[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 19 (Tuesday, February 2, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H266-H273]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 447, NATIONAL APPRENTICESHIP ACT OF 
   2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. CON. RES. 11, CONCURRENT 
 RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 85 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                               H. Res. 85

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 447) to 
     amend the Act of August 16, 1937 (commonly referred to as the 
     ``National Apprenticeship Act'') and expand the national 
     apprenticeship system to include apprenticeships, youth 
     apprenticeships, and pre-apprenticeship registered under such 
     Act, to promote the furtherance of labor standards necessary 
     to safeguard the welfare of apprentices, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The amendment printed in part A of 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) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Education and Labor; (2) the 
     further amendments described in section 2 of this resolution; 
     (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this 
     resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2.  After debate pursuant to the first section of this 
     resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as 
     part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this 
     resolution shall be considered 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, may be withdrawn 
     by the proponent at any time before the question is put 
     thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
     subject to a demand for division of the question.
       Sec. 3.  It shall be in order at any time after debate 
     pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the 
     chair of the Committee on Education and Labor or his designee 
     to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments 
     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules 
     accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. 
     Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be 
     considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Education and Labor or their 
     respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and 
     shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
     question.
       Sec. 4.  All points of order against the further amendments 
     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or 
     amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution 
     are waived.
       Sec. 5.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the concurrent resolution (H. 
     Con. Res. 11) establishing the congressional budget for the 
     United States Government for fiscal year 2021 and setting 
     forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2022 
     through 2030. All points of order against consideration of 
     the concurrent resolution are waived. The amendment printed 
     in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules 
     accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. 
     The concurrent resolution, as amended, shall be considered as 
     read. All points of order against provisions in the 
     concurrent resolution, as amended, are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the concurrent 
     resolution, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, 
     to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division 
     of the question except three hours of debate, with two hours 
     equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on the Budget and one hour, 
     on the subject of economic goals and policies, equally 
     divided and controlled by Representative Beyer of Virginia 
     and Representative Schweikert of Arizona or their respective 
     designees.
       Sec. 6.  Rule XXVIII shall not apply with respect to the 
     adoption by the House of a concurrent resolution on the 
     budget for fiscal year 2021.
       Sec. 7.  House Resolution 73 is hereby adopted.
       Sec. 8. (a) Clause 3(g)(3)(C) of rule II is amended to read 
     as follows:
       ``(C) Upon receipt of an appeal pursuant to subdivision 
     (B), the Committee on Ethics shall have a period of 30 
     calendar days or five legislative days, whichever is later, 
     to consider the appeal. The fine will be upheld unless the 
     appeal is agreed to by a majority of the Committee. Upon a 
     determination regarding the appeal or if no appeal has been 
     filed at the expiration of the period specified in 
     subdivision (B), the chair of the Committee on Ethics shall 
     promptly notify the Member, Delegate, or the Resident 
     Commissioner, the Speaker, the Sergeant-at-Arms, and the 
     Chief Administrative Officer, and shall make such 
     notification publicly available. The Speaker shall promptly 
     lay such notification before the House.''.
       (b) Section 4(a)(2) of House Resolution 38 is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(2) a fine imposed pursuant to this section shall be 
     treated as though imposed under clause 3(g) of rule II, and 
     shall be administered as though pursuant to clause 4(d) of 
     rule II, except that if a Member, Delegate, or Resident 
     Commissioner files an appeal under clause 3(g)(3)(B) of rule 
     II prior to the date on which the Committee on Ethics has 
     adopted written rules, the period for the Committee's 
     consideration of the appeal under clause 3(g)(3)(C) of rule 
     II shall begin on the date on which the chair of the 
     Committee notifies the Member, Delegate, or Resident 
     Commissioner that the Committee has adopted such rules.''.
       Sec. 9.  Section 5 of House Resolution 8, agreed to January 
     4, 2021 (as amended by House Resolution 41, agreed to January 
     13, 2021), is amended by striking ``February 11'' each place 
     that it appears and inserting ``March 12''.

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


                             General Leave

  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, today the Rules Committee met and reported 
a rule, House Resolution 85, providing for consideration of H.R. 447, 
the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021, under a structured rule.
  The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by 
the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. 
The rule self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Scott, makes 
in order 26 amendments, provides en bloc authority to Chairman Scott, 
and provides one motion to recommit.
  The rule also provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 11 under a 
closed rule. It self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman 
Yarmuth. It also provides 3 hours of debate with 2 hours equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on the Budget and 1 hour equally divided and controlled by 
Representatives Beyer of Virginia and Schweikert of Arizona, or their 
respective designees.

[[Page H267]]

  The rule also provides that H. Res. 73 is hereby adopted. The rule 
updates the process by which Members can appeal fines for refusing to 
wear a mask or for taking photographs or recording audio or video on 
the House floor to align with the Ethics Committee appeal procedures 
established in H. Res. 73.
  Finally, the rule extends standard district work period instructions, 
same day, and suspension authority through March 12, 2021.
  Mr. Speaker, the National Apprenticeship Act is critical workforce 
development legislation that will invest $3.5 billion to create nearly 
1 million new apprenticeship opportunities over the next 5 years. This 
is a history investment in workforce training, and I am so pleased to 
support this effort.
  Skilled workers are the backbone of our economy. And apprenticeships 
provide a unique opportunity to grow and expand access to this 
workforce.
  Not only do apprenticeship programs provide pathways to meaningful 
and sustainable careers, they are critical to expanding our Nation's 
skilled workforce. When I meet with local businesses in my district in 
Rochester, New York, I regularly hear that their greatest challenge is 
finding skilled labor to fill positions and keep their businesses 
thriving.
  Apprenticeships provide an invaluable pathway to engage workers, 
establish connections with high-demand industries, and set workers on a 
path to a rewarding and sustainable career.
  I note that as the son of an individual who dropped out of high 
school at the age of 16, my dad, after service in Korea in the United 
States Army, came home and got involved in an apprenticeship for the 
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 13 Union and had a long, long career 
where he retired at the age of 70 after having supported a family of 
seven. What was directly responsible for that was the apprenticeship 
program and his ability to build that sustained career.
  I am particularly proud that a bill I introduced with my colleague, 
Congresswoman Trahan, has been included in the text of the National 
Apprenticeship Act. Our bill helps scale up participation among 
populations not typically engaged in apprenticeships, particularly 
small- and medium-sized businesses, and together we can create new 
opportunities in high-demand industries.
  Now, more than ever, these programs are critical to grapple with the 
long-term economic impacts of COVID-19.
  This week we will also begin the next phase of addressing the ongoing 
COVID-19 pandemic through H. Con. Res. 11, a budget resolution for 
fiscal year 2021. Passing this budget resolution is a necessary step to 
fast-track essential COVID relief, the American Rescue Plan.
  This plan will deliver the direct support the American public needs, 
including a national vaccination program, direct aid to individuals and 
families, housing and nutrition assistance, and expansion and extension 
of unemployment insurance, small business assistance, and resources to 
protect first responders and frontline workers.
  Our Nation has endured an unprecedented health and economic crisis 
which has now claimed the lives of nearly half a million Americans. 
After 11 months, far too many Americans are still barely scraping by or 
falling further behind, through no fault of their own, as they lose 
jobs or see smaller paychecks. We need immediate, bold action to change 
the course of the virus and stabilize our economy.

  Beginning the budget reconciliation process does not preclude a 
strong bipartisan agreement on a relief package that can gain wide 
support in both the House and the Senate. Let me repeat that. It does 
not preclude a strong, bipartisan agreement on a relief package that 
can gain wide support in our House and across the building in the 
Senate. But it does ensure that Congress will be able to move forward 
without becoming delayed by partisan gridlock at a time when so many 
lives and livelihoods are at stake.
  The budget resolution before us provides a framework for 
reconciliation with a target of up to $1.9 trillion, allocated across 
12 congressional committees. The resolution instructs these committees 
to report legislation consistent with their targets to the Budget 
Committee by February 16. The Budget Committee will then combine the 
legislation--without substantive revision--and prepare it for floor 
consideration.
  The 2021 budget resolution is not a comprehensive blueprint for the 
next 10 years. It is designed solely to respond to the ongoing crisis 
and to deliver critical relief as quickly as possible.
  Once we have finished the work of passing a complete COVID response 
package, I look forward to continuing our work on the Budget Committee 
to craft a complete forward-looking budget resolution for fiscal year 
2022.

                              {time}  1715

  We have already lost so much time. Passing this resolution ensures 
that relief can get to Americans in need, who cannot wait another 
minute for help.
  Mr. Speaker, I would also take a moment to recognize that, less than 
1 month ago, this Chamber was besieged by antidemocracy extremists who 
intended to harm this institution and even kill some of our colleagues.
  The rule provides penalties for any Member of the House who endangers 
colleagues by violating the rules of this Chamber. Members are not, 
under any circumstances, permitted to bring firearms on the floor of 
the U.S. House of Representatives. That has been in law and regulation 
since 1967.
  As President Ronald Reagan said: ``Trust, but verify.''
  Mr. Speaker, with that in mind, there should be no problem with 
requiring Members to walk through metal detectors into the Chamber, 
ensuring that everyone is following the same rules, ensuring the safety 
of each and every Member of this body, and ensuring that many members 
of our staff who work here day in and day out are protected.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule and H. 
Con. Res. 11 and the National Apprenticeship Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Morelle for yielding me the 
customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today's rule provides for consideration of two pieces of 
legislation. The first, H.R. 447, is the National Apprenticeship Act. 
The bill seeks to improve and streamline access to apprenticeships. 
These goals are broadly supported by Members on both sides of the 
political aisle, in the House and in the Senate.
  We considered an almost identical bill in the 116th Congress, which 
was the previous Congress. At that time, Republicans expressed a desire 
to work together to achieve the goal of modernizing the National 
Apprenticeship Program. Since then, the Democrats have pushed through 
their bill that did nothing to streamline the program, nothing for 
flexibility for employer-driven apprenticeships.
  The bill before us today is largely the same. Rather than work with 
Republicans in a meaningful way, the majority remains committed to 
codifying decades of rigid regulations and red tape. The Committee on 
Education and Labor did not even have a hearing or a markup on this 
bill before it came before the Committee on Rules, essentially shutting 
out committee Republicans from the negotiation process entirely--many 
of whom were new members on the Committee on Education and Labor and 
did not participate in the discussion in the last Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, between 2009 and 2019, America saw a 128 percent growth 
in apprenticeships. In September of 2020, the Department of Labor 
reported that 94 percent of all apprentices who completed their 
apprenticeship received an average annual salary of $70,000. Today's 
registered apprenticeship system is an important tool for job seekers 
and employers.
  It does have some flaws, however. In 2019, 252,000 individuals began 
an apprenticeship. Good for them, but only 81,000 graduated.
  This bill would make the apprenticeship system the only registered 
and Department of Labor-supported apprenticeship option, shutting the 
door on opportunities for those who participate in nonregistered earn-
and-learn programs. While so many in the Nation have lost work due to 
the economic toll of the pandemic, now is not the time to make it 
harder to find adequate training by reducing an individual's 
apprenticeship options.

[[Page H268]]

  Mr. Speaker, the National Apprenticeship Act would make this system 
even less receptive to innovation and create prescriptive requirements 
on apprenticeships. It also makes it difficult for small and medium-
sized businesses to participate, as they do not always have the 
resources to navigate the lengthy and Byzantine Department of Labor 
registration process.
  America desperately needs more lab technicians. We need more medical 
assistants. We need more pharmacy technicians. In the middle of a 
global public health crisis, we cannot afford to stymie motivated 
future employees.
  Republicans agree that this 80-year-old system can and must be 
improved, but the solutions must be targeted and effective. The 
majority claims that the increased funding in this legislation will 
create 1 million apprenticeships. While it is true that the legislation 
provides significantly more funding, unfortunately, more money alone 
doesn't guarantee better outcomes if the underlying systems don't work 
in the first place.
  Mr. Speaker, the second part of this rule provides for consideration 
of H. Con. Res. 11, establishing a budget for fiscal year 2021, and 
providing the budget reconciliation instructions for fiscal years 2021 
through 2030. Budget reconciliation is a fast-track, budgetary tool 
used to implement policy changes into law. This procedure requires only 
51 votes in the Senate--not the normal 60 votes to break the 
filibuster, but only 51 votes in the Senate--which, unfortunately, can 
turn this into a partisan exercise, which is what happened here today.
  President Biden has proposed a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief 
package, but under the reconciliation instructions included in the 
resolution, the deficit would increase to between $2 trillion and $3 
trillion.
  Look, on the west front of the Capitol 2 weeks ago, the President 
called for unity--his first move. And, today, we see the Democrats 
employing a partisan process to jam through their wish list of policy 
priorities.
  The Budget Committee has not yet even organized as a committee, but 
the Committee on Rules adopted a rule to consider budget reconciliation 
without any prior hearings or markups. This will be the first time 
since 1974 that Congress has bypassed the Budget Committee and gone 
straight to the floor with a budget resolution.
  In addition, the Democrats did not pass a budget resolution at all 
for fiscal year 2021. So the budget resolution before us today is 
exactly 290 days late.

  Barely 1 month ago, Congress passed--and President Trump signed into 
law--a $900 billion coronavirus relief package. Combined with previous 
relief packages--and there were many--there remains $1 trillion in 
unspent funding. To my knowledge, there have been very few, if any, 
authorizing and oversight hearings to account for what funds are needed 
and how these funds have been spent and ensure they are being used in a 
way that best benefits the American people.
  With all of that as background, then you have to ask yourself: ``Why 
is it now so urgent to pass another $2 trillion bill?''
  Well, the answer lies in the progressive, partisan policy priorities 
that the majority wants to push through, including raising taxes, 
increasing the minimum wage, implementing the Green New Deal, providing 
a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, lowering Medicare 
eligibility, providing universal basic income, and canceling student 
loan debt.
  But these policies do not address the immediate needs of Americans 
who are trying to survive the pandemic. Now is not the time to push 
partisan priorities.
  Look, Republicans do stand ready to work with Democrats to provide 
the needed resources for the American people. Yesterday's visit by 10 
Republican senators to the Oval Office and the time that President 
Biden spent with them certainly should be indicative to people that 
there is a willingness to work together to solve the problems of the 
country, but we also are obligated to ensure that the proposals are 
thoroughly vetted and will be implemented in a way that actually helps 
rather than further harms our recovery.
  Mr. Speaker, I would add that Mr. Morelle referenced some of the 
other things contained in the rule. I think it is important that 
Members understand the threats under which we operate. As such, I, 
frankly, do not understand why we have not been provided a classified 
briefing by the Speaker of the House as to what the threats were prior 
to January 6 and what the threats are going forward. Suffice it to say, 
that the people's House--the House of Representatives--now is 
completely on lockdown. There are no people in the people's House other 
than the Representatives, and that is not the way it was intended.
  I think we are owed an explanation for what the level of threat is so 
that we may adequately prepare ourselves in our personal lives, as well 
as our work in our districts. I would call upon the Speaker to make 
such a bipartisan Member briefing available as soon as possible.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I first want to say to the distinguished 
gentleman, my friend: These are not partisan priorities; these are 
American priorities.
  I doubt very much that most Americans care about the process we use 
as they struggle to feed their families or as they struggle to pay 
their rent each month, when they face unemployment that could be 
extended. But here is an opportunity for us to work together. This is 
the beginning of the process, and we will continue to encourage 
bipartisan discussion on a budget resolution that provides meaningful 
relief for millions of Americans affected by this virus.
  As it relates to the National Apprenticeship Act, I would also 
suggest that this is a bipartisan bill. I can name the Members of my 
colleagues across the aisle: Mr. Fitzpatrick; Mr. McKinley; Members 
Bacon and Bost; my friend, Rodney Davis, from Illinois; John Katko, 
whose district abuts mine; Andy Garbarino, my friend from New York; 
Representatives Stauber, Kinzinger, Stivers--all Republicans who 
support and sponsor the National Apprenticeship Act. So this is a 
bipartisan bill, and I will continue to advocate for its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Morelle), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules, for 
yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the underlying measures before us today, but I 
take a moment to discuss something else included here.
  Mr. Speaker, just outside these doors is something students walk 
through every day to prevent gun violence in their schools, something 
travelers pass through every time they board an airplane, and something 
the public goes through every time they enter a Federal building:
  Magnetometers. Metal detectors.
  They are a modern-day inconvenience that we are all used to, and, 
frankly, they are a small price to pay to keep Americans safe.
  Metal detectors were installed outside this Chamber following the 
recent deadly insurrection at the Capitol. Although these machines are 
new, the policy they are enforcing is not. That has been on the books 
for more than 50 years.

  President Lyndon Johnson signed a law outlawing weapons on Capitol 
grounds back in 1967. The Capitol Police Board, the entity that 
oversees security regulations in the complex, then issued regulations 
soon after. They prohibited firearms from being carried into the 
Chamber and in the connected rooms and galleries.
  Mr. Speaker, now some Members, like myself, want to see these 
regulations go further. Representatives Huffman and Speier have been 
instrumental on this front, and I hope that we act. Others want no 
prohibitions at all.
  Mr. Speaker, regardless, the rules are the rules. I thought that was 
clear, but apparently some of my friends on the other side think 
differently. Some are acting as though, by being elected to Congress, 
they have been anointed to some sort of special club, one that gets to 
pick and choose what rules to follow.
  A Member on the other side ran an ad depicting her walking around our 
Nation's Capital with a loaded firearm,

[[Page H269]]

tweeting: ``Let me tell you why I will carry my Glock to Congress.''
  Another Republican recently bragged that he was armed during the 
recent riots, and another was stopped by Capitol Police bringing a gun 
into this Chamber.
  Mr. Speaker, I could go on. We have people in this Chamber who have 
posted disturbing and threatening rhetoric against Members of this 
body. And there is speculation that maybe some Members were complicit 
with those who attacked the Capitol on January 6. You know, these words 
and actions raise serious safety concerns.
  Mr. Speaker, these metal detectors are manned by the same police 
officers who saved our lives during the insurrection while risking 
their own, yet some Members on the other side have disrespected these 
Capitol Police Officers, verbally abused them, pushed them aside, and 
disregarded their orders, all to avoid this basic safety measure. That 
is no way to treat our heroes.
  Some of these very same Members have been quick to send press 
releases and cut advertisements about the need to respect the police; 
but here in these Halls, when they think no one is watching, apparently 
their message is different. It is: ``Do as I say, not as I do.''
  Mr. Speaker, that is why we must act today. This isn't a messaging 
bill. This is as serious as it gets. This elitist mentality must end.

                              {time}  1730

  Apparently, it will take a rules change to ensure that all Members 
follow the rules just like everyone else.
  Included in this measure is language to change the rules to fine 
Members who interfere with the Capitol Police's ability to do their 
jobs at the magnetometers outside this Chamber: $5,000 for the first 
offense, $10,000 for each one thereafter.
  This is modeled after a change my Republican friends made in the 
115th Congress, which fined Members for taking photos or videos on the 
floor.
  We are taking steps to make sure this process is transparent and 
fair. Violations will be posted online, and Members will have the 
chance to have their appeal considered by the bipartisan Ethics 
Committee.
  And let me assure all Americans that these fines will be paid 
directly by Members.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not a mind reader, but I have been here long 
enough to know how this debate will go. Some on the other side will act 
like this is some grand inconvenience. Tell that to the millions of 
Americans who go through metal detectors every day in this country.
  Why are you any different? Give me a break.
  We need to protect not just Members but staff and all the people who 
work up here. We need to protect our constituents and the public who 
visit the people's House.
  That is why I urge my colleagues to support this change. The rules 
apply to us, too, and it is time all of us acted like it.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the ranking member of the Rules Committee.
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend, the 
distinguished Member from Texas, for yielding.
  Today's rule sets in motion a process for considering H. Con. Res. 
11, a shell budget for fiscal year 2021. I understand that the 
majority's stated intent in bringing forward this resolution is to pave 
the way for using budget reconciliation to push through a partisan 
COVID-19 relief package. Unfortunately, I think the majority's intent 
is misguided.
  I want to remind us all that the only reason we are here today is 
that the majority failed to pass a budget last year. As of today, we 
are nearly 9\1/2\ months overdue for the passage of the budget for 
fiscal year 2021, and fiscal year 2021 is already a third of the way 
over. Hardly an auspicious start for an item as serious as the annual 
budget for the United States Government.
  But the lack of expeditiousness that characterized the budget in the 
116th Congress has been replaced by hastiness. The majority is now, in 
the 117th Congress, rushing forward with a new budget despite never 
bothering to convene the Budget Committee. Indeed, the Budget Committee 
has yet to meet in this Congress, much less conduct normal hearings 
that pave the way for the markup of the annual budget.
  Rather than undertake the normal process through the Budget 
Committee, the majority is instead air-dropping a budget straight from 
leadership offices directly onto the floor. This is hardly the kind of 
process considered to be regular order, and it fails to give Members a 
chance to have their ideas considered in committee or to offer 
amendments on the floor.
  Indeed, as a longtime member of the Budget Committee myself, I looked 
forward to our hearings on the budget and the markup. Through this 
process, Members had the opportunity to consider the budget, consider 
expert testimony, offer ideas, and propose amendments to be considered 
by the whole committee. That the majority is failing to do so makes a 
mockery out of the entire budgeting process.
  Over the past year, Congress has shown it can work together to 
produce bipartisan legislation. In the last Congress, we actually 
passed five COVID-19 relief bills that appropriated nearly $4 trillion 
in relief funds. Not all of these funds have yet been spent. Not even 
close, Mr. Speaker. And the $4 trillion number is right around the 
annual budgetary outlays of the Federal Government in a normal year, 
covering both mandatory and discretionary spending.
  Yet, the majority is moving forward with yet another bill and seems 
determined to ensure that this bill enshrines as many partisan policy 
priorities as possible.
  To make matters worse, from looking at the actual budget before us, 
we do not know what these partisan priorities are. We know the budget 
includes instructions to committees to increase spending by certain 
amounts, but it does not offer any guidance on how they should do so.
  Will it encompass only COVID relief matters, or will they enact 
progressive policy goals like Medicare for All or the Green New Deal? 
We have no way of knowing.
  We do know that Senator Bernie Sanders, the socialist leader of the 
Senate Budget Committee, wants to use reconciliation to ram through a 
$15 minimum wage, a measure that would be a disaster for workers and 
businesses alike in my home State of Oklahoma. But what else may be 
included in the bill is a mystery.
  Mr. Speaker, this process hardly befits the bipartisanship that we 
were promised by President Biden. It has been less than 2 weeks since 
the new President was inaugurated, and already we are seeing the 
majority abandoning any pretense at bipartisanship.
  The House majority has failed to even propose a bipartisan COVID 
relief bill or to engage Republicans in serious negotiations. Instead, 
they have simply predetermined the outcome and are moving forward with 
their own partisan bill without even pretending to try to work with 
those of us on my side of the aisle.
  This is hardly what we were promised, Mr. Speaker. It is hardly what 
the institution was promised. And on a matter as important as the 
annual budget of the United States, and during a pandemic as deadly and 
serious as the one we are currently living through, I know the 
institution can do better.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this course and work 
together and pass real bipartisan legislation that will benefit all 
Americans.
  Today's rule also adds a change in the House rules, imposing serious 
fines on Members who fail to go through the new magnetometers around 
the Chamber. Mr. Speaker, as I told my colleagues on the Rules 
Committee a short time ago, I don't disagree with the additional 
security measures to keep Members and staff safe. However, I do have 
concerns over how the new measures are being implemented.
  Earlier this afternoon, I offered an amendment to this rule which 
would have instructed the House Committee on Administration to review 
the matter and make appropriate recommendations. I have no issue 
whatsoever with Members being subjected to the same requirements as 
staff and our constituents when they enter the Capitol, but I have 
serious concerns that the majority's proposed solution is untenable.
  Requiring Members to pass through a magnetometer each time they enter

[[Page H270]]

the House Chamber, even if they haven't left the area, is a sure recipe 
for chaos. It is impossible for Members to socially distance when they 
are stacked up in a line to await their turn at passing through the 
metal detectors.
  When Members need to leave the Chamber to make a phone call right 
outside the doorway, they have to reenter and pass through security 
again. And there are hardworking staff members who work just a few feet 
away from the House Chamber but must pass through these same 
magnetometers every time they need to run to their offices and then 
back to the floor. This is a clear recipe for disorganization and 
gridlock.
  But this need not be the only option, Mr. Speaker. There are already 
existing metal detectors and X-ray machines at entrances to the 
building. Why can't Members be screened at those entrances instead? Why 
must it be right on the way to the very cusp of the Chamber in a 
location guaranteed to stack up Members outside the door waiting to get 
in?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, we have better alternatives, and I urge that 
we empower the Committee on House Administration to look at that.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the rejection of the rule.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I will admit that there are few people I respect more 
than my distinguished colleague and friend from the Rules Committee, 
the ranking member, Mr. Cole.
  But I think as it relates to the budget, as I understand it, the 
Budget Committee chair, Mr. Yarmuth, has continued to extend an 
invitation to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work 
together.
  And we do want to work together. We want to forge a bipartisan 
agreement. This today begins a process, however, that can move us 
toward reconciliation because we understand that the American people 
are in crisis. America is in crisis.
  So while we need to move ahead, and we would like to move ahead with 
a bipartisan agreement, we cannot sit idly by in the instance that 
progress is not made.
  I think it was President Kennedy in his inauguration, nearly 60 years 
ago, who said, ``Sincerity is always subject to proof.'' So prove to us 
your sincerity. Let's work together. And in the interim, we are going 
to move ahead with this resolution with the support of the Members, and 
I certainly hope that they will do that.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Smith), my new favorite ranking member of the Budget 
Committee.
  Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Texas for yielding, and we are thrilled that he is on the Budget 
Committee.
  The rule puts in motion a process to spend trillions of dollars on a 
progressive wish list, all under the appearance of pandemic relief. And 
for what?
  We know all five of the last COVID-related pieces of legislation were 
done on a bipartisan basis. In the last few days, we have seen a 
framework from 10 Republican Senators laid out to get to a solution.
  The fact that we are moving forward with this process just goes to 
show that yesterday's White House meeting was just a photo-op for the 
President.
  Sadly, the Democrat majority seems to want to go a partisan route in 
both the House and Senate because they know there is not a bipartisan 
consensus in this country for the socialist policies they want to 
include, giveaways to their base, the far left and the coastal elite.
  Just look at what is being discussed by Democrats on how they plan to 
use the budgeting process known as reconciliation, a mechanism 
traditionally used to control spending and address the debt. They now 
talk openly about granting mass amnesty; growing the control government 
has over your healthcare; adding new burdens, rules, and costs on the 
very small businesses that they have shut down; and bailing out their 
political allies whose policies destroyed local economies.

  All of this they want to somehow hide from the American people with 
the label of essential items for pandemic relief.
  And the rule we are debating right now rewards this process. It is 
the first step in allowing Washington Democrats to jam this radical 
agenda through Congress at lightning speed.
  I ask the Chair, where was the rush to help American families when 
the Speaker was holding up support for direct aid to working-class 
families all spring, all summer, and all fall, eventually dropping her 
price tag and objections only after the first Tuesday in November? The 
first Tuesday in November happens to be election day.
  I have always kept one motto in my heart as I approach this job: Put 
people before politics. Unfortunately, what we are seeing from the 
Democrats is the exact opposite; it is all politics.
  In more than 30 years, a budget has not originated in the House that 
has not first gone through the committee process. This is truly a 
first. The Budget Committee has yet to even meet, to organize, to set 
our rules, and to ratify an agenda of oversight of the new 
administration.
  So why are we standing here right now? Why are we moving ahead like 
this when the President, in his inaugural address, called for unity and 
spoke about the power of our example? The answer is simple: So that 
Democrat leaders can spend more on a bunch of programs, ideas, and 
systems, which they have dreamed about throwing taxpayer money at since 
they took control of this Chamber 2 years ago.
  Mr. Speaker, I will close with this. The Democrats talk about 
unification, the need to unify as a Congress and work together, the 
need to unify as a country and learn to respect one another again for 
the good of America. But when their actions don't match their words, 
the value of every word they say from that point forward becomes 
meaningless.
  The actions of the Democrat majority, to start a process which will 
only end in more divisive partisanship, is the exact opposite of what 
our country is asking for right now.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman's point, I appreciate the passion with 
which the distinguished ranking member of the Budget Committee makes 
his argument, but why are we moving ahead, he asked.
  Why we are moving ahead today?
  The President ran on this very relief agenda and won the popular vote 
in the United States by more than 8 million votes. We are moving ahead 
because elections do matter, and the argument that President Biden made 
is that this country needed swift, significant, and robust relief. That 
is why we are moving ahead.
  Now, I will continue to say--and I am sure my colleagues will 
continue to say--that the Democrat majority invites bipartisan 
conversation. We would invite all the Members on the other side to come 
together in a meaningful way to talk about unemployment insurance for 
the millions of Americans who are out of work, through no fault of 
their own--millions.
  Hundreds of thousands are filing every week for the first time. 
Millions of Americans don't have enough food on the table. One out of 
every eight Americans are saying they don't have enough money for food 
to put on the table.
  This is for the millions of Americans who don't have enough money to 
pay their rent or pay their mortgage, and for the millions of small 
businesses--or the tens of thousands of small businesses struggling 
every single week, again, through no fault of their own.
  Why are we moving ahead today?
  Because there is no more time left on the clock. We need to move 
ahead in order to provide the substantial relief.
  I would also suggest that those who will say that this is too 
expensive, you only look to find economists all over this country 
beginning with the head of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, who was 
appointed by the President to his position, who has consistently said 
that the worst thing we can do is make too small of an investment. We 
must

[[Page H271]]

make a robust investment. It is what President Bident talked about 
repeatedly through this campaign.
  There is no hidden agenda here. This is, in fact, the agenda that was 
talked about repeatedly throughout the campaign. The American public 
resoundingly responded to the package that the President has now put 
forward, the package which we would like to take up. We would certainly 
like to do it with our brothers and sisters on the other side of the 
aisle, but we are prepared, if not, to respond to the needs of millions 
of Americans who are in crisis.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Iowa 
(Mr. Feenstra), who is a new, freshman member of the Republican 
Conference, to give what I believe is his first speech on the House 
floor.
  Mr. FEENSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this proposed 
rule, which begins laying the framework for one of the largest spending 
bills in the history of this institution. It is nearly $2 trillion 
being dishonestly sold to the people as COVID relief.
  With a price tag this big, Mr. Speaker, you would think that the 
House Democrats would want this bill to go through the committee 
process where Congress and the public can digest this information. But 
no. They are attempting to fast-track this bill to make decisions with 
no committee, no bipartisanship, no oversight, and no discussion.
  Mr. Speaker, this is American taxpayers' money, not government's, and 
it is being spent with no accountability and no transparency.
  The bottom line is that the hardworking, taxpaying Americans deserve 
to have a voice in this process, and I will fight against attempts to 
fast-track this bloated bill every step of the way.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R. 682, the Reopen 
Schools Act, to encourage local educational agencies to resume in-
person instruction in elementary and secondary schools.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the 
text of my amendment, along with any extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), who is here to explain the amendment.
  Mrs. HINSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose the previous 
question, and I do so in support of our students.
  Our amendment would ensure that students get back in schools safely 
and soon. Students have been out of the classroom for far too long, and 
the costs of at-home learning are far greater than we could have ever 
imagined, especially when it comes to mental health for our kids.
  My bill, the Reopen Schools Act, would prioritize State COVID relief 
grants for education for schools that are reopening. It would require 
schools to offer at least partial in-person learning in order to 
receive these Federal pandemic relief funds. These funds were intended 
to help students get back into the classroom safely, taking important 
precautions.
  Congress sent States this money so we could reopen schools safely, 
yet this hasn't happened in so many communities across our country.
  I am so proud of our home State of Iowa for already taking a stand 
for students and requiring schools to offer an in-person learning 
option. But The Washington Post found that roughly one-third of all K-
12 school districts in the United States right now are only offering 
virtual learning. So this means one-third of our classrooms are closed 
and one-third of our school playgrounds are still roped off.

  The cost of this goes well beyond academics. Child depression, 
anxiety, and other mental health challenges are surging. The science 
shows kids need to be back in school.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Iowa.
  Mrs. HINSON. Mr. Speaker, even the CDC has confirmed that young kids 
have an extremely low infection rate right now, a low transmission 
rate, and a low rate of serious illness from COVID-19. Yet they are 
forced to stay home and learn from behind a computer screen, that is if 
these kids have access to computers and broadband internet.
  For many students, especially those in rural Iowa, virtual learning 
is not easy. It is not just going downstairs and logging onto the 
family computer. It is sitting in the parking lot of the Cedar Rapids 
Public Library, logging onto the WiFi to finish homework or take a 
test.
  So it is no surprise that our most vulnerable students are the ones 
who will suffer the most and are suffering the most. Isolation, lack of 
social support, added stress, and environmental strain of this lockdown 
have gone on far too long. Kids and families are suffering.
  As a mom of two school-age kids, this issue is personal to me. This 
issue is personal to all parents, and it is personal to all families 
who care about their kids' well-being. Kids need to be in school. We 
can get them back behind a desk instead of in front of a screen, and we 
can do so safely. That is exactly why we allocated funds for this 
purpose.
  It is past time for States and local school districts to stop 
hoarding these resources and use them for their intended purpose: To 
pay for science-based safety measures that get students and teachers 
back in the classroom with less risk.
  That is why my bill would condition a portion of the $54 billion 
Congress sent to States for K-12 schools in December on reopening their 
doors. One-third of the education funds provided would be immediately 
available right now with the remaining two-thirds available to schools 
in increasing amounts as they move to reopen. Schools with at least 50 
percent of students attending in person at least 50 percent of the time 
would receive the full amount of funding. Parents and students want to 
return to the classroom. My bill will help make that happen.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will 
join me in supporting our students by defeating the previous question, 
and I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans agree that apprenticeships are vital to 
American livelihoods and our national interests. We agree that reforms 
to these programs are necessary and prudent. It is time to update the 
apprenticeship program to better reflect the needs of employers and the 
needs of our Nation. Republicans stand ready to negotiate. Now is the 
time to give Americans opportunities to succeed, and I sincerely hope 
that we will do just that.
  To recover from this pandemic, we must also not push through policies 
that do not address the immediate needs of the American people. The 
budget reconciliation resolution provided for in this rule will 
drastically increase the deficit and seek to implement nonessential 
partisan policy priorities without first conducting the necessary 
authorization hearings and conducting the necessary oversight to ensure 
that current funding is spent effectively and efficiently.
  After the multiple calls for unity, it is disappointing that the 
first move that we are seeing from the majority in this Congress is to 
employ this partisan procedural process. I do hope they reconsider and 
come back to the negotiating table through regular order.
  Let me just also ask again that the Speaker allow Members to be 
briefed by the appropriate law enforcement agencies as to exactly what 
the threats are here in the Nation's Capital. I think we would all 
benefit from that not just in our work here in Washington, D.C., but 
also when we work with constituents and staff back in our districts.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, a ``no'' 
vote on the rule, and a ``no'' vote on the underlying measures.

[[Page H272]]

  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Once again, I just say that those Americans who are watching what we 
do here today and over the next several days, they are going to be 
asking the question: What are you doing in Washington that will help 
the average man or woman and child who suffers the ravages of this 
disease and the economic fallout?
  When I talk to people in Rochester, New York--and I am sure when each 
of us goes back to our home districts--people aren't asking about the 
nuance of legislative procedures. They are asking about what the 
government is going to do for them as we face the greatest pandemic in 
a century and the greatest economic challenge in nearly a century both 
at the same time. We have so many other challenges as well, but the 
House of Representatives is going to move forward. This resolution does 
that. It says that we will certainly encourage bipartisan agreements, 
bipartisan conversations, and bipartisan action.
  The President's conversations with members of the Senate yesterday 
indicate his willingness to do that. But we cannot wait. We have waited 
far too long. Too many Americans have died and too many families have 
faced the crisis of their lifetimes because of the inaction here in 
Washington. So we must move ahead.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support of the rule 
before us today. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote 
on the previous question.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on 
the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, on the Budget, and as the Member 
of Congress for a congressional district that has experienced the worst 
of COVID-19 as a public health emergency and economic catastrophe, I 
rise in strong support of the rule governing debate on H.R. 447, the 
National Appenticeship Act of 2121, and H. Con. Res. 11, 447, as well 
as the underlying legislation.
  The National Apprenticeship Act has the potential to yield $10.6 
billion in net benefits to U.S. taxpayers in the form of increased 
workers productivity and decreased spending on public-assistance 
programs and unemployment insurance and which bring America's 
investments in apprenticeship more in line with countries around the 
world.
  Mr. Speaker, this legislation could not be more timely because during 
a time of record unemployment, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021 
creates an additional 1 million new apprenticeship opportunities and 
invests more than $3.5 billion over 5 years in expanding opportunities 
and access to Registered Apprenticeships, youth apprenticeships, and 
pre-apprenticeships.
  I also strongly support H. Con. Res. 11 because it reorders budgetary 
priorities to provide $1.9 trillion to allow Congress to take immediate 
and decisive action to crush the virus and vaccinate our people, build 
the economy back better, reopen schools, and provide needed support and 
assistance to state and local governments that have been asked to do 
too much with too little for far too long.
  Let me make clear at the outset Mr. Speaker, that nothing in this 
resolution precludes the reaching of a bipartisan and bicameral 
agreement to pass and fund the President's America Rescue Plan, which 
in nearly all material respects mirrors the Heroes Act passed by the 
House Democratic majority on May 15, 2020, nearly nine months ago, only 
to languish on the Republican Senate Majority Leader's desk while 
hundreds of thousands of our fellow Americans succumbed to the virus 
and millions of others lost their livelihoods and businesses, and 
everyone faced an uncertain future.
  So if our Republican colleagues are amenable to reaching an agreement 
on a legislative response that is commensurate to the challenge facing 
Americans, nothing in the legislation before will preclude that from 
happening.
  But have no doubt, if they refuse to be part of the solution, the 
unified and bicameral Democratic congressional majority, in 
coordination with the new Democratic Administration, will take the lead 
and act boldly to address and overcome the present crisis.
  I would urge my Republican colleagues to heed the words of Republican 
Governor of West Virginia who said colorfully just a few days ago, ``At 
this point in time in this nation, we need to go big. We need to quit 
counting the egg-sucking legs on the cows and count the cows and just 
move. And move forward and move right now.''
  The same sentiment was expressed more eloquently by Abraham Lincoln 
in 1862 when he memorably wrote:
  ``The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. 
The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the 
occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew.''
  Mr. Speaker, the bipartisan action we took last December was a step 
in the right direction but only a long-delayed down payment; we cannot 
afford any more delays, especially since Republican stalling already 
caused a painful lapse in critical unemployment assistance last year, 
and additional unemployment assistance is set to expire in March.
  That why this resolution, which creates a failsafe alternative to 
debating, voting, and passing the American Rescue Act, is absolutely 
crucial and the right thing to do, right now.
  The American Rescue Plan proposed by President Biden takes a 
multiprong approach to tackling the public health and economic crises 
stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic.
  To beat the virus and safely reopen schools, the plan will mount a 
national vaccination program that includes setting up community 
vaccination sites nationwide and makes the investments necessary to 
safely reopen schools.
  It will also take complementary measures to combat the virus, 
including scaling up testing and tracing, addressing shortages of 
personal protective equipment and other critical supplies, investing in 
high-quality treatments, and addressing health care disparities.
  The American Rescue Plan delivers immediate relief to working 
families bearing the brunt of the crisis by providing $1,400 per person 
in direct cash assistance to households across America, bringing the 
total (including the $600 down payment enacted in December) to $2,000.
  Additionally, the plan will also provide direct housing and nutrition 
assistance to families struggling to get by, expand access to safe and 
reliable child care and affordable health care, extend and expand 
unemployment insurance so American workers can pay their bills, and 
give families with children as well as childless workers a boost 
through enhanced tax credits.
  Mr. Speaker, the American Rescue Plan provides much needed support 
for communities struggling with the economic fallout, including hard-
hit small businesses, especially those owned by entrepreneurs from 
racial and ethnic backgrounds that have experienced systemic 
discrimination.
  Finally, the plan also provides crucial resources to protect the jobs 
of first responders, frontline public health workers, teachers, transit 
workers, and other essential workers that all Americans depend on.
  The 2021 budget resolution is not a comprehensive fiscal blueprint 
for the next 10 years; it is designed solely to provide the option of 
using reconciliation to deliver critical relief and achieve the goals 
of the American Rescue Plan.
  As such, the total spending and revenue levels in the resolution 
simply reflect current-law projections adjusted for the estimated costs 
of the American Rescue Plan.
  Once the American Rescue Plan becomes law, Congress will begin its 
work on a forward-looking, comprehensive budget resolution for 2022 
that will provide urgently needed economic support and address 
longstanding deficits in our communities and underlying inequities in 
our society, which have been so starkly revealed and exacerbated by 
COVID-19.
  I strongly support this legislation and urge all Members to join me 
in voting for its passage.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Burgess is as follows:

                    Amendment to House Resolution 85

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 10. 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. 
     682) to encourage local educational agencies to resume in-
     person instruction at elementary and secondary schools, 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 Education and Labor. 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. 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.

[[Page H273]]

       Sec. 11. Clause l(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 682.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question 
are postponed.

                          ____________________