[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

     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
     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

     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)
     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)
     Waltz (Mast)
     Waters (Takano)
     Watson Coleman (Pallone)
     Welch (McGovern)
     Williams (GA) (Jacobs (CA))
     Wilson (FL) (Cicilline)

                          ____________________