[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H3708-H3715]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1415
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2467, PFAS ACTION ACT OF 2021; 
   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2668, CONSUMER PROTECTION AND 
 RECOVERY ACT; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3985, AVERTING 
         LOSS OF LIFE AND INJURY BY EXPEDITING SIVS ACT OF 2021

  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 535 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 535

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2467) to 
     require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency to designate per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances as 
     hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental 
     Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. An 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the 
     text of Rules Committee Print 117-10, modified by 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 Energy and Commerce or their 
     respective designees; (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 Energy and Commerce 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 Energy and Commerce 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 bill (H.R. 2668) to amend 
     the Federal Trade Commission Act to affirmatively confirm the 
     authority of the Federal Trade Commission to seek permanent 
     injunctions and other equitable relief for violations of any 
     provision of law enforced by the Commission. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu 
     of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
     the Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill, 
     an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the 
     text of Rules Committee Print 117-11 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 Energy and Commerce or their 
     respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 6.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3985) to amend 
     the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 to expedite the 
     special immigrant visa process for certain Afghan allies, and 
     for other purposes. All points of order against consideration 
     of the bill 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 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 the Judiciary or 
     their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 7. (a) At any time through the legislative day of 
     Thursday, July 22, 2021, the Speaker may entertain motions 
     offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House 
     suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with 
     respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and 
     the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without 
     debate or intervening motion.
       (b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any 
     measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules 
     on the legislative day of July 19, 2021, or July 20, 2021, in 
     the form as so offered, on which the yeas and nays were 
     ordered and further proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 
     8 of rule XX.
       (c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection 
     (a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas 
     and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with 
     respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such 
     motions are considered as withdrawn.

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


                             General Leave

  Ms. ROSS. Mr. 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 North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and 
reported a rule, House Resolution 535, providing for considering of 
three measures. First, H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act, under a 
structured rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from 
Chairman Pallone, provides for 1 hour of general debate equally divided 
and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Energy and Commerce or their designees, makes in order 10 
amendments, provides en bloc authority, and provides one motion to 
recommit.
  The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 2668, the Consumer 
Protection and Recovery Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 
1

[[Page H3709]]

hour of general debate on the bill equally divided and controlled by 
the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 
Commerce or their designees and provides one motion to recommit.
  The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 3985, the ALLIES 
Act of 2021, under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's 
amendment from Chairman Nadler, provides for 1 hour of general debate 
on the bill equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designees, 
and provides one motion to recommit.
  Finally, the rule provides the majority leader or his designee the 
ability to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension bills 
considered on July 19 and July 20, 2021. This authority lasts through 
July 22.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the three bills in this rule: 
H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act of 2021; H.R. 2668, the Consumer 
Protection and Recovery Act; and H.R. 3985, the ALLIES Act of 2021.
  H.R. 2467 will require comprehensive regulation of PFAS under our 
Nation's landmark environmental laws.
  PFAS compounds--dangerous, manmade chemicals which do not break down 
easily and are known as forever chemicals--have contaminated our water, 
soil, and air for decades. The CDC estimates that nearly every American 
has been exposed to them, especially our brave firefighters, 
servicemembers, and their families.
  In my home State of North Carolina, we know this issue too well. 
Chemical companies have polluted the Cape Fear River with PFAS for 
years. Tests of drinking water systems in my district, including in 
Raleigh and Cary, have detected PFAS.
  This bill would accomplish multiple goals, including directing the 
EPA to establish standards to protect our drinking water from 
contamination and authorizing grants to drinking water utilities 
treating PFAS contamination.
  Some utilities are already investing millions of dollars to upgrade 
their water treatment technology. I was proud to offer a bipartisan 
amendment with Congressman Rouzer to clarify the requirements for this 
grant program, helping to ensure that communities that are already 
investing money to address this problem can still benefit from the 
funding included in this bill.
  H.R. 2467 is a strong step forward to protect the health of our 
water, air, soil, and our people. I am thrilled that we are bringing 
this bipartisan legislation to the House floor.
  I also rise in support of H.R. 2668. For over 100 years, the FTC has 
been tasked with protecting consumers from fraud and deception in the 
marketplace. Until the Supreme Court's recent ruling, the FTC used a 
provision of the FTC Act to recover and return billions of dollars to 
victims of fraud. Senior citizens, military families, and immigrants 
are particularly vulnerable to scammers and deceptive business 
practices.
  H.R. 2668 will ensure that the FTC has the tools it needs to protect 
hardworking families and small businesses and to make victims of fraud 
whole.
  Lastly, I rise in support of H.R. 3985. I come from a military State, 
and I am proud to advocate on behalf of all those who have risked their 
lives to protect our country. As we draw down our forces in 
Afghanistan, the very least we can do for our Afghan allies--including 
interpreters, contractors, and security personnel--is to protect them 
from the Taliban and provide them with the opportunity to rebuild their 
lives in safety here in the United States.
  North Carolina is fortunate to be home to many courageous Afghans who 
relocated to the United States through the Afghan Special Immigration 
Visa program, and I know that my community will benefit from allowing 
more of these heroes to take refuge in our State.
  By increasing the Afghan Special Immigration Visa cap and easing 
requirements for applicants, this bill will ensure that our Nation 
keeps its promises to those allies who stood shoulder to shoulder with 
American forces on the battlefield.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time to pass all three of these bills, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina 
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 a bill to 
designate perfluorooctanoic acid, also known as PFOA, and 
perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, also known as PFOS, as hazardous 
substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act, outside the regular rulemaking 
process. This rule also includes a bill to overturn a recent Supreme 
Court decision on the Federal Trade Commission's authority to seek 
monetary relief for consumers, and a bill to ease restrictions and 
increase the cap on Special Immigrant Visas for Afghans.

  H.R. 2467, the PFAS Action Act, has a laudable goal to address the 
negative impacts of PFOA and PFAS. These are manmade chemicals and have 
proven useful but potentially harmful. While they are often used in 
products throughout our world, there is evidence that certain types of 
PFAS lead to negative health consequences. Although there is bipartisan 
agreement that Congress needs to address PFAS contamination, this bill 
does not achieve that goal.
  The PFAS Action Act would require the Environmental Protection Agency 
to designate PFAS and PFOA as hazardous substances under the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 
of 1980, known as CERCLA, within 1 year of the bill's passage and then 
to consider designating the remaining 9,000-plus PFAS chemicals as 
hazardous substances within 5 years.
  The reality is just over 800 compounds have been categorized as 
hazardous substances since the passage of CERCLA in 1980. Now, we are 
going to add over 9,000 chemicals in just 5 years, and I submit it will 
be nearly impossible for the Environmental Protection Agency to 
implement this.
  The agency is actively engaged in investigating the prevalence of 
PFAS chemicals and has undertaken rulemakings to address some of the 
provisions in this bill, so undercutting this process by establishing 
unrealistic requirements on a shortened timeline sets the Environmental 
Protection Agency up for failure.
  CERCLA is an incredibly complex body of law that triggers significant 
liability if a cleanup is necessary. Creating a blanket designation of 
all of the 9,252 PFAS chemicals would create a massive problem for 
consumers who live with FDA-approved PFAS devices. For example, 40 
million Americans are currently living with a PFAS-based heart stent.
  Are they to be designated as Superfund sites or to have those stents 
removed?

                              {time}  1430

  A blanket CERCLA designation would also hinder innovation in new 
products. The coronavirus pandemic has revealed the vulnerabilities in 
our supply chain. It doesn't seem like the correct time to limit the 
materials available for innovation when the designation as hazardous, 
for largely useful compounds, is based on rushed science.
  This bill also requires the EPA to issue a rule on toxicity testing 
for PFAS, a rule on PFAS contamination of drinking water, and a rule to 
designate all PFAS chemicals as hazardous air pollutants under the 
Clean Air Act.
  Furthermore, this legislation requires the Environmental Protection 
Agency to establish grants for communities to implement PFAS water 
treatment technologies.
  Republicans offered amendments in the Energy and Commerce Committee 
and at the Rules Committee that were rejected for various procedural 
reasons. The Rules Committee did not receive a score from the 
Congressional Budget Office for this bill until an hour before our 
Rules meeting yesterday, and the CBO score was indeterminate.
  The administration of this bill would cost the Federal Government 
$280 million over 10 years. It is impossible to know how this impacts 
Federal spending over the next 10 years. No one knows how much PFAS 
contamination exists, so no one knows how much liability this bill 
creates for taxpayers.

[[Page H3710]]

  Because the amendments offered by Republicans were based on the 
underlying bill, the amendments were also problematic from a budget 
perspective. There is no reason to limit consideration of these 
amendments that affect consumer safety based on the inability to 
achieve a budget score because the underlying bill is budgetarily 
suspect.
  Ultimately, this bill ignores the societal good that some fluorinated 
compounds demand. PFAS are in medical devices that save lives. They are 
used in firefighting foams to put out the worst of blazes, including 
jet fuel fires. They are in advanced energy products like solar panels 
and pipelines. They are even in piano keys and dental floss. These 
compounds are risky if used improperly or irresponsibly, but they are 
essential when used correctly.
  Our second bill, the Consumer Protection and Recovery Act seeks to 
overturn the Supreme Court's decision in the case of AMG Capital v. 
Federal Trade Commission. In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled 
unanimously that section 13(b) of the Federal Trade Commission Act does 
not grant the Federal Trade Commission the authority to seek monetary 
relief as an equitable remedy when engaging in enforcement actions.
  Unfortunately, this bill was rushed through the Energy and Commerce 
Committee without addressing any of the Republican concerns. First, 
this bill reinstates the Federal Trade Commission's authority to seek 
monetary relief under section 13(b) and expands the scope to apply 
broadly to all FTC enforcement authority. This will likely make 
monetary relief the go-to remedy for every alleged FTC violation.
  The Federal Trade Commission already has authority to seek monetary 
relief for fraudulent and dishonest conduct under section 19 of the 
Federal Trade Commission Act.
  Second, this bill includes a statute of limitations of 10 years, but 
a 5-year statute of limitations is in line with the rest of the Federal 
Trade Commission Act, and, in fact, would be more appropriate. It does 
not make sense for courts to go back for a full decade to calculate 
monetary relief.
  During the Rules meeting yesterday, Ranking Member Bilirakis offered 
an amendment that would have addressed these two issues. Unfortunately, 
committee Democrats would not even allow a debate on these amendments 
on the floor of this House.
  Additionally, the expanded scope of the bill would give the Federal 
Trade Commission new authority to seek monetary relief in antitrust 
cases. This remedy is currently not needed, because antitrust cases can 
be brought through private rights of action or, in fact, treble 
damages, a tripling of the compensatory damages, can be awarded.
  This bill is a missed opportunity to develop Federal privacy 
legislation that is needed to overcome a patchwork of State laws. A key 
part of protecting consumers is ensuring that the Federal Trade 
Commission has the tools to enforce a Federal privacy standard. It is 
disappointing that the Democrats refused to work with Republicans to 
make this bill actually useful and effective for real consumers.
  Republicans support ensuring that the Federal Trade Commission has 
the necessary tools to protect consumers from bad actors. But it also 
recognizes that guardrails are necessary to prevent the Federal Trade 
Commission from exceeding its authority.
  The final bill, the ALLIES Act, expands the number of special 
immigrant visas by 8,000 and eases requirements for Afghan 
requirements. To qualify, an individual must have been employed in 
Afghanistan by or on behalf of the United States Government, the 
International Security Assistance Force, or the Resolute Support 
Mission.
  This bill removes the current requirement that the International 
Security Assistance Force or Resolute Support employees had been 
engaged in sensitive and trusted positions. This will make it easier 
for Afghans who served alongside our Armed Forces to qualify.
  Americans first entered Afghanistan in October 2001. Most of us were 
not in Congress in October of 2001. And this, of course, followed the 
terrorist attacks on September 11 of that year. Once the Taliban was 
defeated and Osama bin Laden was caught, the United States worked to 
establish a legitimate and strong central government in Afghanistan. 
Now, after 20 years, Americans are ready for their brave sons and 
daughters to come home.
  Despite our efforts and bloodshed, Afghanistan remains plagued by a 
resurgent Taliban, by dangerous militias, and by a weak central 
government. The Pentagon recently stated that, for all intents and 
purposes, the United States withdrawal is, in fact, already complete. 
Unfortunately, many Afghans who served alongside our Armed Forces and 
security personnel remain in Afghanistan under serious threat due to 
their employment by or on behalf of the United States' missions.

  We must ensure that we are not putting Americans at risk by not 
properly vetting applicants as they are brought to this country, but we 
also must do right by those Afghans who risked their lives to aid 
Americans throughout the last 20 years.
  Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise to you that I am going to 
urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean).
  Ms. DEAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. PFAS water contamination 
is personal for all of us. Nearly all of us have been contaminated 
without our consent, without our knowledge. We all have PFAS in our 
blood, the forever chemical. High levels of this toxin have dangerous 
and damaging health effects. The EPA's website describes the effects: 
``low infant birth weights, effects on the immune system, cancer . . . 
and thyroid hormone disruption.''
  And manufacturers knew. They knew the dangers of PFAS my entire life. 
It wasn't until the turn of this century and the heroic work of 
Attorney Rob Bilott that they were forced to admit what they knew. They 
knew that PFAS was toxic in the 1960s. They knew it was building up in 
our bodies, in our blood, by the 1970s. They knew it was contaminating 
our water by the 1980s. They knew that it was poisoning our own workers 
by the 1990s. But they hid the truth from their own workers, from their 
neighbors, from you and me.
  We have a responsibility to protect everyone from PFAS contamination 
and the PFAS Action Act is a step in the right direction in ensuring 
everyone has clean water. The PFAS Action Act would: require the EPA to 
establish a national drinking water standard; designate PFOA and PFOS 
chemicals as hazardous substances; require EPA to regulate PFAS 
discharge; and provide $200 million annually for wastewater treatment; 
place a moratorium on the introduction of new PFAS; and require 
comprehensive PFAS health testing.
  All of this would set a standard and provide protections. I am 
grateful to see a requirement for EPA to develop necessary rules for 
safe disposal of PFAS. That is included in this legislation.
  We cannot continue to allow manufacturers to recklessly poison our 
communities. As we move forward, remember, it is our responsibility as 
legislators to educate, litigate, legislate, and finally hold polluters 
accountable.
  I thank Representative Dingell for her tenacity in drafting and 
passing this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support this rule 
and the underlying bill as well as the other two bills in the rule.
  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 S. 1867, the COVID-19 
Origin Act, introduced by Senator Hawley. It has been 55 days since the 
Senate passed this critical bill without a single dissenting vote.
  Declassifying intelligence surrounding the origin of COVID-19 is 
imperative and key to the House Republican plan to hold China 
accountable for the pandemic.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment into the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately 
prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.

[[Page H3711]]

  

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, to further explain the amendment, I yield 5 
minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Wenstrup), a valuable member of 
the Doctors Caucus.
  Mr. WENSTRUP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question so we can 
immediately consider S. 1867, the COVID-19 Origin Act of 2021.
  The coronavirus pandemic has been marred by fear, confusion, and 
mistrust, and it appears very possible that this virus was genetically 
engineered through gain-of-function research in a lab at the Wuhan 
Institute of Virology, making the virus more contagious to human 
beings.
  It is absolutely true that there has been political engineering, 
including even speaking on the facts of its origin and its initial 
spread. I am sure each and every one of us has talked to constituents 
who have said they just don't know what to believe is true when it 
comes to COVID. Well, we are in a position today to help, to provide 
some transparency and accountability. The best disinfectant is sunlight 
and that is what we can provide today.
  I could stand up here for hours walking through the specific details 
of the report that I helped conduct with some of my colleagues on the 
Intelligence Committee, or by rehashing the findings from the hearings 
that our Republican colleagues on the Select Committee conducted, but I 
only have a few minutes, so here are a few key facts and pieces of 
information that our bill establishes.
  Right now, what we do know is that, according to the Department of 
State, we have ``reason to believe that several researchers in the 
Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick in the autumn of 2019 . . . 
with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal 
illnesses.''
  We also know Wuhan researchers, including Dr. Shi Zheng-Li, also 
known colloquially as the ``bat lady,'' conducted experiments involving 
a particular bat virus which showed an incredibly similar genetic 
makeup to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
  We also know from publications that Dr. Shi was conducting dangerous 
gain-of-function research.
  Further, we know that the Wuhan Institute, which presents itself as a 
civilian institution, has received U.S. taxpayer dollars through grants 
to the EcoHealth Alliance. The lab has collaborated on projects for 
China's military.
  Finally, there is no animal intermediary found. As scientists have 
stated, COVID-19 in its present form would have taken years to develop 
naturally in its infectious state, yet it did not. Rather, it was 
seemingly immediate.
  When I was on the Cincinnati Board of Health, we investigated health 
issues, and we provided our findings to the public. We never saw 
anything like this pandemic, but we played a key role in keeping our 
community healthy by preventing smaller outbreaks from happening again.
  That is why, given these facts, the bill calls for three things. The 
bill first establishes that we must identify the precise origins of 
COVID-19 because it is critical for preventing a similar pandemic in 
the future.
  Earlier this year, CDC Director Robert Redfield stated, ``the most 
likely etiology of this pathogen in Wuhan was from a laboratory.''
  Even Director-General Tedros of the World Health Organization 
acknowledges that COVID-19 may have originated in a lab and thought it 
was worth investigating.
  Second, given these scientific opinions and a whole slew of evidence, 
including what I noted earlier, the bill establishes that we have 
reason to believe that the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated in the 
Wuhan Institute of Virology in their lab.
  Finally--and this goes back to my original point about transparency--
the bill requires the Director of National Intelligence to declassify 
as much evidence as possible that they can of what they know about the 
origin of COVID-19; what activity the Wuhan lab was conducting; and 
what we know about the researchers who reportedly fell ill back in 
2019.
  The bill is about accountability for Americans who want to know, who 
deserve to know what caused this horrible scourge that took the lives 
of so many of our families and loved ones; that destroyed our 
businesses and livelihoods; that robbed them of years of their lives. 
Actually, the whole world wants to know.

                              {time}  1445

  It is critical to inform Congress so we can better prepare to stave 
off the next pandemic. I know some of my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle have recently asked our leaders to establish a committee 
to do just that. I think it is a laudable goal, and this bill would 
help those efforts.
  I can't stress enough that this bill is not controversial by any 
means. In fact, it passed the Senate in May with unanimous consent. Not 
one Senator objected, not Senators Cruz or Rand Paul, not Bernie 
Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. If those four Senators can get on board 
with this bill, should not we be able to do the same?
  Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question and for immediate 
consideration of S. 1867. It is for transparency. It is for 
accountability. It is for truth. It is for doing the right thing on 
behalf of humankind.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the rule under 
consideration today.
  Well before coming to Congress, I provided legal services for Iraqis 
and Afghans who had put their lives at risk as drivers, translators, 
and contractors to help our military abroad. They needed help to obtain 
the Special Immigrant Visas they were promised in return.
  From that experience, I know firsthand that the process is rigorous 
and time-consuming. Even before the pandemic, it could take years for 
these critical allies to receive the special visas they were promised. 
During that time, they and their families faced continual threats of 
injury and death. Many died, had to go into hiding, or had their 
relatives killed because they had assisted U.S. forces.
  As the U.S. leaves Afghanistan after almost two decades of unending 
war, we need to streamline the SIV process so that we can make good on 
America's promise to our Afghan allies who risked their lives to 
protect our troops.
  The ALLIES Act would ensure that the U.S. keeps its promise to 
protect those allies who worked with U.S. troops in Afghanistan. We 
must pass this bill quickly so that no one is left behind.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to state my support for the other two bills 
in today's rule.
  My region knows just how pervasive and dangerous the PFAS chemicals 
are. Pennsylvania has multiple PFAS-contaminated sites, and my district 
is downstream from a couple of them.
  Uncontaminated drinking water should not be a debatable topic. For 
the health and safety our families, friends, and neighborhoods, we need 
to properly regulate and remediate PFAS chemicals, and this bill would 
do just that.
  Finally, we need to pass the Consumer Protection and Recovery Act to 
restore the ability of the FTC to protect consumers by forcing bad 
actors to return funds to consumers who have been defrauded, in the 
wake of a Supreme Court decision that took away that power from the 
FTC.
  It is estimated that Pennsylvania seniors lose about $1.2 billion a 
year to scammers. Forcing reimbursements has been a key tool in the FTC 
toolbox for almost 40 years, and it is probably the most important tool 
for the individual consumer. This bill will make clear Congress' intent 
to restore that power to the FTC.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this rule and its underlying 
legislation, and I call on all my colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, again, I am going to urge defeat of the 
previous question and consideration of the amendment as previously 
discussed by Dr. Wenstrup.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
LaHood) to further explain the amendment.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I thank Dr. Burgess for yielding and Dr. 
Wenstrup for leading this effort.

[[Page H3712]]

  If the previous question is defeated, we will amend the rule to 
immediately consider S. 1867, the COVID-19 Origin Act of 2021. This 
legislation, which passed the Senate by unanimous consent, is simple. 
If passed, the bill would require the Biden administration's Director 
of National Intelligence to declassify intelligence information related 
to any potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology, also 
known as the Wuhan lab, and the origins of COVID-19 in order to better 
prepare for and avoid future pandemics.
  Let's remember the devastating effect that this pandemic has had in 
this country with over 600,000 deaths and 4 million deaths worldwide.
  In May, Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee released an 
interim report outlining the growing evidence of a possible lab leak of 
the COVID-19 virus.
  Here are the facts. Number one, we know, based on numerous reports, 
that the researchers at the Wuhan lab fell sick with COVID-related 
symptoms in the fall of 2019. Number two, we also know that there was 
active engagement by the Chinese military at the Wuhan lab. And, number 
three, we know that the Chinese Government has continued to hinder 
efforts for data collection and transparency in this investigation. 
Essentially, Mr. Speaker, they have been nontransparent and 
noncooperative.
  The bottom line is, the American people deserve a full accounting of 
the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in shutting 
down our economy, massive deaths across the world, and millions out of 
work.
  Mr. Speaker, how can we prevent a future pandemic if we don't know 
the genesis of this one?
  This vote today will help answer those questions and get to the 
origins of the pandemic. I am proud to join my friend, Congressman 
Wenstrup, in this effort for transparency, and I urge my colleagues to 
defeat the previous question.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Morelle), another distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague and 
friend, my colleague from the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Ms. Ross).
  Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of the rule in favor of the 
ALLIES Act.
  This bill would protect our Afghan partners who risked their lives as 
translators and navigators to U.S. military personnel by expediting the 
Afghan Special Immigrant Visa process and approving an additional 8,000 
visas so that they can come to America as soon as possible.
  The withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan has placed thousands 
of these allies and their families at risk of retribution.
  If not for the contributions of these Afghan partners, the United 
States military losses could have been greater than already endured 
during this prolonged conflict.
  For 20 years, their courage and sacrifice protected our troops, and 
they were an invaluable asset to our forces in Afghanistan. We have a 
duty to ensure both they and their families are safe from retaliation 
from the Taliban and other terrorist organizations.
  In my district of Rochester, New York, my office hears multiple times 
per week from SIV advocates, like Keeping Our Promise and the 
Association of Wartime Allies. The stories they share are 
heartbreaking: brave men and women stuck in bureaucratic limbo, waiting 
for the visas they were promised so they can start a new life in 
America.
  We need to pass this bill and honor the promise we made to our 
allies. If we leave these people behind, who will ever be willing to 
assist U.S. forces around the world, knowing that we lacked the moral 
resolve to protect our allies?
  That is not what we stand for. The United States leads from the 
front. Now is the time to take charge of the situation and ensure we 
keep our promise and leave no one behind.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and pass H.R. 
3985.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), a former member of the Rules Committee and a 
valuable member of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
  Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule. Although 
there are parts of the rule that I agree with, I am going to talk today 
about the PFAS Action Act and why I think it is a problem.
  Republicans and Democrats alike are concerned about our water 
quality. Of course, we want to make sure that we have good-quality 
drinking water.
  Unfortunately, the PFAS Action Act goes too far. It classifies over 
9,000 chemicals as hazardous. This is a huge problem because there are 
a lot of materials that are made with PFAS chemicals that aren't 
harmful to humans.
  In one case in point, in my district, there is a company called W. L. 
Gore. Most of you know about it because they make GORE-TEX, but they 
also make medical devices. They have 2,000 employees in Flagstaff, 
Arizona, and they have 1,000 employees in my district. They make heart 
stents.
  I went on a tour of their company. They make all kinds of medical 
devices that are implanted in human beings that we rely on to save 
lives. Yet, those medical devices have a form of PFAS in them. If this 
legislation is passed, you are basically going to cause them to be 
called hazardous materials, and we won't be able to implant these in 
people.
  This is a huge problem, and I think that my Democratic friends just 
need to think this through a little bit more.
  All of us want clean drinking water. But there are so many different 
uses of these PFAS chemicals, over 9,000 of them, and some of them are 
for really good uses, like these medical devices, the heart stents.
  That is why I oppose this rule. I ask my Democrat colleagues to 
reconsider. We had an amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee 
that was rejected by the Democrats, although one of the members said 
they would like to revisit and fix it.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina as she manages this rule and does it in an excellent 
manner.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the underlying rule and to mention 
that H.R. 2467, known as the PFAS Action Act, is an important step in 
the right direction in providing safe and proper use of these 
chemicals.
  As well, I rise in support of H.R. 2668, which is dealing with 
reinforcing the authority of the Federal Trade Commission.
  Likewise, I rise in support of H.R. 3985, and I thank Jason Crow for 
his leadership. That is, of course, expanding the Afghan Allies 
Protection Act of 2009 to expedite the Special Immigrant Visa process 
for certain Afghan allies, and for other purposes.

  Mr. Speaker, we could not be making a more important statement and 
doing a more important act. We are making a statement that says that we 
do not forget our friends, our allies.
  As a Member of the United States Congress since before 9/11, and 
having interacted with the Afghanistan Government during the early 
years, the creation of that government in Kabul, going to Kabul and 
talking to the beginning, the embryonic parliamentarians, where there 
were any number of women there in those early years after the war as 
they began to set up their government, being a part of looking at their 
constitution and having input into its democratic ideals, I know what 
can happen when America leaves.
  What happened when America left after the Iraq war? Schools with 
girls were burned. Parliamentarians that were women lost their lives.
  This is a dangerous condition, sadly. Those allies who provided us 
services, who were translators, who provided the civilian services, 
they are in danger.
  This is the right direction. I thank the administration for working 
with us and working with Mr. Crow. I am a cosponsor of this 
legislation. It is time to move this now. I really hope the other body 
seriously takes into account that we are saving lives.
  As the co-chair of the Afghan Caucus, I think it is crucial for us to 
save lives. This is an important initiative. We need to do more. I 
think there are 8,000 visas. We need to do more, but this is an 
excellent step. I really support the

[[Page H3713]]

efforts of Mr. Crow and thank him for his leadership.
  We are going to be monitoring this. We must monitor what the Taliban 
is doing, and we must make sure that lives are saved.

                              {time}  1500

  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how many additional 
speakers the gentlewoman from North Carolina has.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers.
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans agree that PFAS contamination must be 
addressed, and it must be addressed quickly. But requiring a blanket 
CERCLA designation for a family of over 9,000 compounds is not only 
untenable; it circumvents the science and the ongoing work at the 
Environmental Protection Agency.
  I do want to point out that yesterday I had posed a question in the 
Rules Committee if there had been a hearing in the Energy and Commerce 
Committee. I was assured that there had been. But, in fact, those 
hearings occurred in the previous Congress.
  There was a reference to PFAS in the budgetary hearing for the 
Environmental Protection Agency, and there was likewise a tangential 
reference in a reauthorization of a water bill, but for an issue that 
is this involved, it seems that this required its own separate hearing 
within the committee.
  The Chair, who is on the Energy and Commerce Committee, knows that 
sometimes these things run together. We have worked on this problem for 
so many Congresses that I asked the question simply because I couldn't 
remember if there had been an actual hearing on this bill in this 
Congress. But, in fact, there has not, and I just want the Record to 
accurately reflect that.
  The reason that that is important is there are many Members in this 
Congress who were not Members of the previous Congress, and we are 
asking them to take a vote today on a terribly important piece of 
legislation. We need to provide our colleagues with all the facts, and 
the way we do that in regular order is through the regular hearing 
process in an authorizing committee, like the Energy and Commerce 
Committee.
  Unfortunately, in spite of the assurances from the chair of the Rules 
Committee, that has not happened with this bill.
  Another thing really was concerning to me yesterday in the Rules 
Committee. I had two amendments. I was told: Oh, we can't do those 
because we don't really know the budgetary impacts of that.
  My gosh, you don't know the budgetary impacts of the entire bill.
  We got a CBO score right at the hearing time yesterday, and the CBO 
score says $280 million of direct expenses over the next 10 years. But 
it has no idea of the downstream effects of passing this legislation or 
what the resulting expenditures would be for Federal and State 
governments. We have no earthly idea what the actual cost of this is.
  I would just simply submit, to reject amendments brought in good 
faith by Republicans because you don't have all the budgetary 
information at hand when the Congressional Budget Office really cannot 
provide us the proper budgetary direction on the underlying bill, you 
begin to see the discrepancy and why that yields so much frustration.
  As a result, no Republican amendments to try to improve the bill were 
considered because of the indeterminate budgetary effects. It seems to 
me that a bill focused on consumer safety should not be limited by 
procedural issues.
  Those very same procedural issues, Mr. Speaker, can be waived by the 
Committee on Rules. That is what we do. We waive things all the time. 
But in this case, we couldn't find the additional energy to be able to 
do that.
  Additionally, the rushed bill to overturn the Supreme Court's 
decision on the Federal Trade Commission's section 13(b) authority to 
seek monetary relief will only make monetary relief the go-to remedy 
for every FTC violation, with no guardrails.
  Creating new agency authority that affects consumers should not be 
undertaken so lightly and should not be rushed through committee 
without full consideration of the issue. This bill does nothing to 
advance Federal privacy standards that are needed to overcome the 
patchwork of State laws and increase our ability to negotiate a new 
data-sharing agreement with the European Union.
  Again, I would just stress that an amendment offered by Mr. Bilirakis 
in committee--and I offered it again yesterday in the Rules Committee--
to try to make this a more bipartisan and reasonable approach was 
rejected on party lines. That is not the way that we should be 
governing.
  Finally, the ALLIES Act will increase the ability of certain Afghans 
to obtain Special Immigrant Visas. These Afghans worked alongside our 
troops for years to make their country a better place, often at 
significant risk to their own lives and their families' lives. We must 
ensure that they are properly and thoroughly vetted so that the Taliban 
and jihadist militias cannot exploit our generosity. We must also not 
leave behind those who risked their lives to aid our Armed Forces.

  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question, and I 
urge a ``no'' vote on the rule. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  It is long overdue for Congress to take comprehensive action to 
address the PFAS contamination of our environment and its health 
impacts on Americans. I have seen this in North Carolina.
  Industry has known of the danger of PFAS contamination for decades, 
yet we still lack significant Federal protections.
  We cannot continue to let these manmade chemicals endanger the health 
of our people and our planet.
  H.R. 2467 will protect Americans and our environment by setting 
standards for our drinking water, instituting comprehensive PFAS 
testing requirements, providing grants to utilities that are treating 
contamination, and so much more.
  I also support H.R. 2668 to solidify the FTC's ability to retrieve 
money for victims of frauds and scams. We cannot allow American 
consumers and businesses to fall victim to fraud without holding 
scammers and bad actors financially accountable. This emergency 
legislation will help make Americans who have fallen victim to fraud 
whole.
  Lastly, I support H.R. 3985 to keep our Nation's promises to our 
Afghan allies and protect those who helped protect us. We owe it to 
those who put their lives on the line for our Armed Forces. We also owe 
it to our servicemembers, who will continue to rely in the future on 
allied interpreters, contractors, and security personnel in foreign 
lands.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous 
question.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule 
governing debate of H.R. 2668, the ``Consumer Protection and Recovery 
Act'', which will ensure that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) can 
protect American consumers and put money back in the pockets of 
consumers who have been the victims of fraud and other scams by 
amending the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act) to explicitly 
provide the FTC the ability to obtain both injunctive and monetary 
equitable relief for all violations of the laws it enforces.
  Specifically, this bill would:
  Add a new subsection (e) to section 13 of the FTC Act that specifies 
types of equitable relief the FTC may pursue: restitution for losses, 
contract reformation and recission, money refunds, and the return of 
property;
  Provide the FTC disgorgement authority to seek court orders requiring 
bad actors repay unjust gains acquired in violation of the law.
  Clarify that the FTC may seek temporary restraining orders and 
preliminary injunctions without bond and that any relief sought under 
section 13(b) may be for past violations in addition to ongoing and 
imminent violations.
  As the Nation's premier consumer protection agency, the FTC is 
directed to enforce numerous statutes: the core of which is section 5 
of the FTC Act mandating the agency to prevent unfair or deceptive acts 
or practices and unfair methods of competition.
  Section 13(b) of the FTC Act authorizes the FTC to bring suit in 
federal courts seeking relief for consumers and is a critical 
enforcement tool the FTC uses to combat fraud and scams under section 
5.
  In 2020 alone, the FTC returned more than $482 million to over 1.6 
million consumer victims of fraud or illegal business practices.
  The FTC's restitution authority under section 13(b) was settled law 
for over 40 years, but

[[Page H3714]]

beginning in 2017, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed its 
own precedent to overturn FTC authority under section 13(b) to obtain 
monetary relief and the Third Circuit soon followed.
  Because of these decisions, close to 48 million Americans in six 
states became unable to obtain monetary redress under 13(b).
  Then, on April 22, 2021, the Supreme Court held in AMG Capital 
Management v. FTC that section 13(b) does not allow the FTC to seek 
monetary relief or require bad actors to return money earned through 
illegal activity.
  According to Acting Chairwoman Slaughter, the Supreme Court decision 
``deprived the FTC of the strongest tool [the FTC] had to help 
consumers.''
  Mr. Speaker, all five FTC Commissioners have repeatedly urged 
Congress to take quick action to pass legislation reaffirming FTC 
authority under section 13(b).
  H.R. 2668 does exactly that, by restoring nearly forty years of 
precedent and giving the FTC the ability to protect Americans from 
scams and unethical business practices.
  Americans need this protection, because every day, and far too often, 
individuals in Texas and across the country fall victim to financial 
scammers.
  The COVID-19 pandemic has given rise to an increase of scams and 
fraud that prey on consumers' fears and financial insecurities, and 
inaction on this issue is not an option as it will only embolden bad 
actors.
  H.R. 2668 will ensure that the FTC maintains its ability to return 
money to the victims of scams.
  Seniors especially need this protection, because they have worked 
their entire lives with the promise of a safe and secure retirement, 
but scammers and unscrupulous businesses are taking advantage of 
uncertainty surrounding the pandemic and working overtime to target 
them.
  Retirement accounts are not the only damage these scams cause--they 
damage the independence and trust of a vulnerable community.
  During the COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen instances of fraud rise in 
unprecedented numbers, as scammers attempt to take advantage of senior 
citizens and deprive them of their hard-earned savings.
  Bad actors preying on older Americans is, unfortunately, nothing new, 
but in the midst of a global pandemic impacting Americans' lives and 
livelihoods, cracking down on those scams must be a priority.
  One such scam was thwarted by Houston police and the Harris County 
District Attorney, who made an arrest in February in an international 
cyber-scam that bilked unsuspecting, mostly elderly victims out of more 
than $1 million.
  One victim of the scam, Asuncion Peppers, 74, a retired medical 
technician knows that first hand; She was bilked out of her life 
savings.
  Hackers contacted Ms. Peppers on Facebook, pretending to be one of 
her Facebook friends.
  She was told she was eligible for a government grant of almost one 
million dollars and all she had to do was send a check to pay taxes.
  Investigators believes the scammers were operating from Nigeria, 
defrauding senior citizens in the U.S. and around the world.
  Before Ms. Peppers realized she was being conned, she sent checks 
totaling $87,000 hard-earned money.
  She said that she worked three jobs to build her life savings.
  Ms. Peppers and her husband are just two of 38 victims bilked out of 
more than $1.3 million before the fraud was discovered.
  This story is not an isolated incident: although 1 in 20 seniors in 
the U.S. is a target of fraud schemes, the National Adult Protective 
Services Association has found that only 1 in 44 seniors report that 
they are victims of a fraud scheme.
  During these unprecedented times, it is imperative that Congress pass 
legislation that protects U.S. consumers and honest businesses from 
wrongdoers who steal money through fraud and deception.
  Mr. Speaker, we need to strengthen federal prevention efforts and 
ensure leaders in the public and private sectors are collaborating on 
effective safeguards.
  This begins with ensuring that the FTC has the explicit authority to 
obtain both injunctive and monetary relief for all violations of the 
laws it enforces.
  I urge all members to join me in voting for the rule and the 
underlying legislation, H.R. 2668, the ``Consumer Protection and 
Recovery Act.''
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Burgess is as follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 535

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 8 Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (S. 1867) to require the Director of National 
     Intelligence to declassify information relating to the origin 
     of COVID-19, and for other purposes. All points of order 
     against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall 
     be considered as read. All points of order against provisions 
     in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill and on any 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 Permanent Select 
     Committee on Intelligence; and (2) one motion to commit.
       Sec. 9 Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of S. 1867.

  Ms. ROSS. 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.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 216, 
nays 207, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 210]

                               YEAS--216

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Auchincloss
     Axne
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bourdeaux
     Bowman
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brown
     Brownley
     Bush
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Correa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crist
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis, Danny K.
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel, Lois
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs (CA)
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Jones
     Kahele
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Suozzi
     Swalwell
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--207

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gohmert
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest

[[Page H3715]]


     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hartzler
     Hern
     Herrell
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kim (CA)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Young
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Costa
     Crow
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Higgins (LA)
     LaMalfa
     Lesko
     Scott, Austin

                              {time}  1537

  Messrs. WESTERMAN and LaHOOD changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Ms. LOFGREN changed her vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


    MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

     Aderholt (Moolenaar)
     Buchanan (LaHood)
     DeSaulnier (Matsui)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Cartwright)
     Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))
     Fulcher (Simpson)
     Garcia (IL) (Garcia (TX))
     Gottheimer (Panetta)
     Granger (Calvert)
     Grijalva (Stanton)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Jones (Williams (GA))
     Kahele (Moulton)
     Kirkpatrick (Stanton)
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     McEachin (Wexton)
     Meng (Jeffries)
     Napolitano (Correa)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Ruiz (Correa)
     Rush (Underwood)
     Stewart (Owens)
     Trone (Beyer)
     Wilson (FL) (Hayes)


 =========================== NOTE =========================== 

  
  July 20, 2021, on page H3715, first column, the following 
appeared: MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH 
CONGRESS Aderholt (Moolenaar) Allred (Wexton) Auchincloss 
(Moulton) Bishop (GA) (Butterfield) Buchanan (LaHood) Cardenas 
(Carbajal) DeSaulnier (Matsui) Escobar (Garcia (TX)) Fallon 
(Nehls) Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA)) Fulcher (Simpson) Garcia (IL) 
(Garcia (TX)) Granger (Calvert) Grijalva (Stanton) Jackson (Nehls) 
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Jones (Williams (GA)) Kirkpatrick 
(Stanton) Lawson (FL) (Evans) Leger Fernandez (Jacobs (CA)) 
McEachin (Wexton) McHenry (Banks) Meng (Jeffries) Napolitano 
(Correa) Neal (Lynch) Nunes (Garcia (CA)) Payne (Pallone) Pfluger 
(Mann) Porter (Wexton) Ruiz (Correa) Rush (Underwood) Smucker 
(Joyce (PA)) Stewart (Owens) Tonko (Pallone) Trone (Beyer) Wilson 
(FL) (Hayes)
  
  The online version has been corrected to read: MEMBERS RECORDED 
PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS Aderholt 
(Moolenaar) Buchanan (LaHood) DeSaulnier (Matsui) Doyle, Michael 
F. (Cartwright) Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA)) Fulcher (Simpson) 
Garcia (IL) (Garcia (TX)) Gottheimer (Panetta) Granger (Calvert) 
Grijalva (Stanton) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Jones (Williams (GA)) 
Kahele (Moulton) Kirkpatrick (Stanton) Lawson (FL) (Evans) 
McEachin (Wexton) Meng (Jeffries) Napolitano (Correa) Payne 
(Pallone) Ruiz (Correa) Rush (Underwood) Stewart (Owens) Trone 
(Beyer) Wilson (FL) (Hayes)


 ========================= END NOTE ========================= 


  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the adoption of the 
resolution.
  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.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 219, 
nays 208, not voting 3, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 211]

                               YEAS--219

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Auchincloss
     Axne
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bourdeaux
     Bowman
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brown
     Brownley
     Bush
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crist
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis, Danny K.
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel, Lois
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs (CA)
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Jones
     Kahele
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Suozzi
     Swalwell
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--208

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gohmert
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hartzler
     Hern
     Herrell
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kim (CA)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Young
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Brady
     Higgins (LA)
     Scott, Austin

                              {time}  1600

  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.


    MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

     Aderholt (Moolenaar)
     Buchanan (LaHood)
     DeSaulnier (Matsui)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Cartwright)
     Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))
     Fulcher (Simpson)
     Garcia (IL) (Garcia (TX))
     Gottheimer (Panetta)
     Granger (Calvert)
     Grijalva (Stanton)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Jones (Williams (GA))
     Kahele (Moulton)
     Kirkpatrick (Stanton)
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     McEachin (Wexton)
     Meng (Jeffries)
     Napolitano (Correa)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Ruiz (Correa)
     Rush (Underwood)
     Stewart (Owens)
     Trone (Beyer)
     Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

                          ____________________