Congressional Record, Volume 168 Issue 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2022)

[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 7 (Tuesday, January 11, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H23-H31]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1836, GUARD AND RESERVE GI BILL
PARITY ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4673, ENSURING
VETERANS' SMOOTH TRANSITION ACT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on
Rules, I call up House Resolution 860 and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. Res. 860

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1836) to
amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that the time
during which members of the Armed Forces serve on active duty
for training qualifies for educational assistance under the
Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program of the Department of
Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes. All points of order
against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs now printed in the bill, an
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the
text of Rules Committee Print 117-25 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 Veterans' Affairs or their
respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in
section 2 of this resolution; and (3) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. After debate pursuant to the first section of this
resolution, each further amendment printed in part A of the
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 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proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent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. All points of order against the
further amendments printed in part A of the report of the
Committee on Rules are waived.
Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4673) to amend
title 38, United States Code, to provide for the automatic
enrollment of eligible veterans in patient enrollment system
of Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.
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 117-26 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 Veterans' Affairs or their
respective designees; (2) the further amendments described in
section 4 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc
described in section 5 of this resolution; and (4) one motion
to recommit.
Sec. 4. After debate pursuant to section 3 of this
resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the
report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution
not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant
to section 5 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. 5. It shall be in order at any time after debate
pursuant to section 3 of this resolution for the chair of the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs 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 Veterans' Affairs or their
respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.
Sec. 6. 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 5 of this resolution
are waived.
Sec. 7. House Resolution 188, agreed to March 8, 2021 (as
most recently amended by House Resolution 829, agreed to
December 2, 2021), is amended by striking January 21, 2022''
each place it appears and inserting (in each instance)
``February 4, 2022''.

{time} 1230

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Hayes). The gentleman from Colorado is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Reschenthaler) 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. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Colorado?
There was no objection.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and
reported a rule, House Resolution 860. The rule provides for
consideration of H.R. 1836, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act
under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs, makes in order two amendments, and
provides one motion to recommit.
The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4673, the EVEST Act,
under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs. The rule also makes in order five
amendments, provides the chairman of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
with en bloc authority, and provides one motion to recommit.
Finally, the rule provides for recess instructions, suspension
authority, and same-day authority through February 4, 2022.
Madam Speaker, I am pleased we are here today to provide for
consideration of two important bills to support our Nation's veterans.
H.R. 1836, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act will make
important improvements to the way GI Bill benefits are calculated for
our National Guard and Reserve veterans. Since 9/11, our seven
individual Reserve and Guard components of the United States Armed
Forces have played a larger and larger role in military operations.
Despite putting on the same uniform and taking on many of the same
risks as their Active Duty counterparts, these servicemembers don't
have access to the same benefits.
Under current law, active component servicemembers receive credit for
every day they serve while reserve component and National Guard
servicemembers earn credit depending on their duty status. H.R. 1836
would expand eligibility for the GI Bill to count every day a
servicemember is paid and in uniform toward benefit eligibility and
ensure parity for National Guard and Reserve members. It only makes
common sense. This service would include all training and general duty
for which basic pay is warranted.
These men and women answer the call to serve without hesitation. Our
National Guard has stepped up these last several years to assist in the
fight against COVID-19, help communities affected by natural disasters,
as in Colorado, we had a terrible wildfire a week ago and the National
Guard stepped up, and even protecting our Capitol following a domestic
terrorist attack. It is past time these servicemembers have access to
the GI benefits they deserve.

[[Page H24]]

I commend Congressman Mike Levin for sponsoring this legislation to
provide parity, and I am proud to support this bipartisan bill.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 4673, the EVEST Act,
to improve healthcare benefits for departing Active Duty servicemembers
as they transition into VA healthcare and civilian life, again,
something that is just common sense and I thought was already part of
the law.
Approximately 200,000 servicemembers transition out of military
service each year. This service is difficult, demanding, and dangerous,
and the transition from military to civilian life can be challenging
for servicemembers who suffered a service-related injury or a traumatic
experience. A recent survey of 10,000 veterans showed their chief
concern in their first year after leaving the military is their health
and their mental well-being.
At this moment, veterans eligible for VA healthcare must choose to
enroll in the VA's healthcare system using its online, phone, or in-
person services. However, veterans are often confused regarding their
eligibility status for enrollment despite all veterans being eligible
for VA healthcare benefits for 5 years after separation from the
military.
A 2014 study found symptoms of PTSD can be significantly improved if
veterans receive prompt mental healthcare, and for each year a veteran
waited to initiate treatment, there was a 5 percent increase in the
odds of their PTSD not improving or even worsening. Simply put, our
veterans cannot afford to not get the healthcare they need and deserve.
The EVEST Act requires the VA to enroll veterans in its patient
enrollment system within 60 days of receiving relevant information and
notice from the Department of Defense. This bill uses existing DOD
systems through the Transition Assistance Program as well as VA's
existing patient enrollment system to enable a warm handoff from DOD to
VA. The bill would require the VA to provide veterans notice of
enrollment and instructions for how the veteran can opt out if they so
wish.
Smoother access to VA healthcare has never been more important than
it is today. It is time to shift the burden from the veteran to the DOD
and the VA where it belongs.
I thank Chairman Takano for introducing this commonsense legislation
to improve the health of our recently separated veterans, and I also
recognize the gentleman from Pennsylvania for his service to the
country as part of our military.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I thank my good friend from Colorado for his kind words and also for
yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
Madam Speaker, before I get into debate, I do want to talk about my
good friend from Colorado. I know that he may be moving on in some
months. I want to say I truly am looking forward to working with my
good friend for the next few months. He is a gentleman and a good
friend both on and off the floor.
Madam Speaker, the rule before us today makes in order two pieces of
legislation, H.R. 1836, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act of
2020 and also H.R. 4673, the EVEST Act.
As a former Navy JAG, I am deeply committed to supporting the
military men and women who make sacrifices every day to protect our
freedoms, both at home and abroad.
And that is why I am incredibly disappointed that neither of these
measures received a legislative hearing in the House Veterans' Affairs
Committee this Congress.
Without input from the VA, VSOs, and other stakeholders, it is
absolutely unclear the impact these bills would actually have, let
alone whether these are actually workable bills.
Take for example H.R. 1836. Republicans agree that we must address
the benefit and equity for our National Guardsmen and simplify the law
so that any time spent on Active Duty for service other than training
would count towards GI Bill eligibility. But unfortunately, the broad
expansion of benefits in H.R. 1836 could have very real impacts on
retention in both the Reserves and Active Duty.
Additionally, it would be helpful to hear from VSOs and other
stakeholders about the impact that increased interest fees would have
on veterans' access to housing. This is a real problem, and I don't
think we have properly addressed it or debated it.
These are issues that could have been explored. They could have been
explored during a legislative hearing. They could have been explored to
ensure a final product that meets the needs of our guardsmen and our
veterans.
At the same time, while I agree that we must support transitioning
servicemembers and we must do it by connecting them with VA hospital
care and medical services, this has been an incomplete legislative
process that makes H.R. 4673 completely problematic.
According to the VA 2022 Budget documents, 9.2 million veterans are
enrolled for care and medical services while 7.1 million veterans
actually receive treatment at VA or community care facilities. So given
that the budgets are determined by historical enrollment versus actual
utilization, increasing enrollment without understanding the impact on
the VA healthcare system could create an imbalance between the
budgetary needs and what reality will show. It would also be helpful to
understand H.R. 4673's potential impacts on access to care for current
veterans and the ability of VA staff and facilities to handle the
influx of the new enrollees.
To that end, last Congress we passed the Commander John Scott Hannon
Veterans Mental Health Care Improvement Act of 2019. This required the
VA to submit a strategic plan to provide a healthcare plan to any
veteran during the 1-year period following their discharge or release
from Active Duty service. This strategic plan is currently expected to
be released early in 2022. So it would make a lot more sense to wait
until we receive the strategic plan before we move forward with a
legislative solution.
Again, Madam Speaker, these are issues that could have been discussed
at a legislative hearing. These issues could have helped ensure a
veteran-focused approach to enrollment eligibility for VA healthcare.
Instead, the majority is moving forward without a true understanding of
the real-world impacts of these measures. I, therefore, urge my
colleagues to oppose this rule.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume. I would say in response to my friend, this is a situation in
the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act where the National Guard and
the Reserves are standing side-by-side with active military, and they
are entitled to the same benefits that the active military has when it
comes to the GI Bill. So that one, in my opinion, is a no-brainer.
The other, and I would say, the VSOs, the veteran service
organizations supporting the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act, H.R.
1836, are Student Veterans of America, National Guard Association of
the U.S., Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United
States, and the Reserve Officers Association of the U.S.

{time} 1245

With respect so the EVEST legislation, H.R. 4637, again, here we are,
people have acted with military service and then have to opt in as
opposed to just let the system move quickly for them to become part of
the veterans medical care and benefits system. And we have a number of
different organizations that support that.
VSOs supporting that are the Paralyzed Veterans of America, the
Disabled American Veterans, the Nurses Organization of Veterans
Affairs, and the Veterans Healthcare Policy Institute.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from North
Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. ROSS. Madam Speaker, I thank my esteemed colleague, Congressman
Perlmutter, for yielding.
Madam Speaker, the bills included in this rule serve as an expression
of gratitude for all veterans, regardless of their official service
status.
My State of North Carolina alone has nearly 12,000 National Guard
members, each of whom deserves to be recognized

[[Page H25]]

for their sacrifice on behalf of our Nation.
Reservists and National Guard members take on challenging, admirable,
and oftentimes lifesaving work, especially throughout the COVID-19
crisis. We owe it to these exceptional Americans to provide gold-
standard education benefits, medical care, and mental health support.
A critical inflection point in all veterans' lives is their
transition to civilian life. We know that during this period, veterans
disproportionately face mental health crises. That is why in
partnership with Congresswoman Gonzalez-Colon, Congressman Bowman,
Congresswoman Moore, I have offered an amendment to H.R. 1836 that
takes proactive steps to offer support.
Our amendment requires the VA to provide new veterans with
information on the medical services they can access, including the
mental health care and military sexual trauma resources to which they
are entitled.
My father served as a psychiatrist in the Air Force during the
Vietnam era, a particularly challenging time for our veterans. He
witnessed firsthand the need for mental health care among this
population.
In addition, one of the issues--military sexual trauma, leaving
veterans with scars, both physical and psychological--is affected by
this legislation. I have introduced other legislation on this issue and
I am committed to helping veterans who have experienced this trauma
access support.
Veterans can't benefit from VA services unless they know about them.
Unfortunately, many veterans lack information of the full range of
resources available. Our amendment will raise awareness among
transitioning veterans about VA services and the care they deserve.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, the
rule, and the underlying bill.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, during my opening statement, I
referenced the strategic plan that the VA is undertaking that we are
supposed to get in early 2022. And the reason for that is we typically
need data before we legislate, but we do have data on another topic,
and that is the damage that our children are facing by being kept out
of school.
Madam Speaker, we have nearly 2 full years of data that show that
keeping kids out of classrooms has caused massive learning loss, a
mental health epidemic, particularly among our youth, and stressful
situations for millions of families. Recently, children in Chicago have
been forced to endure virtual hearings after the Chicago Teachers Union
refused to do their jobs and show up for in-person classes.
House Republicans believe schools should be open and that our
children come first. In some municipalities, bowling alleys have opened
before our schools. It is shameful.
Madam Speaker, that is why if we defeat the previous question, I will
personally offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R.
682, the Reopen Schools Act.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my
amendment into the Record, 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 Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Iowa (Mrs. Hinson), my good friend, the legislation's
author, here to explain the amendment.
Mrs. HINSON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania
for yielding.
Madam Speaker, our amendment would ensure that students are no longer
kept out of the classroom and forced to learn from behind a screen. It
would ensure that parents are able to return to the workplace. It would
help combat the ongoing youth mental health crisis spurred by school
closures.
Madam Speaker, my bill, the Reopen Schools Act, would condition
Federal COVID grants to schools on those schools actually being open
and operating in the first place, which is what that money was intended
to do.
I am proud that my home State of Iowa--and I am thankful to our
Governor, Kim Reynolds--for ensuring that Iowa students could go back
to school. In Iowa, kids have been back in the classroom, where they
belong, for over a year. They get to socialize with their peers and
they get hands-on learning help from their teachers. They get to run
and jump at recess. They get to raise their hands to ask and answer
questions instead of clicking a button from behind a screen. They get
to write on white boards during their lessons.
Unfortunately, this is not the case in the rest of the country. So
many students are still trapped behind screens. And what about the
students who don't have regular computer and broadband internet access?
What about students in households without computers or even households
with only one computer where mom and dad are maybe trying to use it for
work.
Virtual learning means we are leaving behind our most vulnerable
students, our rural students, our students with additional learning
challenges, and even kids who have every virtual advantage are
struggling. Families are struggling. Working parents are challenged
like never before, and American kids are suffering and paying the price
for it.

As a mom, I have personally felt this pressure, and I know many of my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle know what it is like to have kids
trying to learn at home while you are trying to work at the same time.
So this is not a partisan issue. This is about our kids. This is about
supporting working families. Kids need to be in school.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in defeating the
previous question so we can reopen schools and prevent taxpayer dollars
from keeping kids at home.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comments of Mr.
Reschenthaler and Mrs. Hinson about schools. But this, in a word, is
the Congress of the United States. This is not the Des Moines school
board or the Punxsutawney school board where they may have individual
respective issues for their area.
Madam Speaker, my wife is a teacher--as you are--and in Jefferson
County, Colorado, the schools are open.
Now, are people getting sick? Is there a lot of pressure on teachers?
You bet there is. But those schools are open.
So I appreciate the comments of my friends about wanting to open the
schools in Chicago or maybe wanting to open them someplace else, but
they are open. And so I am not exactly sure what they are railing
against other than maybe the school board of Chicago or the school
board of Des Moines.
Madam Speaker, I yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas
(Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, spoken like my good friend from
Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter--who I really insist that he remain in this
body for his astuteness and his way of analyzing--might I just take a
quick moment to say that the schools of America are open. But today,
the hospitalization rate for omicron is the highest ever since we have
had COVID-19.
And so I believe that school superintendents, teachers, parents, and
others--like Madam Speaker--are making decisions for our children to be
in school but also to be safe.
Madam Speaker, I move on these two very important legislative
initiatives, H.R. 1836 and H.R. 4673. I thank the gentleman from
Colorado. I thank my good friend who has served in the United States
military from Pennsylvania. I thank him for his service as well.
Madam Speaker, I rise enthusiastically on this legislation for a
number of reasons, but more importantly, I have worked extensively with
the Guard, particularly the Texas National Guard. We in Texas can
sometimes be called disaster alley as it relates to hurricanes and
tornadoes, as it relates to COVID-19. And alongside of us on those
battles, if you will, saving lives have been the National Guard. We are
grateful for their service. They are citizen soldiers.
I think we don't acknowledge that what the Guard is is individuals
who put on the uniform, leaving being a bus driver or a teacher or a
mechanic, lawyer or doctor; and in doing so, they sacrifice and leave
their families. So I am excited about H.R. 1836 by Mr. Levin because
right now in terms of education, it is Active Duty, those individuals
in active military service, including full-time training and annual

[[Page H26]]

training. But H.R. 1836 will expand the eligibility criteria to include
those training in full-time National Guard duty. They are on the front
lines.
In my hospital during COVID-19, it was the Guard that came as nurses
and support systems when we were literally overwhelmed with patients.
It is the Guard that is coming back again to be able to help us now
that we are also at the peak. Texas Children's Hospital seeing more
sick COVID-19-impacted children in their history, the Guard is vital.
And I would just say that this is not about data. It is about the
lives of our Guard. And I want to move to say how important it is to
get our young soldiers on to the healthcare system under the bill of
Mr. Takano as quickly as they come out. It is not about data, it is
about saving lives.
And that leads me to Governor Abbott's untimely and wrong policies in
Texas. I will be seeking an official investigation from the department
in Washington, the Secretary of Defense and the Pentagon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, the issue is very clear. In his
wrongheaded dispatching of our guard to the border--of course, this is
a Federal responsibility, the southern border--we now have documented
crises, guards committing suicide, guards not getting their paychecks,
and guards having their education tuition slashed. Yes, that is what is
happening in the State of Texas.
Madam Speaker, I am a fighter for the Guard. They have worked without
ceasing and question. And I demand that this Congress, this Committee
on Armed Services, the Pentagon, investigate when the commander of a
particular State abuses those individuals who have put on the uniform
as citizen soldiers and who are in desperate need of our help.
Suicide? Not getting your paychecks timely because you are
dispatching people to the border without order and without
understanding?
Madam Speaker, I support this legislation, but I am calling upon my
colleagues to help me, help these young soldiers with family members
who, at this point as we stand here, are not getting the kind of
treatment equating to their dignity, their service, and their
sacrifice.
Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the Rule for House
consideration of H.R. 1836, Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act, and
H.R. 4673, EVEST Act.
I thank Rules Committee Chairman McGovern for shepherding this
legislation to the floor.
I also thank House Veterans Committee Chair Mark Takano, for his
stewardship of the committee and unwavering commitment to our nation's
veterans.
H.R. 1836, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act will expand
eligibility criteria for certain education benefits.
Current law defines the term ``active duty'' as those individuals who
are on full-time duty in the active military service of the United
States, including full-time training duty, annual training duty, and
attendance, while in the active military service, at a school
designated as a service school by law or by the Secretary of the
military department concerned.
H.R. 1836, will expand eligibility criteria to include those training
in fulltime National Guard duty, which includes the National Guard, the
Army National Guard, and the Air National Guard, as well as those same
members when performing active duty.
H.R. 4673, the EVEST Act, would forward the goal of seamless
enrollment in health care coverage.
Specifically, this bill will require the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) to automatically enroll new veterans into VA health care,
and notify veterans of their enrollment and instructions on how to un-
enroll, if desired.
I rise today to pay tribute to all the men and women who have served
in the Armed Forces of the United States and risked their lives to
defend our freedoms and way of life and took and lived the oath to
``support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
enemies, foreign and domestic'' and bore true faith and allegiance to
the same, an obligation they took freely, without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion.
Veterans are truly heroes walking among us.
I want to thank all of our armed serviceman and women for their
selfless dedication to our protection every day.
Today's Rule includes a very important bill that provides for our
nation's reservists, H.R. 1836, Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act.
When it is signed into law it will repair a disparity issue by placing
the Guard and Reserve on equal footing with regards to GI bill
benefits.
This Rule, in which we further the benefits and recognition that our
veterans deserve, also reminds us that we have an overriding duty to
protect the health and dignity of those service today.
For this reason, I would like to discuss the actions of the Texas
Governor, because he is taking whatever steps he can to prevent local
jurisdictions and municipalities in Texas from promulgating and
enforcing any mandate that may be necessary to respond to and mitigate
the substantial threat posed by the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic.
It is no exaggeration to say that Executive Orders issued by the
Texas Governor have consigned thousands of Texans to needless death and
suffering.
According to virtually all public health experts, these deaths and
suffering could be alleviated by taking the simple but life-saving
precautions of getting a vaccination shot, wearing a protective face
covering, and maintaining recommended social distancing.
To date, the COVID-19 virus has afflicted more than 35.3 million
persons in the United States and more than 5.09 million Texas.
In Harris County alone, the number is approaching 753,000 cases and
already 9,821 persons have died of the virus, which represents more
than 10 percent of the 76,839 Texas lives claimed by this lethal
disease.
To exacerbate matters, in March 2021, the Texas Governor launched the
ill-fated and ineffective Operation Lone Star which he claimed was
necessary to stem a so-called invasion of migrants at Texas' southern
border.
As of November 2021, more than 10,000 Texas National Guardsmen have
been deployed to the southern border in pursuit of this folly.
According to published media accounts, National Guard members who
have been activated for Operation Lone Star are experiencing habitual
pay delays and poor working conditions during the border mission,
including being exposed to COVID-19, and many are missing the equipment
necessary for safety and mission success.
Finally, just last week the Texas Governor filed a frivolous lawsuit
in federal court challenging the authority of President Biden, the
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces to require that members of the
National Guard be vaccinated against COVID-19.
There is no merit to this nuisance law suit as demonstrated by the
summary rejection of similar arguments raised by neighboring Oklahoma
Governor Stitt.
The Texas Governor's failure to comply with the policies intended to
reduce the spread of COVID-19 among the Armed Forces will mean that
there will be less military personnel available national disasters that
have struck Texas in recent years, such as the winter freeze of last
year.
This will also mean that there are fewer personnel to respond to any
attacks on the homeland.
Encouraged by Governor Abbott's obstinacy, about 40 percent of the
members of the Texas Army National Guard are refusing to get
vaccinated, which puts at risk their colleagues and the persons they
are sworn to defend and protect.
This Rule governs debate of excellent and common-sense bills that
will enhance the respect and benefits of our servicemen and women.
We must also act to ensure that our servicemen and women are
protected from COVID-19, both for their own safety and the safety of
our nation.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume. I appreciate my good friend from Texas talking about suicide.
If we want to talk about suicide, let's look at the youth of this
country. Here is the statistic:
The number of ER visits for suspected suicide attempts by 12- to 17-
year-old girls rose by 51 percent in 2021 compared to 2019. Suicide
attempts are up 51 percent. So let's talk about suicide and let's talk
about the effect that these shutdowns are having on our youth.
I know my good friend from Colorado said this is just an issue in
Chicago when we were talking about Chicago. Chicago is just an example
of the shutdowns.
There are over 4,500 schools across the country that chose to begin
the week of January 2 by shutting down, which clearly disrupted
learning.

{time} 1300

This isn't just a Republican stat. I have a New York Times article
that has even more facts on this. Remember, it was President Biden who
promised that he was going to shut down the

[[Page H27]]

virus, not shut down the economy and not shut down schools. He has
actually done the exact opposite.
Here is another statistic. More Americans have died from COVID-19 in
2021 than in 2020. That is under President Biden's watch.
We can hear excuses all day long about what can be done, but the fact
is this: This is a crisis that Joe Biden and the other party across the
aisle own. There is no excuse. They control the White House and the
Senate, and they have the majority in the House. This has been done on
their watch.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma
(Mr. Hern) to talk more about this topic.
Mr. HERN. Madam Speaker, I thank my dear friend from Pennsylvania for
yielding me 2\1/2\ minutes to speak about something today that we need
to shed light on, which is an issue impacting an entire generation of
students.
Children from preschool age through college have been barred from
their classrooms for the better part of 2 years now. Many of us have
stated from the start that shutting down schools would create more
problems than it would solve, and now the data proves us right.
Still, some teachers' unions refuse to work. They refuse to put the
well-being of the students' futures first.
Americans are sick and tired of the Federal Government moving the
goalposts and changing the ``science'' to fit whatever narrative they
want.
The President of the United States repeatedly caved to the teachers'
unions, ignoring the needs of our students to the detriment of our
children across the country. Now that he has seen the polling on school
closures, he says the schools should reopen, continuing to move the
goalposts.
Suicide and self-harm among students hit record highs while schools
were closed. Mental health problems are on the rise among kids of all
ages. Test scores are abysmal. All of these issues trace back to the
closure of our schools.
When schools remain closed, our children are harmed. Parents are
having to take their children to work, to their jobs, because they have
no way of having their children cared for during the day.
Students need to be in school environments for more than just an
education. The social skills developed through their school years have
a direct impact on the adults and members of society that these
children will grow into.
What will the next generation of leaders look like? What will the
next generation of doctors, scientists, or engineers look like if this
is their education today? In 20 years, our society will be dependent on
this generation in the workforce and throughout our society. We are
failing to prepare our children for it.
The future of our Nation belongs to the children. Yes, it really is
for the children. Can anyone in this Chamber look at the actions of the
last 2 years and say we are serving our children's best interests? The
answer is a resounding no.
Madam Speaker, I urge consideration of Congresswoman Hinson's
legislation to ensure our students are back in the classroom.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I would just respond to my friend from Oklahoma, as
well as the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Obviously, they have some
issues with their school systems if this is the problem that they are
bringing up.
In Colorado, schools are open. I can tell you that my wife, Nancy, is
pretty stressed because COVID is still around and the teaching ranks
have been hit by COVID. There is a lot of stress on teachers, but the
schools are open.
Maybe those gentlemen need to talk to their school boards. In
Colorado, we believe in local control. In Colorado, we have kept these
open.
I would just suggest to the gentlemen to take a look at their own
school boards instead of having some national standard that they want
to create here about keeping schools open, because they are open.
Madam Speaker, Mr. Reschenthaler mentioned something about the
economy. Let's talk about the economy. Let's start with the stock
market.
The stock market is up 10,000 points since Joe Biden took office.
Madam Speaker, 10,000 points. Do you know what that means? It is $1.4
billion per point. It means the stock market is up $14 trillion in 1
year under Joe Biden. Since Donald Trump lost, the stock market is up
$14 trillion.
If that weren't enough, let's talk about how many jobs have been
added since Joe Biden won and Donald Trump lost. Madam Speaker, 6.2
million jobs have been added in the last year.
Wages have increased by 4.7 percent, at levels we haven't seen for
decades.
We had the sharpest drop in unemployment since Joe Biden won and
Donald Trump lost, over the course of the last year, down to 3.9
percent.
The stock market is up. Jobs are up. Wages are up. My friends are
complaining about the economy. Well, they have to complain about
something, so that is what they want to complain about.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I am actually glad the economy came up because this is
truly a disaster. We can talk about the stock market, but I can tell
you that the people in my district don't care about Wall Street. They
are focused on Main Street.
When everything they buy every day, whether it is bacon at the
grocery store or gasoline at the gas station, costs more, it takes
money out of their paychecks.

Don't take my word. Let's turn to some statistics.
The December jobs report was the worst of Joe Biden's Presidency,
with the U.S. economy actually adding just under 200,000 jobs when it
was projected to add roughly half a million jobs, grossly falling short
of what all the economists were projecting.
The December jobs report was the worst of the Biden Presidency. The
labor force participation rates decreased for the following
demographics. African-American men 20 and older declined in job
participation. African-American teenagers, Asian Americans, and
Hispanic and Latino Americans all had falling numbers under the Biden
economy.
Again, let's just look at inflation. Gasoline is up 58 percent. We
haven't seen increases like this in gasoline since the last time that
Joe Biden was in the White House. Car and truck rentals are up over 37
percent. As I referenced, bacon is up over 21 percent. Fish and seafood
are up 10 percent. Eggs are up 8 percent. Coffee is up 7.5 percent.
What this means is the real wages of American workers, which have
stagnated, are even worse than they were before this Presidency because
everything the American worker buys costs more thanks to Joe Biden and
thanks to the party across the aisle's economic policies.
I want to talk more about schools that were referenced. Let's talk
about schools. I have a New York Times article. ``No Way to Grow Up''
is the title. American children are in crisis. It was published on
January 4. This is a New York Times article.
Among third through eighth graders, math and reading levels were
lower than normal this fall, according to NWEA, which is a research
group.
Many children and teenagers are experiencing mental health problems
aggravated by the isolation and disruption of the pandemic.
Three medical groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics,
recently declared a national state of emergency in children's health.
What is really shocking about this is the party across the aisle
claims to be the party of science. I think the party across the aisle
has forever forfeited the right to call themselves the party of science
because nothing that they have done has been based on science--maybe
political science, but not real science.
Here is the real science. Data now suggests that the many changes to
school routines are of questionable value in controlling the virus'
spread. Some researchers are skeptical that school closures actually
reduce COVID cases in most instances.
Here we have the so-called party of science using unscientific
rationale to shut down schools, which we know is damaging kids both
from an education

[[Page H28]]

point of view and a mental health point of view, damaging kids while
having zero science to back that up.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr.
Moore).
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues
to defeat the previous question so that we can immediately consider
H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act.
As a father of four, I know just how important it is to families
across the country that our schools stay open and our kids keep
learning.
I want to pause for a moment to highlight what we are hearing right
now. I fully appreciate my Democrat colleagues talking about
federalism. I am very supportive of that in the face of sweeping
Federal mandates that are going to inflict an enormous workforce burden
on all of our private-sector companies in my district with a Federal
vaccine mandate. We are trying to say: Don't do that. That is not the
right approach.
I am hearing the same thing, that it is not the right approach to
tell each school board what they are doing. Let me set just a clear
concept of what we are talking about here. There is Federal money
involved. We want school boards to make decisions--I have even
incorporated it into my speech that I will share here in a minute--to
use these Federal dollars that are designed to help keep schools open.
We need to make sure that these schools stay open. Let's all embrace
federalism. That is the goal. President Biden just realized it a few
weeks ago when he said we can't solve this at the Federal level. We
fully embrace that.
In-person learning is critical for our children's well-being. From
mental health to reading and math skills, American students are
struggling.
COVID is spreading, and we can embrace commonsense precautions,
embracing federalism, like masks and testing, where relevant. But our
kids need to be in the classroom.
Rolling school closures are exacting a staggering toll on our
children, particularly those with special needs or those who are
already vulnerable or behind academically.
Low-income families with parents who work outside the home are most
at risk when schools shut down. Moms and dads race to find makeshift
childcare just to be able to go to work and feed their families, and
vulnerable kids fall further and further behind on their schoolwork. We
cannot fail these students.
Congress allocated $54.3 billion for the Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Fund to help schools reopen and stay open.
Those funds must be used to prioritize the expenses that keep schools
open.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to
the gentleman from Utah.
Mr. MOORE of Utah. Madam Speaker, I am grateful for Utah's educators
and superintendents who are working hard to do what is right by our
students. They are working hard; I see it. Families across the country
are trying the best they can, and we must commit to supporting them in
return.
A vote for the previous question is a vote for our students and our
future.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the comments of the gentleman from Utah,
as well as my friend from Pennsylvania. They are focusing on schools.
Okay, focus on schools. Obviously, I think local control of these
school districts is the appropriate way to go and not kind of a Federal
mandate.
Obviously, we would like to see vaccines used more and COVID
eliminated. If we got everybody vaccinated and people wore masks, I
think that would be the direction we would go.
What these bills are about, and what this rule is about, is the
mental health of our National Guard and Reserve troops. We are talking
about the National Guard, and we are talking about the Reserves.
They may want to bring in a school bill, which is completely
unrelated to the topic at hand, but what we are talking about here
should have been either passed under some kind of an expedited fashion
or it should be the law already. Obviously, they want to argue about
something that is not before the body because they can't argue against
these two bills.
We want to make sure that there is parity that exists between the
National Guard and Reserve and active military when it comes to the GI
Bill and the ability of those individuals to take advantage of the
benefits of the GI Bill, which will benefit this Nation greatly.
My dad had a saying about the original GI Bill. He said: America has
made many investments, but of the two best investments that America
made, the Louisiana Purchase was second only to the GI Bill in terms of
the value to America.
Here we are, talking about all sorts of other things and not parity
for National Guardsmen, Reserve officers, and Reserve troops with the
ability to access the GI Bill.
We are also ignoring the mental health issues that so many coming out
of the military may experience once they are out of the Department of
Defense, out of their active service. We want to make sure there is a
seamless approach to them entering into the VA system.
Madam Speaker, I understand my friends arguing about everything else,
but what we have before us are very important matters that have to be
addressed.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1315

Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, again, I just want to reiterate
that I have said if we defeat the previous question I will personally
offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R. 682, the
Reopen Schools Act, to help our children who are in school who are
suffering. That is why this is now an issue.
To speak more on that, Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Speaker, I want to say thank you to the gentleman
from Pennsylvania for a few minutes here. I appreciate it.
Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question and in support
of the Reopen Schools Act. We are hearing today that, in terms of
priorities here, what could be more important than schools and getting
our schools open with the damage that has been done over the last
couple years?
During the early days of the pandemic many schools across the country
were shuttered. But now some 2 years in, I believe we have the tools
and resources to keep our schools open--something we all know is in the
best interest of our kids.
Since March of 2020, the Federal Government has provided $190 billion
in pandemic aid to schools to upgrade their mitigation systems and get
kids back in the classrooms safely. Unfortunately, last week the
teachers union in Chicago decided to walk out on their students. The
standoff has kept 340,000 students--the third largest school system in
the United States--out of the classroom. Worryingly, we are now seeing
other teachers unions across the country looking to follow their lead
and pushing for a return to remote learning.
So our colleague across the aisle here asked: What are we railing
against?
Aren't we in support of local control?
Of course we are. But what we are seeing in the State of Wisconsin
now is that the Department of Health Services, at the behest of the
Governor, is pushing for more restrictions. A letter just went out
today to all school districts across the State of Wisconsin: You should
be putting more restrictions in place.
It is very similar to what the Centers for Disease Control has done.
It is extremely hard for someone at the local level to simply stand up
against this onslaught of regulations and suggestions that you have to
do this otherwise children are going to be damaged.
How are you going to stand up against that when you are just a small,
local school district?
Even the Education Secretary, Miguel Cardona, took a stand by saying
that students have suffered enough and schools should stay open. I
agree.
Last year's school closures were extremely hard on parents and
students leading to significant learning loss. That is a scenario we
cannot afford to repeat this academic year. We owe it to

[[Page H29]]

our kids to get back to in-person instruction. H.R. 682 ensures that
the additional $190 billion in pandemic aid actually goes towards what
it was intended: getting kids back in the classroom.
Madam Speaker, I just want to close by saying this: I remember back
in April of 2020, a couple weeks into the shutdowns and lockdowns, we
knew whom this was going to affect the most, and we knew that children
are at very low risk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from
Wisconsin an additional 10 seconds.
Mr. TIFFANY. In fact, the head of the CDC at that time, Dr. Redfield,
said that kids should be back in school. They are at less risk than the
cold and flu with COVID. Kids should be back in school.
Madam Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question so we can
consider this critical piece of legislation put forward by the
gentlewoman from Iowa.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time each
side has remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has 9\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 8\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I appreciate my friends wanting to talk about the
Chicago Teachers Union because, again, they don't want to talk about
the National Guard; they don't want to talk about the Reserve; they
don't want to talk about the GI Bill; and they don't want to talk about
mental health benefits or health benefits generally for veterans
because they don't have any complaint about that. There is just a whole
other conversation going on here.
Again, I don't know what is going on in Wisconsin, whether the
gentleman has a complaint against collective bargaining in Wisconsin; I
don't know if it is the problem in Pennsylvania if there is an issue
with collective bargaining. That is not the issue before the House
today.
Madam Speaker, we need to get these National Guard and Reserve pieces
of legislation passed, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I am a veteran in the Navy. I was a naval officer. I
deployed to Iraq. I will talk about veteran issues all day long, and we
can start by talking about the VA loan that needs reform so veterans
can actually use this loan in a hot market where sellers simply will
refuse to accept that loan. I will sit up here and talk about that all
day, and I have been talking about veterans' issues.
But let's just step back. We have had almost 1 year of one-party
rule, one party controlling the White House, the Senate, and the House
for 1 year.
And what has that given us?
It has given us an absolute crisis--a disaster--at the southern
border. It has given us rampant COVID deaths that actually exceed what
they were last year despite the fact that this President inherited from
President Trump Operation Warp Speed which gave him three vaccines and
a list of therapeutics that could be used. Despite all that, this is
still an unmitigated disaster that Biden and his Democratic colleagues
have created.

We also have inflation and stagnation. American workers have less
money to buy the goods and services they need. We have Russia poised to
invade Ukraine. We have Communist China daily invading the airspace of
the free and independent nation state of Taiwan. And don't even get me
started on the fact that we ceded Afghanistan to the Taliban after 18
months of stability in a nation that saw zero American fatalities and
stability for our Afghan allies, and we handed it over to the Taliban.
That is what 1 year of one-party rule has given this country: an
unmitigated disaster.
Now, getting back to schools, I know that my colleagues on the left
want to say that this is just an issue for Chicago or some other city.
Forty-five hundred schools shut down the first week of January is a
national issue.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Louisiana
(Ms. Letlow) to talk more about it.
Ms. LETLOW. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so
we can immediately consider H.R. 682, the Reopen Schools Act. I believe
that this legislation is critical for our students, to ensure success
in the current school year, and also address the learning gap that has
arisen during this pandemic.
As parents, we know that education is the most essential cornerstone
in the foundation of our children's future. Throughout the past year I
have heard from countless parents who had to put their lives on hold to
assume the role of teacher in their child's virtual classroom, while
other family priorities, including returning to work, took a backseat.
As a former educator myself, I know how crucial classroom discussion
is to the learning process. The statistics clearly show that students
learn better when they are able to participate in person and interact
with their peers and teachers, and not reduced to just a face on a
screen.
I also want to note that in rural areas such as my district,
successful virtual learning is nearly impossible because of the lack of
access to broadband internet. In my home State of Louisiana, our
standardized tests show that the number of students in grades 3 through
8 who achieved the State's proficiency goals fell by nearly 5 percent
during the pandemic.
Over the past 2 years, Congress has appropriated billions of dollars
so schools can take the necessary steps to reopen safely. I want to be
clear: We are not asking schools to put either students or teachers
into unsafe environments. We did not send States and districts that
funding for them to simply shut their doors again.
Madam Speaker, it is absolutely critical for us to move forward on
this legislation to ensure that American students can continue to learn
in safe, face-to-face classrooms across this country.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I would like my friend from
Colorado to know that I have no further speakers and that I am prepared
to close.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I would just like to thank the
gentlewoman from Louisiana for talking about the need for broadband
because in the American Rescue Plan there is funding for broadband for
rural areas such as she represents as well as in the infrastructure
bill.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time so my friend can
close.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time.
Madam Speaker, as a former Navy JAG, I strongly support efforts to
ensure our military men and women receive the care and benefits they
deserve both during and after their periods of service. It is,
therefore, incredibly disappointing to me that the two bills made in
order under today's rule present numerous issues and numerous
uncertainties that could have been addressed through what could have
been just a robust discussion with the VA, VSOs, and other stakeholder
groups.
I really hope that moving forward we can just work together to ensure
that through the legislative process we address the needs of our
Nation's veterans.
Again, I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous
question so that I can offer the amendment to Reopen Schools Act.
So, again, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the
previous question and ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I want to just recognize my friend for his service to our country
both in the military and here in the United States Congress.
I want to thank my colleagues for joining me here today to speak on
the rule, the Guard and Reserve GI Bill Parity Act, and the EVEST Act
and how we provide and care for our Nation's veterans.
We have an opportunity through passage of both bills to improve the
healthcare of our separating servicemembers and ensure our National
Guard and Reserve component members receive parity in their GI Bill
benefits to thank them for their service to

[[Page H30]]

our country. I again want to thank the Veterans' Affairs Committee for
their work along with Chairman Mark Takano and Representative Mike
Levin for sponsoring these important bills.
As we kick off 2022 and continue the House's work for the people, I
am glad we are starting with our Nation's veterans. I want to thank my
friend and colleague, Mr. Reschenthaler, and the numerous other
veterans who have served in this body for, again, service both in the
military and service here in the United States Congress. I have always
fought hard for our Nation's veterans throughout my time in Congress as
my way to show my gratitude for their service and fulfill my belief
that it is our country's responsibility to care for our Nation's
veterans after they have cared for us.
Madam Speaker, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the
previous question.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as
follows:
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 (H.R. 682) to encourage local educational agencies to
resume in-person instruction at elementary and secondary
schools, 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 Committee on
Education and Labor; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 9. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the
consideration of H.R. 682.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time,
and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam 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 203, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 2]

YEAS--219

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
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--203

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
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
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
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
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reed
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
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
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Young
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--10

Cartwright
Cline
Higgins (LA)
Huizenga
McClintock
Rogers (AL)
Rutherford
Waltz
Webster (FL)
Williams (TX)

{time} 1406

Mr. LONG changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
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

Adams (Brown (MD))
Auchincloss (Clark (MA))
Babin (Sessions)
Baird (Walorski)
Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Cicilline)
Beatty (Kaptur)
Bera (Kilmer)
Bishop (GA) (Carter (LA))
Blumenauer (Beyer)
Blunt Rochester (Brown (MD))
Bonamici (Kuster)
Bourdeaux (Clark (MA))
Boyle, Brendan F. (Swalwell)
Brownley (Kuster)
Bush (Bowman)
Butterfield (Kildee)
Cardenas (Soto)
Casten (Underwood)
Chu (Clark (MA))
Cohen (Beyer)
Cooper (Clark (MA))
Crawford (Stewart)
Crist (Soto)
DeFazio (Brown (MD))
DeGette (Brown (MD))
DeSaulnier (Beyer)
DesJarlais (Fleischmann)
Deutch (Rice (NY))
Doggett (Raskin)
Evans (Mfume)
Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA))
Gaetz (Boebert)
Garamendi (Sherman)
Gohmert (Weber (TX))
Gonzalez, Vicente (Correa)
Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
Grothman (Fitzgerald)
Hagedorn (Carl)
Herrera Beutler (Moore (UT))
Hudson (McHenry)
Jacobs (NY) (Garbarino)
Jayapal (Raskin)
Johnson (GA) (Raskin)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Jones (Jacobs (CA))
Kahele (Case)
Katko (Meijer)
Kim (CA) (Steel)
Kim (NJ) (Pallone)
Kind (Connolly)
Kinzinger (Meijer)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Lamborn (McHenry)
Langevin (Lynch)
Lawson (FL) (Soto)
Lee (CA) (Khanna)
Leger Fernandez (Clark (MA))
Lieu (Beyer)
Lofgren (Jeffries)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Timmons)
Maloney, Sean Patrick (Jeffries)
Matsui (Thompson (CA))
McBath (Trone)
McCaul (Ellzey)
McEachin (Wexton)
Meng (Kuster)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Beyer)
Nadler (Pallone)
Napolitano (Correa)
Ocasio-Cortez (Escobar)
Omar (Bowman)
Panetta (Kildee)
Payne (Pallone)
Pfluger (Mann)
Pingree (Cicilline)
Pocan (Raskin)
Porter (Wexton)
Pressley (Garcia (IL))
Price (NC) (Connolly)
Roybal-Allard (Correa)
Ruiz (Aguilar)
Ruppersberger (Trone)
Rush (Kaptur)

[[Page H31]]

Salazar (Gimenez)
Sarbanes (Raskin)
Schrier (Spanberger)
Sewell (Cicilline)
Sires (Pallone)
Smucker (Joyce (PA))
Speier (Escobar)
Stansbury (Jacobs (CA))
Stanton (Levin (CA))
Stefanik (Meuser)
Suozzi (Raskin)
Titus (Connolly)
Tlaib (Khanna)
Torres (NY) (Cicilline)
Van Drew (Res-
chenthaler)
Vela (Correa)
Waters (Takano)
Watson Coleman (Pallone)
Welch (McGovern)
Williams (GA) (Jacobs (CA))
Wilson (FL) (Cicilline)

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Dingell). The question is on the
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Madam 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 203, not voting 10, as follows:

[Roll No. 3]

YEAS--219

NAYS--203

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
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
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
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reed
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
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)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Young
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--10

Buck
Cartwright
Cline
Higgins (LA)
Huizenga
McClintock
Rogers (AL)
Rutherford
Webster (FL)
Williams (TX)

{time} 1431

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.

personal explanation

Mr. CLINE. Madam Speaker, I am not recorded because I was absent due
to illness. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall
No. 2 and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 3.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

____________________