.
       Furthermore, TSA does not fully evaluate applicants for 
     capability as well as compatibility when hiring new TSOs. 
     Thus, the agency may be making uninformed hiring decisions 
     due to inadequate applicant information and a lack of 
     formally documented guidance on ranking potential new-hires. 
     Without complete information, TSA may not be selecting the 
     most highly qualified individuals as TSOs.
       Prior to July 2018, TSA had not standardized the approach 
     for training new TSOs before they attend basic training and 
     did not consistently send TSOs to basic training immediately 
     following onboarding. TSA also does not give all airports 
     complete visibility into its basic training curriculum as a 
     basis for training new-hires locally. Without an experienced 
     workforce or a consistent, robust training program, TSA is 
     missing opportunities to strengthen its workforce. Given the 
     importance of TSOs fulfilling the aviation security mission, 
     TSA must address its retention, hiring, and training 
     challenges, which could save millions in taxpayers' dollars.


                              TSA Response

       TSA concurred with all nine recommendations and initiated 
     corrective actions to address the findings.
                                  ____

     Memorandum for: The Honorable David Pekoske, Administrator, 
         Transportation Security Administration.
     From: John V. Kelly, Acting Inspector General.
     Subject: TSA Needs to Improve Efforts to Retain, Hire, and 
         Train Its Transportation Security Officers.
       Attached for your action is our final report, TSA Needs to 
     Improve Efforts to Retain, Hire, and Train Its Transportation 
     Security Officers. We incorporated the formal comments 
     provided by your office.
       The report contains nine recommendations aimed at improving 
     TSA's retention, hiring, and training efforts for its 
     Transportation Security Officers. Your office concurred with 
     all nine recommendations. Based on information provided in 
     your response to the draft report, recommendations 4, 6, and 
     8 are closed while recommendations 1, 2, 5, 7, and 9 are 
     resolved and open. Once your office has fully implemented the 
     recommendations, please submit a formal closeout letter to us 
     within 30 days so that we may close the recommendations. The 
     memorandum should be accompanied by evidence of completion of 
     agreed upon corrective actions and of the disposition of any 
     monetary amounts. Recommendation 3 remains unresolved and 
     open because we did not agree with TSA's proposed corrective 
     action plan. As prescribed by the Department of Homeland 
     Security Directive 077-01, Follow-Up and Resolutions for the 
     Office of Inspector General Report Recommendations, within 90 
     days of the date of this memorandum, please provide our 
     office with a written response that includes your (1) 
     agreement or disagreement, (2) corrective action plan, and 
     (3) target completion date. Also, please include responsible 
     parties and any other supporting documentation necessary to 
     inform us about the current status of the recommendations. 
     Until your response is received and evaluated, recommendation 
     #3 will be considered open and unresolved.
       Consistent with our responsibility under the Inspector 
     General Act, we will provide copies of our report to 
     congressional committees with oversight and appropriation 
     responsibility over the Department of Homeland Security. We 
     will post the report on our website for public dissemination.
                                  ____



                               Conclusion

       TSOs are critical to airline passenger safety and the 
     security of the aviation transportation system. The Aviation 
     and Transportation Security Act charges TSA with developing 
     standards for retaining, hiring, and training security 
     screening personnel at all

[[Page H1479]]

     U.S. airports. Passengers rely on TSOs to screen other 
     passengers and baggage properly at more than 400 airports 
     nationwide. In FY 2017, TSA hired more than 9,600 TSOs and 
     spent approximately $75 million to recruit, hire, and train 
     them. Improving retention, hiring, and training of TSOs would 
     save costs and provide a more stable, mature, and qualified 
     workforce to better secure the Nation's aviation 
     transportation system.


                            Recommendations

       Recommendation 1: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, continue to coordinate efforts with Security 
     Operations to implement actions that facilitate improvements 
     in the hiring process to ensure applicants are informed of 
     the Transportation Security Officer duties and that TSA 
     continues to hire qualified applicants. At a minimum, TSA 
     should:
       a. require an applicant affirm whether he/ she has reviewed 
     the Transportation Security Officer Realistic Job Preview 
     video and understands duties include interacting with 
     passengers, passenger patdowns, shift work, weekend work, and 
     holidays. If the applicant has not, ensure the applicant 
     reviews the video as part of the application process; and
       b. finalize the implementation of the agency's job 
     compatibility assessment tool for use during the hiring 
     process.
       Recommendation 2: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, revise the exit survey process to:
       a. ensure airports offer local exit interviews;
       b. record results in a centralized system;
       c. provide relevant stakeholders access to the results for 
     analysis and process improvements; and
       d. address areas identified in the exit survey results that 
     would help retain a skilled and knowledgeable Transportation 
     Security Officer workforce.
       Recommendation 3: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, continue to review and develop recruitment and 
     retention strategies for reducing attrition:
       a. at smaller airports; and
       b. among part-time Transportation Security Officers.
       Recommendation 4: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, meet established timelines to implement the 
     first phase of Career Progression for newly appointed entry-
     level Transportation Security Officers.
       Recommendation 5: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, examine increases in pay based upon skill 
     level for Transportation Security Officers that could help 
     attract and retain a strong workforce.
       Recommendation 6: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, compile a local hiring update message to 
     remind airports to follow TSA records retention policies for 
     Airport Assessment documentation.
       Recommendation 7: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Human Capital, formally document system functional 
     requirements, such as the rating process criteria, for 
     quality assurance purposes to ensure proper system logic in 
     how applicants are ranked on the Certification Lists.
       Recommendation 8: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Training and Development, coordinate with Security Operations 
     to enforce the pre-Basic Training Program requirements.
       Recommendation 9: We recommend the Assistant Administrator, 
     Training and Development, provide all airports access to the 
     Basic Training Program curriculum in its entirety.


                  Management Comments and OIG Analysis

       TSA concurred with all of our recommendations and is taking 
     steps or has implemented actions to address them. Appendix B 
     contains TSA's management comments in their entirety. We also 
     received technical comments to the draft report and revised 
     the report as appropriate. We consider recommendations 1, 2, 
     5, 7, and 9 resolved and open. Recommendations 4, 6, and 8 
     are closed. Recommendation 3 remains unresolved and open 
     because we did not agree with TSA's proposed corrective 
     action plan. A summary of TSA's responses and our analysis 
     follows.
       TSA Comments to Recommendation 1: TSA concurred with the 
     recommendation. TSA explained its efforts to make every TSO 
     applicant aware of the realities of the TSO position and 
     ensure the agency conveys job expectations to TSO applicants. 
     These efforts include participating in job fairs and career 
     events, hosting in-person and virtual information sessions, 
     attaching an airport-specific fact sheet to every TSO Job 
     Opportunity Announcement posted on the Federal Government's 
     official employment site, USAJobs, and creating and sharing 
     the TSO Realistic Job Preview video that is communicated 
     throughout the hiring process and accessible through various 
     avenues. TSA will mandate that personnel scheduling the 
     Airport Assessment review an airport's hours of operations, 
     typical shifts and days off, and typical duties of the 
     position. Additionally, TSA will modify the Airport 
     Assessment scheduling script to advise that each applicant is 
     required to watch the TSO Realistic Job Preview video prior 
     to attending the assessment. TSA expects these actions to 
     begin by March 31, 2019. Additionally, TSA plans to include a 
     compatibility assessment tool in the TSO hiring process, 
     which the Office of Personnel Management will validate. The 
     estimated completion date to pilot and fully deploy the 
     compatibility assessment tool is September 30, 2019.
       OIG Analysis of TSA Comments: TSA has taken steps to 
     satisfy the intent of this recommendation. We consider this 
     recommendation resolved, but it will remain open until TSA 
     provides documentation to support that all planned corrective 
     actions are completed.

  Ms. SCANLON. Fortunately, Madam Speaker, this bill before us today 
will address each of those challenges. The Rights for Transportation 
Security Officers Act will honor those who protect America's aviation 
security by bringing the TSA personnel system within the bounds of the 
rest of the Federal workforce.
  H.R. 1140 will put an end to the current TSA personnel directives 
that have allowed the TSA to be the judge and jury in workforce 
disciplinary matters, and require TSA to follow the labor-management 
employee relations statutes that provide workplace rights and 
protections to most Federal employees under title 5 of the U.S. Code; 
the provision that is most notable in efforts to increase employee 
retention and morale by putting TSOs on the general schedule pay scale 
and finally aligning pay with the vast majority of other Federal 
employees.
  This legislation has been a long time coming for the men and women 
who protect our skies and keep millions of us safe on a daily basis. 
During the 35-day partial government shutdown at the end of the last 
Congress, TSOs were required to work for more than 5 weeks without pay. 
At Philadelphia International Airport in my district, a typical entry-
level salary for a TSO is about $29,000 per year, without including 
additional locality pay.
  Working without pay for over a month would be difficult if you made 
three times that amount, Madam Speaker, but it is unconscionable that 
the Federal Government would force the very people we trust to keep us 
safe into having to turn to food banks, short-term loans, and donations 
to make ends meet. Yet these Federal workers kept reporting for work 
even when they couldn't afford gas and parking. These are not 
hypotheticals. In my district alone we collected food, diapers, gas 
cards, and other necessities for TSOs who were not being paid.
  The Federal Government did not live up to its commitment to these 
TSOs, but these civil servants did not waiver in their dedication to 
keeping the flying public safe.
  My colleagues across the aisle have objected to this bill which would 
support our Federal workers by claiming that our national security is 
at risk, that TSA would lose flexibility, and that the bill is too 
expensive.
  To the first point, I would say that a TSA staffed by underpaid and 
overworked TSOs is a greater threat to national security than paying a 
fair wage to keep Americans safe. Pay is one of the top reasons that 
the TSA struggles with keeping good employees. We lose current and 
potential TSOs every day because they can make more money in lower 
pressure work environments elsewhere.
  Whether in business, law, or government, you get what you pay for, 
and I, for one, do not believe that the security of our airports and 
skies or the lives of the traveling public are something we should be 
looking to get a bargain on.
  Further, granting the TSA workforce full collective bargaining rights 
under title 5 would not deny TSA the ability to remove bad employees or 
interfere with TSA's authority to direct security operations. Federal 
agencies already under title 5 jurisdiction have the flexibility to 
quickly deal with bad actors, but ensuring that proper protocols are 
followed in termination proceedings is a right that must be afforded to 
employees. This includes other Federal agencies with security and 
enforcement operations such as Customs and Border Patrol, the 
Department of Defense, and others.
  The TSA has had years to address its issues of recruitment, 
retention, and training, but has failed to do so. Now it is time for 
Congress to bring TSA in line with other Federal agencies. The TSA is 
not a new Federal agency, nor is it destined to go away. So, in that 
sense we must make sure that these patriotic civil workers are properly 
compensated and given the workplace rights that they deserve.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, I thank Representative Scanlon for

[[Page H1480]]

yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Madam Speaker, this bill has six main aspects that I have major 
concerns with.
  First, the bill eliminates TSA's unique personnel management 
authorities created in the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 
2001, commonly known as ATSA.
  This legislation moves employees of the TSA into the government pay 
schedule. In 2001, when Congress created TSA, the decision was made not 
to do this in order to give the agency flexibility. At present, the TSA 
Administrator has authority over employee pay, hiring, termination, and 
discipline.
  TSA has repeatedly told us that placing the screener workforce under 
title 5 would tie the agency's hands related to national security 
policy, workforce management, and collective bargaining.
  Specifically, TSA would not be able to continue a one-step removal 
process for employees found to have committed serious security breaches 
or misconduct, such as allowing unauthorized access to secure areas or 
allowing threat items and illicit contraband through the security 
checkpoint.
  TSA's ability to move employees to different checkpoints based on 
passenger volume would also be curtailed. Currently, TSA can set new 
security policies TSOs must follow and move TSOs between checkpoints to 
manage passenger volume. Under this bill, however, both actions would 
be subject to collective bargaining and the security measures could be 
limited as a result.
  TSA's ability to set security screening policies, such as when and 
how to conduct pat-downs, would be negotiable with the union instead of 
being driven by national security imperatives.
  In fact, the bill eliminates the TSA's authority to immediately fire 
employees for serious misconduct, including sexual assault, drug and 
alcohol abuse, arrest, theft, and intentional security breaches, such 
as allowing guns, knives, and explosives past the checkpoint. In recent 
years, there have been several incidents of TSOs assaulting passengers, 
stealing passenger items, and allowing drugs past the checkpoint. Now, 
we all know the majority of TSOs are good people doing good jobs. But 
there are some bad actors.

  On February 6, 2020, the State of California announced the arrest and 
prosecution of a former TSA screener resulting from a joint 
investigation effort by Federal, State, and local enforcement agencies 
and the TSA.
  According to the criminal complaint, the TSA screener used fraud or 
deceit to falsely imprison a woman going through security while 
stationed as a travel document checker at Los Angeles International 
Airport in June of 2019. The screener allegedly insisted that the woman 
passenger needed extra screening in an elevator, where he told the 
passenger to reveal her full breasts and to lift her pants and 
underwear. The victim in the case stated that she complied with the 
TSO's instructions out of fear that he would inappropriately touch her.
  This sort of horrible incident is why it is imperative that TSA 
retain its one-step removal process for employees who sully the 
integrity and honor of the TSA mission and put American travelers at 
risk.
  Under title 5 protections, this TSA screener that I just talked about 
could remain on the Federal Government's payroll for years before 
removal. That is wrong. Under this bill, TSA leadership would lose the 
flexibility to respond effectively to incidents such as the one I just 
described.
  The second reason I have concerns about this bill is just recently in 
2019, the bipartisan Blue Ribbon Panel for the Transportation Security 
Administration on Human Capital Service Delivery specifically 
recommended that TSA not--I repeat not--switch to the general schedule, 
GS, system, calling it overly rigid and outdated.

                              {time}  1245

  This panel is comprised of former officials from both Republican and 
Democratic administrations, and it is led by a Department of Homeland 
Security official from the Obama administration.
  They all pointed out that, under the current system and law, TSA can 
pay its employees more than they can make under title 5. It called on 
TSA to use the statutory flexibility Congress provided it to provide 
targeted pay increases, which I support. The Blue Ribbon Panel 
specifically recommended against the policies contained in H.R. 1140.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the Blue Ribbon Panel report, 
titled ``Final Findings and Recommendations, Blue Ribbon Panel for the 
Transportation Security Administration.''

                   Final Findings and Recommendations


 Blue Ribbon Panel for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)

       The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has faced 
     numerous challenges with human capital policy, operations, 
     and services to support mission requirements. The Agency 
     determined it needed a third-party review to identify the 
     underlying problems and recommend solutions. ICF was 
     contracted to perform the work and convened a Blue-Ribbon 
     Panel (the Panel) to review, analyze, and make 
     recommendations for improvements. This Report documents the 
     ``As Is'' state and recommendations for improvement. It is 
     based on extensive interviews with Office of Human Capital 
     (OHC) and other headquarters (HQ) stakeholders, interviews 
     with airport leaders, and focus groups with the National 
     Advisory Council (NAC) and Transportation Security Officers 
     (TSOs). In addition, the Panel reviewed documents and data 
     provided by TSA. ICF also analyzed TSA data to look for 
     trends, corroboration, or potential root causes of identified 
     issues.
       Because of the nature of the Panel's work--identifying 
     problems and recommending solutions--this report documents 
     difficult, long-standing challenges. The Panel also found 
     areas of excellence. The TSO workforce, for example, 
     demonstrates a remarkable level of dedication to their work. 
     Even during the seven-week partial government shutdown, the 
     vast majority of TSOs showed up and did their jobs. Some even 
     participated in recruiting events to help TSA recruit new 
     officers. Given the low pay and difficult working conditions 
     that are inherent in TSA's screening work, the dedication 
     these officers show is extraordinary.
       TSA's low ranking in the Partnership for Public Service's 
     Best Places to Work in the Federal Government may lead some 
     to conclude that there are no great leaders in TSA. That is 
     not true. The Panel found there are airports with outstanding 
     leaders whose work clearly demonstrates excellence. The 
     challenge facing TSA is to take the lessons learned from 
     those airports, feedback from employees and stakeholders, and 
     Panel recommendations to transform human capital operations 
     agency-wide.
       The Panel's key findings and recommendations are 
     categorized into two major areas: Examining Human Capital 
     Service Delivery and Supporting the Transportation Security 
     Officer (TSO) Workforce.
       TSA human capital challenges include ineffective use of 
     Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) 
     flexibilities, an ill-defined service delivery model that 
     relies on contractors with insufficient oversight and 
     inadequate Human Capital Information Technology, poorly 
     trained field staff, and a headquarters human capital office 
     that lacks strategic focus and demonstrates insufficient 
     teamwork.
       The policy and human capital operations challenges appear 
     to result from deficiencies in the Office of Human Capital 
     (OHC) and an inconsistent approach to field delivery of human 
     capital services. The OHC suffers from a lack of teamwork and 
     leadership challenges. Interviews with customers, 
     stakeholders, and OHC staff make clear that human capital 
     programs are not designed in the context of a cohesive 
     strategy. OHC customers gave negative feedback on key 
     programs, particularly human capital information technology 
     systems, classification and position management, and hiring 
     and pay, with a few bright spots in employee relations and 
     training. OHC leaders consistently reported a culture where 
     cooperation across OHC organizations was lacking and peer 
     relationships are poor.
       TSA's Human Capital Office issues are significant, but the 
     Panel has encountered other human capital organizations with 
     such issues that have been transformed into effective units. 
     With significant leadership support, the Panel believes the 
     improvements in Human Capital Office leadership, work 
     processes and policies required for TSA to have acceptable 
     human capital services are achievable and has included 
     recommendations for implementable and substantive changes 
     that will provide a way forward for TSA. This report 
     includes multiple recommendations. The most pressing among 
     those recommendations are the need for more effective 
     human capital leadership, a well thought out process for 
     human capital service delivery, greater use of ATSA 
     flexibilities, modern human capital technology, and 
     standardizing and realigning the field human capital 
     structure. Adoption of these recommendations, coupled with 
     actions TSA is already taking to make improvements, should 
     result in significantly improved human capital policies 
     and services.
       The 2018 TSA Exit Survey report indicated employees were 
     concerned about leadership issues, having experienced a 
     ``lack of management skills,'' ``unfair practices (e.g., in

[[Page H1481]]

     performance appraisal, disciplinary actions, career 
     advancement, etc.),'' ``unequal levels of respect,'' a 
     ``hostile work environment,'' and ``inadequate communication 
     with the workforce.'' TSOs perceive favoritism and express an 
     inability to voice complaints about issues.
       The Panel believes the systemic problems with TSO pay may 
     be a major contributor to some of those perceptions, due to 
     the inability of TSOs (even those with exceptional 
     performance ratings) to advance within their pay bands. 
     Employee perceptions of leadership and organizational 
     fairness may undermine their commitment to stay at TSA.
       Surveys and Focus Groups reveal that TSO pay is a key issue 
     for the screening workforce, and a complex problem. These 
     officers work long hours, have difficult working conditions, 
     and are the backbone of the TSA mission. By some measures, 
     TSO annual pay in some locations lags well behind industry 
     counterparts. TSO perceptions regarding inequity in their pay 
     are aggravated by the fact that their pay averages about one-
     third of that of TSA employees in Management, Administration 
     and Professional (MAP) positions. The Panel recognizes that 
     the nature of the TSO's work and that of employees in MAP 
     positions means a disparity in pay is always going to exist. 
     While there is no indication it was deliberate, TSA's use of 
     its flexibilities has boosted MAP pay above government 
     averages, with TSO pay remaining below those averages for 
     comparable jobs.
       The disparity is driven in part by a pay and performance 
     management process that provides little hope of movement, 
     especially within the E-Band. A TSO at the bottom of the E-
     band, even with exceptional performance ratings year after 
     year, would take more than 30 years to reach the top of the 
     E-Band. This produces the effect that the E-Band pay range is 
     illusory, with few TSOs in the middle or at the top of the 
     band.
       TSO turnover is high in the first three years in comparison 
     to other positions in TSA and in the federal workforce. TSO 
     turnover is somewhat consistent with other low wage jobs in 
     the private sector with comparable skill requirements for 
     initial hiring, where annual turnover rates of 20 percent or 
     more are common. That does not mean TSA should accept high 
     turnover as a given. The cost of turnover (in terms of 
     recruiting, hiring and training replacement officers and 
     lower productivity of newer and less skilled officers) is 
     high and the effect on the workforce which carries the 
     screening workload in absence of a full TSO cohort is 
     significant. If TSA can retain Officers beyond the first 
     three years, turnover reduces to a much more manageable 
     level.
       Turnover among longer term employees may be driven by the 
     stability of employment and benefits TSOs receive. Although 
     TSA operates outside of the general government pay and 
     classification statutes found in Title 5 of the U.S. Code, 
     the agency offers the same or better benefits as other 
     agencies and provides greater job security than many private 
     sector employers. As a result, if TSA can address pay, 
     leadership, and turnover issues, the Panel believes the 
     agency will see reduced costs, better morale, and a more 
     stable workforce.
       This report includes recommendations to address TSO pay and 
     advancement, and other critical issues for the TSO workforce. 
     Although we often find that pay is a secondary issue for 
     employees and other leadership issues tend to drive turnover, 
     Focus Group findings highlight pay as the greatest issue 
     driving turnover.
       The Panel acknowledges that TSA recognizes the pay issues 
     and is seeking ways to address them. The scale of TSA 
     operations means that even small across-the-board pay 
     increases can cost tens of millions of dollars. The Panel 
     recommends targeted pay raises, rather than across-the-board 
     increases that might consume precious salary dollars to raise 
     pay in locations where pay is not a problem.
       Although TSOs identify pay as the key driver of turnover, 
     the Panel believes other problematic issues must be addressed 
     as well. If pay problems are reduced, the other issues will 
     continue to affect morale and turnover. Other key 
     recommendations address the hiring process, which the Panel 
     believes should be significantly modernized, and leader 
     selection and development, which is essential to address many 
     of the morale issues that are contributors to morale problems 
     and turnover. The Panel also recommends changes to the 
     promotion process and support for Information Technology 
     improvements that can simultaneously increase operational 
     efficiency and transparency, likely reducing concerns of 
     favoritism expressed by the TSO workforce.
       One recommendation the Panel heard repeatedly from 
     employees was moving TSA into the General Schedule (GS). The 
     Panel does not agree. The General Schedule is a 70 year-old 
     classification and compensation system from the last century 
     and is the subject of countless studies and recommendations 
     from good government organizations who consistently find it 
     is too inflexible to meet the needs of the 21st century 
     workforce. A better course of action is to use existing ATSA 
     flexibility to improve the TSA pay system so that it operates 
     at a level superior to the GS system.
       This Report provides a high-level roadmap for changes to 
     TSA's Human Capital policies and processes, which if adopted, 
     should have a significant positive impact on TSA workforce 
     and mission operations.

  Mrs. LESKO. Madam Speaker, third, some benefits currently available 
to the screener workforce under ATSA would not be possible if this bill 
were to become law.
  The bill does not fix the morale problem.
  The bill does not guarantee additional pay or benefits for TSOs. It 
may actually make situations worse. The bill eliminates the authority 
TSA has to pay TSOs more than other Federal employees under title 5.
  It also eliminates several benefits, such as the broadest application 
of veterans' hiring preference in the Federal Government, meaning that 
veterans may not get the same preference that they do now; shift trades 
between employees; voluntary leave transfers; partial overtime pay as 
compensation for schedule changes; and career progression bonuses of up 
to 5 percent of a screener's salary.
  Fourth, we have yet to receive a CBO score. However, TSA estimates 
the bill will cost $1.2 billion over the next 5 years. To cover the 
cost, funding for security priorities would be reduced. The bill does 
not even have a specific authorization of appropriations or means of 
paying for moving these employees under title 5.
  The fifth reason I have a concern on this bill, H.R. 1140, amounts to 
a forced unionization of the TSA workforce and a forced designation of 
the union that will represent that same workforce. It does not allow 
for an intervening election for TSA screeners to choose their labor 
representation.
  As such, this bill benefits one specific union, the American 
Federation of Government Employees. The bill does not provide for an 
intervening election to give screeners the right to choose which union 
they want to represent them.
  In 2011, AFGE was recognized by the Obama administration to represent 
the screener workforce after two elections. Approximately 8,900 
screeners voted for the union. However, today, there are approximately 
45,000 screeners subject to this bill. While TSA employees did select 
AFGE as their bargaining agent in 2011, it is remarkable that this bill 
specifically dictates which union will be representing TSA employees 
without a more recent vote or all employees voting.
  Sixth, this bill, once again, is a partisan messaging bill that will 
not become law. We know that because I highly doubt the Senate is going 
to hear this bill. Yet again, the majority refuses to work with the 
minority to move viable legislation to address real problems.
  Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, as expected, we have heard that eliminating the unique 
personnel management tools that were initially afforded to the TSA is 
somehow going to undermine the organization, but this ignores the 
reality that those tools are no longer needed nor effective.
  The record is replete with evidence that we need to reform the way 
the TSA is managed in order to address very, very serious issues of 
recruitment, retention, and training.
  What is posited here is a false choice between workers' rights and 
national security, and we reject that choice.
  We were given an example of gross sexual misconduct as a reason why 
workers shouldn't have organizational rights. But under title 5's rule, 
which would apply under this bill, agencies can expedite personnel 
actions against employees accused of criminal activity, and they also 
can be removed from their duty post for potential harm to themselves or 
to others.
  Again, this is a false choice between workers' rights and national 
security, or just plain old management.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a member of the Rules Committee, for her 
leadership. I thank the minority's representative, as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to enthusiastically support H.R. 1140. I am very 
proud to be an enthusiastic cosponsor of this legislation and to 
explain to my colleagues and the American people how we started the 
Committee on Homeland Security, as a founding

[[Page H1482]]

member, if you will, being here during the heinous terrorist acts of 9/
11 and knowing that the Nation needed to put together quickly a 
Homeland Security Department, second in size to the Department of 
Defense, I believe.
  We organized the Transportation Security Administration fast and in a 
way that the Administrator would, really, have all powers--all powers. 
In doing so, we failed to give them Federal civil service protection. 
So, this legislation is legislation that is crucial because the TSA 
workforce is among the lowest paid in the Federal Government and lacks 
basic workplace protection afforded to most other government workers. 
As a result, TSA struggles with low morale and high attrition.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1140, the Rights for Transportation Security 
Officers Act of 2020, is nothing that has been previously described--
nothing like that. It is an opportunity to maintain a professional 
force of individuals who every day protect Americans.
  It is unfortunate that, as we go through our normal life and we see 
TSO officers, and we see them in their blue shirts and their dark 
pants, we take them for granted, quite frankly.
  As a former chair of the Transportation Security Subcommittee of the 
Homeland Security Committee, I was intimately engaged in knowing just 
what the work was that they did.
  Do we understand the numbers of weapons that are found every day? I 
am saying it generically because some of this is classified.
  The number of incidences that are thwarted, if you will, by TSO 
officers--do we realize that one of our great officers lost his life in 
Los Angeles, and his family suffers?
  This bill would provide reasonable protection. It would give 
gradations of salaries. It will allow us to keep a professional staff.

  We attempted to put a Band-Aid on this by providing for professional 
development training in Georgia, where other Federal law enforcement 
academies were. That was not enough.
  In fact, they had to change it for these individuals who work for a 
period of time before they went to the academy because they were losing 
people after they went to the academy because they were not earning the 
compensation that they should. There was no promotion.
  Just the other day, a very fine young woman, excellent, who was 
respected and had come up to headquarters, she left us for another 
Federal agency because there was no advancement or opportunity.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ruiz). The time of the gentlewoman has 
expired.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, these are fine Americans. Many of them 
are former military, and they support their families. To give them the 
opportunity to, first of all, have a right to grievance, to ensure that 
they have nonreduction on pay and compensation, that they have 
preservation of their civil rights--there is no right to strike. But it 
is a right to have the ability to engage their employer and to be able 
to be respected.
  Mr. Speaker, I am enthusiastic about this. Names like Bill and 
Patrick and Alfred, other men and women of the Transportation Security 
Administration, the TSOs' names, I am sure, that we could call in our 
respective airports, the people we know every day, our neighbors. They 
do a great and fine job.
  We must pass this bill, and I hope we pass it in a bipartisan way. 
Think about not paying those who are saving your lives every single day 
in the Nation's airports. Think about how you are treating them. Think 
about the low pay. Think about the compensation that does not allow 
them to have high morale.
  Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the show of support for passing this 
bill, and I ask my colleagues to support it.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I, too, support increasing pay for our TSOs. I am the 
ranking member, Republican member, on the Homeland Security 
Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security, so we have had 
hearings on this.
  I do believe that they need to get a pay increase. It is a tough job. 
The ones I go through, in the Phoenix and Washington DCA airports, do a 
good job. So I am not opposed to that at all, and I am hoping I can 
work together with my Democratic colleagues on the budget so we can try 
to increase the budget so that they can increase pay for good TSOs who 
are doing a good job.
  But what I do know is that I don't like this bill. I already said the 
reasons why I don't like this bill, but one of them is specifically 
about the case I talked about where a bad TSO officer, someone who did 
a bad thing--sexually assaulted a woman--that then they wouldn't be 
removed immediately if this bill came into law.
  My colleague, Representative Scanlon, said: Well, under title 5 
rules, they could be removed from their post.
  Well, that is good, but they are still getting paid. And I can tell 
you what, I bet if I went out on the street right now and I said: Do 
you think it is fine if a TSO officer sexually assaulted a woman on an 
elevator under false pretenses, do you think that Federal employee 
should still be getting paid?
  They would say absolutely not. They would be outraged. That is one of 
my major concerns on this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will bring to the 
floor H.R. 5595, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Arizona?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions 
campaign, commonly known as BDS, is anti-Israel, anti-peace, and 
damaging to U.S. interests.
  This bill amends the Export Administration Act of 1979 to prohibit 
boycotts or requests for boycotts imposed by international governmental 
organizations against Israel. This will protect American companies from 
being forced to give information to international organizations for the 
furthering of boycotts against Israel.
  This bill establishes Congress' opposition to the Boycott, Divestment 
and Sanctions movement, and establishes that Congress considers the 
United Nations Human Rights Council's creation of a database of 
companies doing business in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the 
Golan Heights in March 2016 to be an act of BDS.

                              {time}  1300

  We cannot be quiet when it comes to combating anti-Semitism and anti-
Israel mentalities. We need to work together in Congress and pass 
commonsense legislation on this issue. H.R. 5595 does just that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Zeldin), my good friend.
  Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous 
question so that the House may take up H.R. 5595, the Israel Anti-
Boycott Act, that would help fight back against the BDS movement.
  This bill would prohibit boycotts or requests for boycotts imposed by 
international governmental organizations against Israel and would 
protect American companies from being coerced to provide information to 
those organizations for the purpose of furthering boycotts against 
Israel.
  This bill holds individuals who attempt to violate this protection 
accountable. Additionally, it establishes Congress' opposition to the 
BDS movement and condemns the United Nations' Human Rights Council's 
creation of a blacklist of companies doing business in the West Bank, 
East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights as an act of BDS.
  This legislation does not impede the right of any individual American 
to boycott or criticize Israel. It is okay to have reasonable, 
legitimate concerns with any government, including our own and allies 
like Israel, but this hate-fueled movement is not all about affirming 
the rights of Palestinians.
  The BDS movement has fueled anti-Semitism across college campuses and 
in our country's politics. I hear from Jewish students on college 
campuses across America who are being subjected to blatant anti-
Semitism under the guise of BDS. For example, at Syracuse University, 
they are granting internship school credit to students interning with 
pro-BDS organizations

[[Page H1483]]

after a slew of anti-Semitic graffiti vandalized the school.
  The founder of BDS was blatantly anti-Semitic, and this movement is 
being pushed by many people who support a one-state solution that would 
end Israel, our Nation's greatest ally.
  BDS tries to delegitimize Israel by turning it into a pariah state 
cut off from all trade, tourism, military, diplomatic, and cultural 
ties with the rest of the world. Last month, the U.N. did it again and 
published a blacklist of companies doing business in the West Bank.
  We must forcefully condemn this.
  This House, last year, passed H. Res. 246, a resolution to condemn 
the BDS movement. Making a statement was a start, but now it is time to 
do something about it and pass legislation with teeth.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the rule and defeat the 
previous question.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In closing, I want to urge my Democratic colleagues to vote against 
this rule and H.R. 1140 and the previous question so we can assert my 
anti-BDS amendment.
  The bill, as I stated, would eliminate TSA's ability to immediately 
fire employees for serious misconduct, like what happened in 
California. The bill would also take away TSA's ability to give the 
TSOs many of the benefits that they currently get, such as bonuses and 
overtime pay.
  I really think we need to work together to ensure TSA employees are 
happy and enjoy their work, and that is why I said I am supportive of 
increasing their pay, especially that of good and productive TSOs. We 
need to provide incentives to help bring good morale to these 
hardworking employees, not the opposite.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the 
underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  H.R. 1140 is a pro-security and pro-Federal worker piece of 
legislation.
  The TSA is no longer a startup agency requiring maximum flexibility 
during a period of national emergency, and Congress, in previous 
administrations, has taken actions to reflect that.
  Ten years after its creation, in 2011, TSA employees were given labor 
union representation. This was a good step forward. However, the time 
is now to provide the 60,000 TSA employees the same worker rights and 
protections afforded to other Federal workers under the U.S. Code.
  It is a sad and shameful day for the government when anyone is forced 
to turn to food pantries to feed their family, employed or not, but it 
is unacceptable that Federal workers who work to protect and serve all 
Americans would be without a paycheck for weeks at a time--over the 
holidays, no less.
  Working people all over the United States are sacrificing more and 
earning less. This is a systemic problem that will not be solved by 
this bill. But, in order to rebuild the middle class that got so many 
of us into this body where we are today, we need to value Federal 
workers for the job they do and the services they provide to all of us.
  There are times and places for cutting costs and reducing expenses, 
but I do not believe that we as a body should do so in a way that 
negatively impacts national security or does so to the detriment of the 
men and women who keep us safe. I believe it is the responsibility of 
the Federal Government to responsibly pay its Federal workers.
  The hundreds of thousands of civil servants in this country do not 
belong to one political party or all subscribe to the same political 
beliefs. No, they do their jobs because they are in service to this 
Nation, and, in return, they deserve reasonable wages and rights in the 
workplace. I do not think that this is too much to ask.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous 
question.
  The material previously referred to by Mrs. Lesko is as follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 877

  At the end of the resolution, add the following:

        Sec. 4. 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 bill (H.R. 
     5595) to impose additional prohibitions relating to foreign 
     boycotts under Export Control Reform Act of 2018, and for 
     other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the 
     bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Foreign Affairs. After general debate the bill 
     shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill are 
     waived. When the committee rises and reports the bill back to 
     the House with a recommendation that the bill do pass, the 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill 
     and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports 
     that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the 
     next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the 
     third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, 
     resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further 
     consideration of the bill.
       Sec. 5. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 5595.

  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of adoption of the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 219, 
nays 194, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 83]

                               YEAS--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)
     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
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Engel
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Finkenauer
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McAdams
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mucarsel-Powell
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rose (NY)
     Rouda
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherrill
     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
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--194

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs

[[Page H1484]]


     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Bishop (UT)
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cook
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     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
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Meuser
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Posey
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Roby
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spano
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Drew
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Young
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Byrne
     Clarke (NY)
     Doggett
     Gomez
     Grijalva
     Johnson (TX)
     Lewis
     Ratcliffe
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose, John W.
     Roybal-Allard
     Scott, David
     Sherman
     Sires
     Veasey
     Waters

                              {time}  1335

  Mr. RASKIN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Ms. CLARKE of New York. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have 
voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 83.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. LESKO. 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 220, 
nays 192, not voting 17, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 84]

                               YEAS--220

     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
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Engel
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Finkenauer
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McAdams
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mucarsel-Powell
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rose (NY)
     Rouda
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherrill
     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
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--192

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bishop (NC)
     Bishop (UT)
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Comer
     Conaway
     Cook
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Gianforte
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     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
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marchant
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meadows
     Meuser
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Posey
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Roby
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Sensenbrenner
     Shimkus
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spano
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Tipton
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Drew
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Young
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--17

     Bilirakis
     Byrne
     Doggett
     Gomez
     Grijalva
     Johnson (TX)
     Lewis
     Ratcliffe
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose, John W.
     Roybal-Allard
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sherman
     Sires
     Veasey
     Waters

                              {time}  1344

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated against:
  Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. 
Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay`` on rollcall No. 84.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, had I been present, I would have voted 
``yea'' on rollcall No. 83 and ``yea'' on rollcall No. 84.

                          ____________________