[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 37 (Tuesday, March 1, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H1187-H1199]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3967, HONORING OUR PROMISE TO 
                ADDRESS COMPREHENSIVE TOXICS ACT OF 2021

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 950 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 950

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3967) to 
     improve health care and benefits for veterans exposed to 
     toxic substances, 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 117-33, modified by the amendment printed in 
     part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as 
     amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The 
     previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, 
     as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 
     or their respective designees; (2) the further amendments 
     described in section 2 of this resolution; (3) the amendments 
     en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution; and (4) 
     one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2.  After debate pursuant to the first section of this 
     resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as 
     part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this 
     resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in 
     the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the 
     report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 
     the time specified in the report equally divided and 
     controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn 
     by the proponent at any time before the question is put 
     thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be 
     subject to a demand for division of the question.
       Sec. 3.  It shall be in order at any time after debate 
     pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the 
     chair of the Committee on 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. 4.  All points of order against the further amendments 
     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or 
     amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution 
     are waived.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ruiz). The gentleman from Massachusetts 
is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose 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. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I just want to state what 
I think we are all feeling here today, and that is that our prayers are 
with the Ukrainian people during this very perilous time.
  I want to acknowledge the unity displayed in the yesterday afternoon 
Rules Committee meeting when Democrats and Republicans came together 
and with one voice condemned Vladimir Putin's blatant aggression, his 
brutality, and the horrific actions the Russian state is now taking 
against the people of Ukraine. It was almost as if there was no 
distinction between political parties, and I think that is as it should 
be because Vladimir Putin is not a genius, as some have said, and he is 
not smart. He is a bully. He is a dictator.
  I cochair the Human Rights Commission in Congress. We have done 
countless hearings on his brutality against the Russian people. He 
jails people he disagrees with, he kills people he disagrees with, and 
he tortures people he disagrees with. He truly is an international 
pariah.
  After this latest action, he will be in the same category as Kim 
Jong-un in North Korea.
  So I just want to acknowledge the unity yesterday in the Rules 
Committee, and I want my Republican friends to know how grateful I was 
to have us all speak as one, especially during this difficult time. I 
know it is important not just for the Ukrainian people but in Russia 
that we are speaking as one because when people start to make excuses 
for the Russian dictator or start to find ways to praise him, that gets 
played on Russian TV and exaggerated in a way to indicate that somehow 
we are not unified here when I believe that we are.
  Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, 
House Resolution 950, providing for consideration of H.R. 3967, the 
Honoring Our PACT Act, under a structured rule. The rule self-executes 
a manager's amendment from Chairman Takano, provides 1 hour of general 
debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, and makes in order 28 
amendments. Lastly, the rule provides en bloc authority to Chairman 
Takano and provides one motion to recommit.
  Mr. Speaker, today we are here to stand up for our veterans. For a 
long time now, more and more have been speaking out--pleading--to be 
taken seriously about the health impacts of the toxic chemicals they 
dealt with while serving our country.
  Many encountered water at military bases that were contaminated with 
toxins, like harmful forever chemicals. They breathed in toxic fumes at 
burn pits where jet fuel was used to incinerate things like paint, 
petroleum, and plastic. And they were exposed with radiation when being 
tasked to clean up after nuclear tests, without being given the proper 
safety equipment.
  These were duties we demanded of them. And as a result, many veterans 
have been left to suffer with severe health challenges like cancers, 
infertility, and respiratory conditions. Many more have died, and 
others are just too sick to work.

                              {time}  1230

  We aren't talking about just a few people here, Mr. Speaker. We are 
talking about millions and millions of veterans who answered the call 
to serve.
  When they asked us to take care of them, for too long, they were just 
brushed aside not just by Congress but also by the Department of 
Defense, year after year after year.
  They were told the science wasn't clear. And they were told that 
providing the medical care that they needed and that they earned was 
just too high.
  Maybe some bureaucrat somewhere viewed denying veterans' disability 
claims as an exercise in frugality. Maybe drowning them in paperwork 
and setting an unreasonably high bar to get benefits just became the 
norm. I don't know.
  But that finally ends here and now, Mr. Speaker. The legislation 
included in this rule will cut the burdensome red tape. It will 
streamline the VA's review process, and it will get veterans exposed to 
toxins the care that they so badly need.
  H.R. 3967 tasks the VA with providing standardized trainings to 
better handle these claims, and it requires them to conduct outreach 
and provide resources to veterans exposed to deadly chemicals.
  Thanks to this bill, no longer will the burden to prove toxic 
exposure be placed on veterans themselves. And it is about damn time, 
Mr. Speaker.
  If this bill becomes law, it will help an estimated 1.4 million 
veterans by fiscal year 2031. That is something that we should all be 
proud of.
  The Honoring our PACT Act recognizes that just thanking our veterans 
for their service isn't enough. We must back up those words with 
action.
  Some may suggest that we should just maintain the status quo or make 
the scope of this bill much, much smaller. Let me remind them that 
Congress made the choice to spend trillions

[[Page H1188]]

of dollars over the last 20 years on sending our servicemembers into 
harm's way. Those decisions came at a cost of more than $6 trillion. 
That is trillion with a T.
  How in the world, Mr. Speaker, can anyone justify spending trillions 
of dollars on sending servicemembers to fight abroad just to nickel and 
dime them on healthcare costs once they return home? That is 
unconscionable.
  Taking care of toxic-exposed veterans is a cost of war, period. If 
anyone here has reservations about paying it, they should think long 
and hard before calling for our servicemembers to fight in another 
conflict halfway around the world.
  Our veterans put their lives on the line for us. They made sacrifices 
that are hard to even imagine. They fought to protect us, and they 
shouldn't have to then fight their country for the benefits that they 
have earned.
  Let's take care of our veterans. Let's pass this bill and the 
underlying legislation. And let's honor our veterans with more than 
just words.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to thank my good friend, the chairman of the Rules Committee, 
for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I would just like to take a moment to 
recognize someone who absolutely exemplifies the bipartisanship and 
camaraderie of the Rules Committee staff, and that is James Fitzella. 
He has worked on the Rules Committee for 7 years, and I am incredibly 
sad to say that he is leaving us for the private sector. His commitment 
to this institution and working across the aisle to get things done, 
that attitude will be truly missed.
  He served the Rules Committee with integrity, dedication, and 
unwavering optimism. Congressional staff are often the unsung heroes of 
this body and of any legislative accomplishment, and this is absolutely 
the truth in James' case.
  I know I speak for everybody on the Rules Committee when I extend my 
sincere gratitude to James for his public service and wish him our very 
best.
  I would also be remiss if I didn't recognize Jeff Gohringer, who is 
leaving the majority staff after being on the Rules Committee for 6 
years. I am sure Chairman McGovern would agree that we would be lost 
without the excellent work from our staff members.
  I know Jeff was an absolutely critical part of the team, so I would 
like to also extend my best wishes to Jeff in his future endeavors as 
well.
  Mr. Speaker, let's talk about the rule before us. The rule before us 
today makes in order H.R. 3967, the Honoring our PACT Act.
  As an Iraq war veteran, I believe supporting toxic-exposed veterans 
should be of the highest priority.
  Approximately 3.5 million veterans who served our Nation after the 
terrorist attacks of 9/11 were exposed to open-air burn pits and other 
toxins. Many of these troops now suffer from serious health issues, 
including rare and aggressive cancers, respiratory conditions, and 
other illnesses. Yet, they face significant barriers to obtaining help 
from the VA.
  These men and women put their lives on the line to defend our 
freedoms. We must provide them with the care and benefits they have 
earned.
  That is why I am disappointed that we are here considering H.R. 3967 
rather than voting on the Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act, a 
bipartisan bill that has already passed the Senate by unanimous 
consent. If we took up that bill immediately, it could be signed into 
law by the end of the week, ensuring swift delivery of lifesaving care 
for toxic-exposed veterans.
  Instead, here we are, prioritizing a bill that must still undergo a 
lengthy analysis process and many legislative considerations. We also 
have to look at the impact on the current VA and those that are getting 
benefits now from the VA, and the backlog that exists in our VA system.
  Republicans want to quickly deliver help to veterans suffering from 
toxic exposure. The best way to do that is to bring the Senate-passed 
Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act to the House floor.

  Prioritizing H.R. 3967 will only slow down the process and delay 
implementation of toxic exposure benefits. I, therefore, urge my 
colleagues to oppose this rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to thank the gentleman for his comments. I just want to say 
that he is right. We could probably pass the very short bill that the 
Republicans have put forward, H.R. 6659, and send it to the President. 
But our bill, which is actually more than 80 pages, goes into much more 
depth and covers a lot more.
  Republicans want to do just a little bit. We want to actually solve 
the challenges that so many of our veterans face.
  By the way, Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the Statement of 
Administration Policy, which states that President Biden would 
basically sign the bill we are discussing here today into law.

                   Statement of Administration Policy


H.R. 3967--Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) 
           Act--Rep. Takano, D-California and 100 cosponsors

       The Administration strongly supports H.R. 3967, which would 
     expand veterans' access to health care and benefits to 
     address the health effects of harmful environmental exposures 
     that occurred during military service.
       The President believes that our Nation has only one truly 
     sacred obligation: to properly prepare and equip our service 
     members when we send them into harm's way and to care for 
     them and their families when they return home. Far too often, 
     military service comes with a cost, and we owe it to our 
     veterans and their families to address these consequences 
     comprehensively. Unfortunately, it has taken decades to 
     understand the deleterious effects of environmental 
     exposures--leaving too many without access to the benefits 
     and services they need.
       H.R. 3967 would make changes to the definitions for who is 
     eligible for VA health care based on presumed toxic exposure 
     during military service, including from bum pits, radiation, 
     or other environmental conditions. H.R. 3967 would also make 
     changes to the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA's) process 
     for determining presumptive service connection and mandate 
     several research studies related to military related 
     environmental exposures. It would also establish new 
     registries related to exposures, which would provide new data 
     on the long-term impacts from environmental exposures. H.R. 
     3697 also would allow a Federal cause of action related to 
     contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and 
     establish training requirements for health providers, and 
     require an outreach plan to educate veterans about their 
     eligibility for benefits and services related to toxic 
     exposure.
       The Administration looks forward to working with the 
     Congress to enact this legislation and ensuring it is 
     effectively implemented. We must address the toxic legacy of 
     environmental exposures sustained by veterans during their 
     military service and fulfill our sacred obligation to our 
     veterans, their families, caregivers, and survivors. We must 
     also ensure that VA has the resources it needs to implement 
     this legislation.
  Mr. McGOVERN. We have an opportunity today to move a bill forward 
that will pass the House, even if many Republicans will not vote for 
it; send it to the Senate; get them to act on it; and send to the 
President a bill for him to sign that will actually do the job and be 
more than just a press release.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the gentlewoman 
from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of today's rule.
  As we work with President Biden to build a better America, we must 
honor our debt to our veterans for their service and sacrifice on 
behalf of our country.
  There are obvious risks and sacrifices in military service: the 
physical and mental challenges, time away from loved ones, and the 
possibility that one may be called upon to make the ultimate sacrifice 
for one's country. But there are hidden risks and sacrifices as well, 
and our failure to address them means that, for too long, we have not 
met the needs of veterans who have been exposed to toxic substances 
during the course of their military service, as they have suffered from 
chronic respiratory illness, cancer, and a variety of other maladies 
later in life.
  The most well-known example of this is Agent Orange. It took years of 
veterans' advocacy for the government to acknowledge and provide 
services and treatment for injuries caused by Agent Orange.
  Even as the connections between illness and exposure to Agent Orange

[[Page H1189]]

have multiplied, new links have been established between exposure to 
other toxic substances during military service and chronic and life-
threatening diseases. The burn pits used at military installations 
across the globe are a more recent example.
  The Honoring our PACT bill enacts long-overdue support for over 3 
million veterans suffering from illnesses due to exposure to toxins and 
radiation during military service. This comprehensive bill will cut red 
tape to getting veterans benefits, allowing veterans exposed to 
chemical, airborne, and radioactive hazards to receive full health 
benefits to treat illnesses related to that exposure.
  We owe it to our vets to pass this bill and provide them with the 
benefits they deserve.
  Mr. Speaker, I also want to highlight my amendment to the Honoring 
our PACT Act, which will provide additional funding to ensure that the 
VA can implement the new benefits that this bill will authorize.
  I strongly encourage all of my colleagues to support the rule, the 
PACT Act, and my amendment when they are considered on the House floor.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Just a quick point of rebuttal. I would just remind my good friend 
from Massachusetts that passage of H.R. 3967 is not guaranteed in the 
Senate.
  We don't have that concern when we are talking about the Health Care 
for Burn Pit Veterans Act, which has already passed the Senate by 
unanimous consent. We could pass that today here on the floor this 
week. It could be signed into law this week. Doing anything other is 
simply to delay assistance to the veterans who need it most.
  Now, to the topic of Ukraine. In the wake of Vladimir Putin's brutal, 
brutal invasion of Ukraine, the world is crying out for an alternative 
to Russian energy. Pennsylvania, and the rest of America's heartland, 
could provide that alternative.
  But President Biden and Congressional Democrats refuse to let that 
happen. They would rather promote their radical Green New Deal agenda 
and continue buying oil from Putin's ruthless regime. They would rather 
do that than unleash domestic energy production, and that includes 
Pennsylvania coal, oil, and natural gas industries. They would rather 
do that than lower gas and heating prices for American families and 
strengthen our national security through becoming an energy exporter.
  Republicans, on the other hand, actually want to make America energy 
independent once again, just like we were in the last administration.
  That is why, Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will 
personally offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider the 
American Energy Independence from Russia Act.
  Mr. 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. Here to explain the amendment is one of the bill's 
authors, the Natural Resources Committee ranking member and my good 
friend. I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, as we witness an evil empire trying to 
remake itself, I reflect on Mrs. Bolin's first grade class in my tiny 
rural school in the heartland of America and, as a 6-year-old living 
during the Cold War, trying to understand how crouching under a desk as 
part of our nuclear attack drill would save anyone. The simple truth 
is, it wouldn't.
  Crouching, hiding, and being intimidated only emboldens Communists. 
Standing up strong is how you beat the evils of communism.
  Last year, I had the great experience of standing at the Brandenburg 
Gate in Berlin, where Ronald Reagan spoke those famous words in 1987: 
``Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.''
  Remarkably, less than 2\1/2\ years later, that wall came down, and by 
the end of 1991, the evil Soviet empire had dissolved. The Soviet Union 
was gone, but the seeds of the evil in the Communist government of 
Russia and other parts of the world still remain.
  As brave Ukrainians are fighting a David and Goliath type battle of 
survival, we must stand strong and create a long-term plan to crush the 
Russian energy grip on Europe and our allies. Energy revenue feeds the 
Russian beast, and we have the resources and the technology to starve 
it to death.

  Only a few years ago, the United States became energy independent. 
But my, how quickly things have changed.
  On his first day in office, President Biden canceled the Keystone XL 
pipeline that could have reduced our reliance on Russian oil. But it is 
not just Keystone. All U.S. pipeline projects are being held up, and 
Russian hackers even attacked our existing pipelines with no recourse.
  A week into office, the Biden administration doubled down on their 
anti-American energy agenda, ordering an indefinite freeze on new oil 
and gas leasing and, to this day, has issued zero new leases on Federal 
lands or waters.
  President Biden's policies are choosing Russian oil and Russian jobs 
over American energy and our own national security. In fact, in 2021, 
U.S. imports from Russia reached an 11-year high, and we are sending 
tens of millions of our dollars every day to fund Putin's war machine.
  Why are we doing this to ourselves when we have so many resources at 
our fingertips?
  Our bill is simple, and it stands up to Russian aggression by going 
after their major source of funding. It will empower U.S. domestic 
production by immediately approving the Keystone XL pipeline; by 
restarting the oil and gas leasing program on Federal lands and waters; 
by requiring President Biden to submit an energy security plan to 
Congress; by unleashing liquefied natural gas exports to displace 
Russian gas abroad; and, finally, requiring drawdowns from the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve to be replaced by increased Federal oil and 
gas leasing.
  I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand up strong and 
join Mrs. McMorris Rodgers and me in cosponsoring the legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 
15 seconds.
  Mr. WESTERMAN. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question 
so that our legislation can be considered immediately by the House of 
Representatives.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we begin on a note of basically saying that it was 
wonderful that we were all united in standing up to Vladimir Putin and 
speaking with one voice. I think we need to kind of amend that at this 
point.
  Let me just say that we need to stand with the people of Ukraine. We 
need to stand with President Zelensky, who has had the guts to stand up 
to Vladimir Putin, but also to the former President who tried to extort 
him and who withheld essential defensive military aid in exchange for 
trying to get from him some manufactured dirt on the President's son. 
Let's be a little bit careful about what charges we are throwing around 
here.
  Again, I am sorry that my Republican colleagues are feeling the need 
to come here and play partisan politics in the middle of a global 
crisis, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
  Yet, for all their criticism on how this administration is handling 
the crisis in Ukraine, they have been all over the map on what they 
would do differently. They talk about energy independence, yet they are 
the ones who have consistently voted against and opposed green and 
renewable energy here at home, which is the fastest way to achieve real 
energy independence.
  I include in the Record a February 23 Washington Post opinion piece 
entitled ``Republicans say Biden is `weak' on Ukraine. What would they 
do differently?'' By the way, just a spoiler alert, the answer is: They 
have no idea.

               [From the Washington Post, Feb. 23, 2022]

  Opinion: Republicans Say Biden is `Weak' on Ukraine. What Would They 
                            Do Differently?

                           (By Paul Waldman)

        There was a time in American history when foreign crises 
     were considered a moment for unity. We said ``politics stops 
     at

[[Page H1190]]

     the water's edge,'' meaning that partisanship had to be put 
     aside so the country could show the world a united front, and 
     both parties usually agreed.
        The public acted that way, too. Presidents' approval 
     ratings would rise whenever we found ourselves in any sort of 
     conflict with a foreign adversary; this was called the 
     ``rally 'round the flag effect,'' and it occurred even when 
     things went badly. For instance, President Jimmy Carter's 
     approval ratings shot up by almost 30 points after Americans 
     were taken hostage in Tehran.
        But no more. Even the most straightforward of foreign 
     policy challenges become yet another opportunity for the 
     opposition to say the president is a failure and a villain, 
     which is what Republicans are doing now as we confront 
     Russian leader Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine.
        But that doesn't mean the Republican Party can decide what 
     it believes.
        One of Donald Trump's legacies is that in some GOP 
     quarters, Putin is now regarded as akin to a hero. That 
     starts with Trump himself, who reacted to the invasion by 
     calling Putin's aggression ``genius,'' ``smart,'' and 
     ``savvy.'' Meanwhile, Fox News host Tucker Carlson has been 
     so relentless in passing on the Kremlin's perspective that 
     Russian state TV regularly airs clips from his show.
        That exacerbates the profoundly unsettled nature of 
     contemporary foreign policy thinking in the GOP. The right 
     has struggled to find a singular voice over the past 15 years 
     or so, once the thrill of the Global War on Terror ran 
     aground in the disaster of the Iraq War.
        In the 2016 presidential primaries, Republican candidates 
     struggled over whether and how to call the war a mistake, and 
     where that would leave the party's traditional hawkishness. 
     Then Trump took over, with less a foreign policy doctrine 
     than a shifting collection of impulses, including a distrust 
     of ambitious adventures and an obsequiousness toward Putin 
     that can be described only as pathetic.
        So how should a Republican hawk respond to the current 
     crisis? The answer is clear: Just make it about President 
     Biden.
        The GOP critique is both blessedly free of substance and 
     plays right into the anxieties about manhood that determine 
     approximately 75 percent of everything Republicans do these 
     days.
        So whether you're a Putin fanboy or a cold warrior, you 
     can agree that the real problem here is weakness. Why is this 
     crisis happening? Because Biden is weak. What should America 
     do now? Not be weak, because Biden is weak. Is your favorite 
     baseball team going to win the pennant this year? They would, 
     if Biden wasn't so weak.
        ``Biden weakness invited Russian aggression, Republicans 
     say,'' reads a Fox News headline. Biden is ``the weakest 
     president that America has ever had,'' says former Trump 
     administration ambassador to United Nations Nikki Haley. ``No 
     one fears this pathetic old geezer'' says the National 
     Review.
        The House Republican Conference tweeted a picture of 
     Biden, with the caption ``This is what weakness on the world 
     stage looks like.'' Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York, the 
     third-ranking Republican in the House, tweeted, ``Biden is 
     unfit to serve as Commander-in-Chief. He has consistently 
     given into Putin's demands and shown nothing but weakness.''
        Though some Republicans say the sanctions at the center of 
     Biden's strategy should have started earlier, you'll have a 
     hard time finding one who can specify in any detail what 
     Biden's ``weakness'' toward Russia has consisted of to this 
     point, nor what a ``strong'' president would be doing 
     instead. Mounting a ground invasion to take Moscow? Launching 
     nuclear weapons? What?
        If the answer is ``What Biden is doing, but, you know, 
     more,'' that's not very persuasive. But as far as they're 
     concerned, ``strength'' isn't something presidents 
     demonstrate with their actions; it's more of an ineffable 
     quality that Republican presidents possess by definition 
     while Democratic presidents lack.
        Consider Trump. Short of literally getting down on his 
     hands and knees to shine Putin's shoes, there's almost no way 
     you could imagine Trump having been weaker toward Putin than 
     he actually was. Trump continually praised the Russian 
     dictator, dismissed his misdeeds and went out of his way to 
     denigrate NATO--just as Putin would want.
        It culminated in the utterly disgraceful display at the 
     2018 summit in Helsinki, when Trump was asked about Russian 
     interference in the 2016 election and declared he was taking 
     Putin's word over the analysis of U.S. intelligence agencies, 
     because ``President Putin was extremely strong and powerful 
     in his denial today.''
        It was so embarrassing that even Republicans were shocked; 
     then-Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee said Trump ``made us look 
     like a pushover.'' Sen. John McCain called it ``one of the 
     most disgraceful performances by an American president in 
     memory.'' Nevertheless, today Republicans claim that when it 
     came to Russia, Trump was a paragon of strength.
        And however this crisis ends, they will insist that 
     everything would have worked out far better if only Biden 
     were stronger. Whatever that means.
        To be clear, everyone has the right to criticize the 
     president; having politics end at the water's edge brings its 
     own problems. Nor is there anything wrong with intraparty 
     differences. But rather than a lively debate over alternative 
     courses of action, what we're seeing now from the GOP is 
     mostly juvenile name-calling.
        Not that we had much reason to expect anything different.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Ms. ROSS. Mr. Speaker, today, thousands of veterans struggle with the 
health effects of exposure to hazardous substances during their 
training or deployment. Congress has an obligation to provide these men 
and women with the resources, including healthcare services, they need 
to live with dignity.
  The Honoring our PACT Act fulfills this duty by streamlining VA 
processes to receive care for toxic exposure-related illnesses, 
reducing the burden on all veterans. It also takes preemptive measures 
to ensure that the VA conducts research to track and identify emerging 
toxins. This will ensure that we are proactive in our efforts to 
safeguard the health of future veterans.
  I am particularly pleased that this bill includes the Camp Lejeune 
Justice Act, which gives our servicemembers the opportunity to seek 
compensation for exposure to contaminated water at Marine Corps Base 
Camp Lejeune in North Carolina.
  For decades, marines and their families stationed at this base 
unknowingly consumed, bathed in, and used water containing harmful 
chemicals and industrial solvents. As a result of their service, many 
veterans and their family members now suffer from serious medical 
conditions, including cancer and birth defects.
  For years, North Carolina law prevented these individuals from 
seeking relief in court. The Camp Lejeune Justice Act rights this 
wrong, bringing long overdue justice to affected veterans.
  The Honoring our PACT Act also creates a registry of veterans exposed 
to PFAS, or forever chemicals, from use of fire extinguishing agents in 
military installations. I proposed an amendment to this section with my 
colleague from North Carolina, Representative Rouzer, which will 
require the Department of Defense to study additional sources of PFAS 
exposure on military bases and make recommendations to expand 
eligibility for toxic exposure benefits accordingly. I am grateful that 
this amendment was made in order. We owe our Nation's veterans an 
immeasurable debt for putting their lives on the line to defend our 
freedom.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the rule and the underlying bill.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one of the best ways that we can support the Ukrainian 
people, and President Zelensky by extension, is by ensuring that we 
have a steady supply of American energy and that we are supplying our 
allies in Eastern Europe. This will also deny Putin a major revenue 
stream.
  Alarmingly, U.S. oil imports from Russia reached an 11-year high in 
2021, accounting for more than 10 percent of the total U.S. crude oil 
and petroleum product imports.
  Here to explain why that should concern all Americans is my good 
friend, my mentor, the ranking member of the Rules Committee,   Tom 
Cole.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. 
Cole).
  Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for 
yielding.
  It is imperative that we defeat the previous question so that we can 
bring up the American Energy Independence from Russia Act for immediate 
consideration.
  Mr. Speaker, last week, Vladimir Putin sent shock waves around the 
world by launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Though much of the 
planet has rallied to support Ukraine in their heroic defense, Putin 
has begun to use his most potent weapon to threaten Western 
democracies. That weapon is dependence of much of the world on Russian 
oil and gas.
  Not even the United States is immune from this national security 
threat. In 2021, according to the American Fuel and Petrochemical 
Manufacturers, the United States imported an average of 209,000 barrels 
of crude oil per day and 500,000 barrels per day of other petroleum 
products from Russia. It is unconscionable that we are still this 
reliant on imports from authoritarian countries like Russia. This 
reliance on bad actors for our energy supply needs poses a clear and 
present

[[Page H1191]]

danger to the security of the United States, just as it poses a threat 
to the security of Western and Central Europe.
  At any time, Vladimir Putin could choose to retaliate on the dozens 
of countries that have imposed sanctions on him and his regime by 
simply turning off the spigot. Gas prices in the United States would 
undoubtedly increase, even more than they currently are, and much of 
Europe will be plunged into the cold in the depths of winter. That is a 
potent leverage for a dictator like Putin to have. We must counter this 
by restoring America's energy independence and helping our friends and 
allies to do the same.
  Unfortunately, when President Biden took office, he immediately took 
steps that ultimately harmed America's energy independence and made us 
more reliant on foreign energy imports. That included his decision to 
cancel the Keystone XL pipeline, which was expected to transport 
830,000 barrels of oil every day, and his decision to impose a 
moratorium on new oil and gas leasing on Federal lands, including my 
home State of Oklahoma. President Biden's actions have made America 
less energy secure and more vulnerable to foreign threats.
  This is why we need the American Energy Independence from Russia Act 
more than ever. This bill would immediately approve the Keystone XL 
pipeline, would restart oil and gas leasing on Federal lands and 
waters, and would expand liquid natural gas exports at a time when 
Europe needs them the most. It would ensure an all-of-the-above energy 
policy that paves the way for American energy independence, and it 
would rightly end the ongoing vilification of America's oil and gas 
industry.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is simply common sense. With one bill, we can 
open up new sources of energy and reduce or eliminate imports of 
foreign sources of energy. Above all, by advancing this bill, we can 
improve the security of the United States, and weaken Vladimir Putin's 
most potent weapon in one fell swoop.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to respond, because I like 
the gentleman too much.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Rhode Island 
(Mr. Cicilline).
  Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I 
would like to begin by thanking Chairman Takano for his incredible 
leadership on this legislation and tireless work on behalf of veterans 
all across our country.
  H.R. 3967, the Honoring our PACT Act of 2021, recognizes the full 
range of military toxic exposure, from contaminated water at military 
bases and airborne hazards from burn pits, to radiation from atomic 
testing. It upholds and recognizes the promise we made to every 
servicemember that we would care for them should they become wounded or 
sick while risking everything to protect this country.
  This legislation is long overdue, and it is the least we can do for 
the more than 3.5 million veterans who are currently suffering without 
the healthcare they need and deserve.
  These veterans and their loved ones should never have been forced to 
come to Congress demanding that we and the VA provide the care they 
have so clearly earned, which is why I am glad that this bill ensures 
that future veterans will be able to get the help they need without 
waiting decades for help by streamlining the VA's toxic exposure 
presumptions.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this bipartisan 
bill.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, one in six American adults reported they cannot pay 
their full energy bill in the last 12 months. That is appalling. It is 
especially appalling given the fact that at our fingertips we have an 
abundance of energy. In Pennsylvania alone, we have oil, gas, and clean 
coal. We should be unleashing the American energy sector.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico 
(Ms. Herrell), who is here to talk more about this.
  Ms. HERRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so 
that the rule can be amended to consider H.R. 6858, the American Energy 
Independence from Russia Act offered by my colleagues, Ranking Member 
McMorris Rodgers and Ranking Member Westerman.
  The Biden administration has taken seemingly every step possible 
since taking office to cripple the energy dominance agenda of the Trump 
administration that saw America become an energy-independent Nation for 
the first time in decades.
  In New Mexico, the Biden administration has yet to hold a lease sale 
since taking office, which is a direct violation of Federal law. By not 
holding a lease sale, the Biden administration is robbing the citizens 
of New Mexico of revenues that could be used to improve vital services 
like our public education system.
  By artificially reducing our energy production, we are only 
increasing Russia's power in the world. Since the beginning of 2020, 
imports of Russian oil into the U.S. have increased by nearly 300,000 
barrels a day. This is a direct result of the Biden administration 
flipping the switch and taking disastrous executive actions that 
prevent energy development here at home. Our increased dependency on 
foreign sources of energy is causing energy prices for our constituents 
to skyrocket. Gas prices are up over 50 percent, which is hitting our 
constituents hard every time they go to the pump and every time they 
buy groceries or heat their homes.
  If we get back to producing energy at the capacity that we are 
capable of, our energy supply will be secure, gas prices will fall, and 
economic outlook will vastly improve. Advancing innovation and 
increasing U.S. production is the only effective way to achieve 
American prosperity and reduce global reliance on Russia.
  By accepting the status quo of being an energy-dependent Nation, my 
Democratic colleagues are willfully weakening both our national and 
economic security.
  H.R. 6858 will change the course of American energy policy and bring 
back the era of American energy dominance. I urge my colleagues to 
oppose the previous question and support the American Energy 
Independence from Russia Act.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, two quick things. One, my friends are touting this 
whatever it is, this all-of-the-above approach to dealing with our 
energy challenges. But I am looking at this proposal, and it just seems 
it is the same old, same old, fossil fuels, fossil fuels, fossil fuels. 
I wonder who wrote this. I wonder where this came from.
  Why isn't there any mention of green energy or clean energy or solar 
energy or renewable energy, any of the things that, quite frankly, the 
majority of the American people want us to do? Why isn't it here?
  Well, I will make a suggestion to people who are tuning in: Follow 
the money. Follow the money. This is Big Oil's wish list. If you want 
to continue to find ourselves in circumstances, whenever there is an 
international crisis, that we have to kowtow to Big Oil, then listen to 
them.
  But on the Democratic side, we want to wean ourselves off of the same 
old, same old. And ``all-of-the-above,'' by the way, is not just oil, 
oil, oil.
  The second thing I want to say is that my friends on the other side 
always love to talk about how much they support our veterans. Well, we 
actually have a bill here that will support our veterans. It is a big 
deal. You all received a letter from all the leading veterans' service 
organizations of this country saying to please pass this bill.
  They don't want to talk about it. They say: Oh, support this 
minuscule bill, the alternative that we are putting up here, by the 
way, which our veterans' organizations do not prefer.
  If you really want to help our veterans, if you are sincere about 
what you say when you say let's support our veterans, then how about 
voting that way. Talk is cheap around here. How about putting your vote 
where your rhetoric is and supporting this underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. 
Welch).

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, we ask our veterans to serve, young men and

[[Page H1192]]

women who sign up, serve in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and they are going 
knowing that they are representing us, and they will take on the 
challenges and the dangers of combat. They do that willingly.
  But why is it that we create an extra hazard within our control by 
creating these burn pits and assign men and women to be breathing that 
toxic air? It is not right. This legislation, Honoring our PACT Act, 
finally acknowledges that that was wrong and that we have a duty to 
every one of those veterans.
  In Vermont--and I know, Mr. Speaker, it is in your State as well; you 
have been a leader on this--there has been tragedy with cancers to 
young men and women, fathers, moms.
  In our State, Pat Cram and June Heston both lost their wonderful 
husbands, Sergeant Major Michael Cram and Brigadier General Michael 
Heston, to cancer. Those women have started a movement in Vermont that 
has supported this legislation that finally is going to do for these 
veterans what we did for the Vietnam veterans with Agent Orange and 
establish a presumption that this was combat related. It is overdue, 
and it is necessary.
  So I thank all of the men and women on both sides of the aisle who 
are standing up to acknowledge that our obligation is to take care of 
the warrior and his or her family after they have served us so well.
  This is overdue legislation. Let's pass it by unanimous consent.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, just three quick points in rebuttal. 
First and foremost, I myself am a veteran of the Iraq war. I was there 
for 6 months, actually, in 2009.
  If we would just pass the Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act that 
the Senate passed by unanimous consent, we could pass that and put it 
on the President's desk at the end of this week. There is nothing 
standing in our way except the Democratic Party on this.
  Also, I would just remind my good friend from Massachusetts that my 
motion does not prevent the House from considering the Honoring our 
PACT Act. It doesn't. It simply amends the rule to also allow for 
consideration of the American Energy Independence from Russia Act.
  I am sure everyone on the other side of the aisle would agree that 
lowering gas and heating prices for all American families and ending 
our dependence on Russian oil is of the utmost importance. In fact, I 
just got an alert that a gentleman from my colleague's State General 
Assembly just put forward a bill on the floor of the General Assembly 
of Massachusetts to stop the importation of Russian oil.
  Sixty percent of the natural gas our country imports actually goes to 
Massachusetts. People don't realize that. But if New York would get out 
of the way and allow Pennsylvania to have a pipeline from Pennsylvania 
to New England, the New Englanders wouldn't need dirty Russian oil. 
They could use Pennsylvania natural gas. But I digress. We can and 
should find the time this week to add the American Energy Independence 
from Russia Act to our agenda.
  Lastly, ad nauseam, I have heard bill after bill after bill from the 
leftists across the other side of the aisle on electric vehicles, and 
yet again I am reminded that the Republicans are the real party of 
science because if you look at the actual science, an electric car will 
generate just 23 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than a 
gasoline-powered car.
  In fact, if you were to take every gas-powered car on the face of the 
planet and get rid of it, it would only mean a mere 1.8 percent decline 
in total emissions. This is fake science. We have alchemy and 
chemistry. We have astrology and we have astronomy. We have the 
Democrat Party and we have the Republican Party.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota 
(Mr. Armstrong), my good friend, to talk more about this.
  Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, my hometown of Dickinson, North Dakota, 
is in the southern part of the Bakken oil patch. It is where we 
unleashed this revolutionary technology of shale hydraulic fracturing, 
horizontal drilling, and producing natural gas. But you know what else? 
Eighteen miles away from my childhood hometown is an ethanol plant. 
Seven miles to the west is a biodiesel plant. Thirteen miles south, 
fourteen miles south is the largest wind farm in North Dakota 
generation of Brady I and Brady II. About 80 miles to the northeast we 
are figuring out how to strip rare earth metals out of lignite coal so 
we can be less dependent on Russia and China in all of those issues.
  The people who work and live in my communities grow all the cereal 
grains, and the by-products from the ethanol plant are fed as feedstock 
to our cattle industry, so I don't need lectures from anyone on all-of-
the-above energy, particularly when the left's version of all-of-the-
above energy is solely wind, solar, rainbows, unicorns.
  Here is the dirty little secret: The world is going to burn more 
carbon in 2 years whether we shut down domestic production or not, and 
this naive and idealistic viewpoint that if we shut down American 
industry, American ingenuity, then the rest of the world will follow 
along is fundamental differential to the fact we are watching it play 
out in real time.
  Our strategic adversaries and, indeed, our enemies will fill this 
space--that is the fact--because the world needs these products, and 
they are going to continue to utilize these products. But at least 
welcome this: We are going to do nothing to reduce global carbon 
emissions because the atmosphere doesn't recognize countries' borders.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question, 
allow this to go back, and let us do what we were doing so well until 
the last year, developing American energy, allowing it to be utilized, 
rather than energy from our adversaries.
  I can tell you one last thing, and then I will close. In the last 
year, we haven't had a Federal lease sale in North Dakota. 
Congressional Democrats have tried to ban the transport of liquefied 
natural gas by rail, and so let's be honest about how we got here so we 
can get there in the future.

  Mr. McGOVERN. It is amazing, Mr. Speaker, we are here talking about a 
major veterans bill, and the gentleman couldn't even bring himself to 
mention veterans once in his statement.
  To the gentleman from Pennsylvania, talking about taking all cars off 
the road, who is talking about that? I will tell the gentleman that if 
we go ahead with what he wants to do on the Keystone pipeline, that is 
equivalent to adding another 5 million cars on the road. That is what 
that would mean to our environment.
  My Republican friends, if they want to think small when it comes to 
veterans, have at it. Veterans' organizations are watching. We are 
hearing from veterans all across the country who want this bill passed. 
They want us to pass this comprehensive bill. We will do that.
  If you want to do your minuscule bill, you have a substitute, you can 
vote for it. It is in your substitute. We want to actually do something 
in a comprehensive way to meet the concerns that our veterans have 
expressed for years and years and years. If you want to take a pass, go 
ahead. That is what you do on our most important issues. This probably 
is no exception.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the 
rule for the Honoring our PACT Act, which includes the Camp Lejeune 
Justice Act. This legislation would allow marines and their families 
who were exposed to contaminated drinking water at Camp Lejeune over 34 
years--34 years of neglect and denial--finally to pursue their long 
overdue day in court.
  Toxicity rates in Camp Lejeune's water were staggering. They ranged 
from 240 to 3,400 times what is permitted by today's national safety 
standards. This greatly increased the risk of cancers, adverse birth 
outcomes, and other medical tragedies. And now many veterans and their 
families are suffering from no legal recourse.
  The Camp Lejeune Justice Act will correct an anomaly in North 
Carolina law by providing a legal pathway for affected veterans and 
their families to pursue fair compensation, which would already be 
permitted had their exposure occurred anywhere else except the State of 
North Carolina.
  Today's effort is a culmination of the decades-long bipartisan 
campaign to

[[Page H1193]]

provide servicemembers affected an opportunity for justice long 
deferred. First by Congressman Brad Miller and Senator Burr, as well as 
the late Congressman Walter Jones.
  I am also grateful for the tireless advocacy of the affected marines 
and their families, the sustained efforts of diverse groups of 
supporters, and my congressional colleagues, including the bill's 
sponsors, Congressmen Matt Cartwright and Greg Murphy.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the rule for this Honoring our 
PACT Act and with it the adoption of the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, a 
critical step to honor the promises we have made to our veterans.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), my good friend and the Republican whip.
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania for 
yielding. First of all, opposing the previous question, the bill that 
is going to be coming up later is a very partisan bill. We could 
actually bring up the Senate bill for our veterans that passed the 
Senate unanimously. Imagine in these times when a bill passed the 
Senate unanimously, and Democrats in the majority won't even bring that 
bill up, which clearly is the way to help our veterans.
  But there is something more important that we can do today, dealing 
with the crisis in Ukraine. There are many crises in America, but in 
Ukraine Putin is running roughshod over the people of Ukraine, carpet 
bombing cities. One of the ways he is fueling his war is with oil that 
America and other countries are buying because President Biden took 
American energy off the table.
  There are very specific things President Biden does that if we reject 
this previous question, we can turn around and bring up this 
legislation by my colleagues, the gentlewoman from Washington (Mrs. 
Rodgers) and the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), that 
actually open up American energy and take leverage away from Putin and 
also take billions of dollars away from Putin that he is using to 
finance the war.

  Let's talk about a few of those very specific things we can do with 
rejecting the previous question to bring up this important energy 
legislation. When President Biden came in office, he did a number of 
very specific things to undermine American energy. Not energy all over 
the world. He is begging OPEC and Russia to produce more oil. Think how 
tone deaf that is, begging Russia to produce more oil. Let's open up 
our American energy reserves that President Biden shut off. Let's 
approve LNG exports so we can help Europe get energy from America, not 
from Russia. President Biden hasn't approved a single LNG facility in 
over a year or pipeline. Let's get rid of the red tape that they are 
using. Do you know that Russia right now is making $700 million a day 
by selling oil to America, EU, and U.K.? $700 million a day to fund his 
war against Ukraine. Let's end it by opening up American energy 
reserves. Reverse all these radical policies by President Biden that 
are emboldening Putin. Let's reject this.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the gentleman that 
President Biden didn't try to extort President Zelensky by withholding 
money to get him to manufacture dirt on one of his political opponents. 
But I find this a little bit comical.
  My Republican friends say that they want to bring up this Senate 
bill, which is much narrower than what we are doing right now, yet they 
want you to defeat the previous question not so they can bring up that 
Senate bill, but so they can bring up this giveaway to the oil 
companies. Again, follow the money. Follow the money. This is a bill 
that was written in some back room in some oil company and, quite 
frankly, it is unconscionable. They never let a crisis go to waste.
  Today we are talking about trying to help our veterans, and it would 
be nice if on this one issue of helping our veterans we could all come 
together, but I guess that is asking too much.
  I now yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Cartwright).
  Mr. CARTWRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I could not be prouder that the Honoring 
our PACT Act includes my bill, the Camp Lejeune Justice Act, and let me 
tell you why I wrote this bill. Between 1953 and 1987, two generations 
of marines and marine families and employees at Camp Lejeune were 
poisoned by the water at Camp Lejeune. Poisoned by water that by 
today's standards in health, 240 to 3,400 times the level of acceptable 
toxins was in that water. This was water that the marines drank. It was 
in the mess halls. It was water they showered with. It was water that 
they drank out from the water buffaloes and filled their canteens from 
while on exercise. This is water that was poisoned, and it not only 
poisoned the water of marines but also the marine families and the 
employees at Camp Lejeune.
  Mr. Speaker, when marines volunteer for Marine duty, they know they 
are up for something dangerous. They know that the Marines pride 
themselves on being the first to fight. They know they are going to be 
in harm's way at some point, but when they went to Camp Lejeune for 
combat training, they didn't realize what their real enemy was going to 
be. It was going to be leukemia, bladder cancer, kidney cancer, 
aplastic anemia, liver cancer, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin's 
lymphoma, Parkinson's disease. Not only the marines, but their families 
were subject to this from the water.
  I would like to thank the people who helped put together this bill,   
David Price, Greg Murphy, the Reverend William Barber, the veterans 
service organizations, 151 Republicans and Democrats who came together 
on this bill.
  Folks, at long last, all of these great marines, these great 
Americans will get a shot at justice. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the PQ, 
``yes'' on the rule, and let's vote ``yes'' on the Honoring our PACT 
Act and the Camp Lejeune Justice Act.

                              {time}  1315

  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, just one point in rebuttal to my good 
friend from Massachusetts: Republicans do support toxic-exposed 
veterans. Yesterday, I personally offered an amendment in the Rules 
Committee to bring up the Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act. By the 
way, that passed unanimously in the Senate. We could again be doing 
that right now. That doesn't stop us from debating the current bill. We 
can walk and chew gum at the same time, but the only thing that is 
delaying getting the Senate version of this bill on to the President's 
desk at the end of this week is the Democratic Party. We could pass 
that bill this week.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. 
Graves) to talk about oil and gas and energy issues.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania for yielding.
  I just heard my friends on the other side say, let's follow the 
money. Let's follow the money.
  Mr. Speaker, right now under this administration, we have gone from 
buying approximately 76,000 barrels of crude oil a day to surging to 
198,000 barrels of crude oil every single day. If you add in other 
petroleum products, Mr. Speaker, let's follow the money. The additional 
$22 million a day that we are giving to Vladimir Putin, if you add it 
all up, we are giving him $7 billion a year. $7 billion a year that 
goes toward the $65 billion Vladimir Putin puts towards military 
spending every single year.
  Yes, let's follow the money.
  I hear my friends on the other side talk about emissions, oh, we 
can't do these things because it is going to cause greater emissions.
  Let's once again look at the facts, Mr. Speaker. Under the previous 
administration, on average, emissions went down 2\1/2\ percent a year. 
Under President Biden they have increased 6.3 percent every single 
year.
  Let's follow the money.
  Do you know who is paying that money? It is the Americans that can 
least afford it, whether it is the $12 extra every single time they are 
filling up their vehicle with gas, whether it is the 700 to $1,700 a 
year in extra electricity payments that Americans are paying this year 
to heat their homes.
  Mr. Speaker, yes, let's follow the money because the people in 
America that can least afford it, they are the ones that are paying the 
bill for these irresponsible, ill-advised energy policies that, Mr. 
Speaker, you can go back

[[Page H1194]]

and look at the Record, we are the ones who advocated otherwise.
  Here is the deal: This administration has stopped offshore 
production, prevented new lease sales, prevented onshore production. 
This majority has tried to impose a $10,000 per year per mile pipeline 
fee, tried to raise royalty fees, increased severance taxes on domestic 
energy.
  Do you think Vladimir Putin is doing the same thing with Russian 
energy? I can answer that, Mr. Speaker: Absolutely not.
  The policies that this bill fixes are the errors that this 
administration and this majority in Congress made in imposing this 
energy crisis on us in raising energy prices for Americans that can 
least afford it.
  Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the facts don't result in the narrative 
that my friends on the other side are trying to establish. Let's be 
clear on why we have an energy crisis in America, why we are dependent 
upon Vladimir Putin for energy, why we are funding the military 
atrocities that he is carrying out in the Ukraine right now, and let's 
support this bill, this legislation that Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers 
and Congressman Westerman have pushed to ensure that we can have a 
clean American energy future.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an April 28, 2021, 
Military.com article titled: ``VA Secretary Wants More Vets Sickened by 
Burn Pits to File Claims, But Many Are Still Being Turned Away,'' and I 
include in the Record an April 12, 2021, ``NBC News'' article titled: 
``Veterans Face Uphill Battle to Receive Treatment For `Burn Pit' 
Exposure.''

                   [From Military.com, Apr. 28, 2021]

VA Secretary Wants More Vets Sickened by Burn Pits To File Claims, But 
                    Many Are Still Being Turned Away

                           (By Steve Beynon)

       Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Denis McDonough 
     wants more veterans who believe they were sickened by 
     exposure to burn pits overseas to seek help from the 
     department, despite many being turned away.
       ``We're urging vets to come forward with their claims,'' 
     McDonough said at a press briefing Monday. ``Our commitment 
     is to treat each claim with the care it deserves. As we get 
     more claims, we can aggregate those claims to draw bigger 
     conclusions.''
       As of March 31, the VA had denied 72% of burn pit claims, 
     according to agency data obtained by Military.com. Between 
     June 2007 and March 31, the VA processed 15,640 disability 
     compensation claims related to burn pit exposure. Of those, 
     3,510 veterans had at least one burn pit issue granted.
       The top three diagnoses related to burn pits are bronchial 
     asthma, chronic bronchitis and allergic rhinitis, according 
     to department data. The most common reasons for a veteran to 
     be denied is not having a diagnosed medical condition or 
     being unable to connect the condition to their service--43.1% 
     and 42.8% of denials, respectively.
       But the data doesn't reflect the scope of the issue. The 
     number of patients filing claims might be disproportionately 
     small given VA estimates that 3.5 million veterans have been 
     exposed to burn pits since 1990. It is unclear how many are 
     sick due to their exposure or have died as a result.
       McDonough suggests that more data is needed, and he wants 
     more veterans to seek help from the VA so officials can get a 
     better grasp on the issue.
       The burn pit data also could be inherently flawed. To get 
     the data, the VA had to use text mining, searching for 
     keywords such as ``burn pit'' and ``burn pits'' in its 
     patient databases, according to department records. This 
     means patients coming forward with issues related to burn 
     pits might not automatically be listed as burn pit patients 
     if that phrase wasn't used in their records.
       Out of the 2.5 million Global War on Terrorism veterans, 
     781,384 have filed claims related to respiratory issues. 
     According to VA data obtained by Military.com, 63% were 
     granted. Of all the GWOT veterans, 42,686 filed for claims 
     related to cancer; 37% of those claims were granted.
       The VA's research shows GWOT veterans are three times more 
     likely than non-deployed veterans to file claims related to 
     respiratory issues and twice as likely to file claims for 
     cancer.
       ``Although the GWOT-deployed and GWOT non-deployed 
     population sizes are relatively the same, the GWOT-deployed 
     cohort has more than two times the number of service-
     connected cancers,'' according to the agency's findings.
       Burn pits are often referred to as the post-9/11 
     generation's Agent Orange, referencing the bureaucratic maze 
     and uneven claims process veterans have to navigate, and what 
     could be a decades-long legislative fight to issue easy-to-
     access health care and disability compensation.
       The House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees and 
     advocacy groups have made toxic exposure the top issue this 
     year. Congress is looking at some two dozen bills, ranging 
     from incremental improvements to sweeping health care bills 
     for all 3.5 million veterans exposed to burn pits and other 
     toxic environments.
       But it's unclear what can actually make it to President Joe 
     Biden's desk. Some lawmakers and advocates are concerned over 
     what is very likely to be a huge tab to cover the cost of 
     opening the VA up to a huge swath of new patients.
                                  ____


                    [From NBC News, April 12, 2021]

    Veterans Face Uphill Battle To Receive Treatment for `Burn Pit' 
                                Exposure

                 (By Kenzi Abou-Sabe and Didi Martinez)

       During Marine veteran Scott Evans' two tours in 
     Afghanistan, his work on a specialized team that used dogs to 
     sniff out explosives led him to spend large chunks of time 
     around open-air pits where trash was burned.
       In August, Evans, 33, of North Carolina, received 
     devastating news: he had terminal pancreatic cancer. The 
     diagnosis placed him among a growing number of military 
     veterans who say they have developed serious and sometimes 
     fatal diseases after facing prolonged exposure to burn pits 
     at overseas bases.
       The pits were a common feature at military bases during the 
     wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a crude answer to the basic 
     logistics problem of how to deal with piles and piles of 
     trash. Everything from electronics and vehicles to human 
     waste was regularly doused in jet fuel and set ablaze, 
     spewing toxic fumes and carcinogens into the air.
       The Department of Defense estimates that roughly 3.5 
     million service members could have been exposed to burn pits. 
     The Department of Veterans Affairs has denied about 75 
     percent of veterans' burn pit claims, including Evans', 
     because it does not acknowledge a connection between 
     conditions like asthma and cancer to exposure to the flaming 
     garbage piles.
       Veterans say that at the same time they face resistance 
     while seeking treatment from the VA, they have also been let 
     down by civilian medical providers who often lack an 
     understanding of the existence and dangers of burn pits.
       ``Over the next decades, I'd be shocked if we didn't see 
     spikes in disease in these patients,'' said Dr. Tom Abrams, 
     an oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute who has 
     treated two veterans affected by burn pits.
       ``Whether it's cancer, respiratory illness or some other 
     disease that has yet to make itself known, I think we have to 
     be on the lookout and really be aware that these veterans are 
     at very high risk.''
       Abrams and other medical experts acknowledge that it's 
     exceedingly difficult to draw a definitive link between burn 
     pits and the conditions veterans are reporting, but they note 
     that ample evidence already exists showing that long-term 
     exposure to toxic smoke can lead to serious health issues.
       A VA spokesperson said it ``follows the science on 
     questions of health outcomes of military exposures'' and is 
     conducting a review of the hazards of burn pits.
       The spokesperson referenced a 2020 report by the National 
     Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine that found 
     none of the 27 respiratory health outcomes it reviewed met 
     the criteria for ``sufficient evidence of an association.'' 
     The evidence for respiratory symptoms such as chronic 
     persistent cough and wheezing met the criteria for ``limited 
     or suggestive evidence of an association,'' the spokesperson 
     added.
       A Pentagon spokesperson said the Defense Department and VA 
     are ``continuing to fund studies to provide more evidence on 
     the potential long-term effects of burn pit exposure.''
       Lawmakers in Washington have taken up the cause, 
     introducing multiple bills aiming to change the way the VA 
     deals with veterans who think they're suffering from a burn 
     pit-related illness.
       On Tuesday, advocates and legislators led by Sen. Kirsten 
     Gillibrand, D-N.Y., Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and the 
     comedian Jon Stewart will take to Capitol Hill to rally in 
     support of a measure, which would force the VA to expand care 
     and benefits to veterans affected by certain burn pit-related 
     illnesses.
       In an interview with NBC Nightly News' Lester Holt, Stewart 
     said the situation echoes the aftermath of the terror attacks 
     of Sept. 11, 2001, when first-responders were coming down 
     with serious illnesses and health officials were slow to 
     recognize them as being caused by toxins swirling in the air 
     at ground zero.
       ``What the first responders were standing on top of was 
     essentially a burn pit,'' he said. ``The jet fuel from the 
     planes ignited it, but it was all those materials from the 
     World Trade Center.''
       Stewart got involved in the effort after being approached 
     by Rosie Torres, the founder of the nonprofit Burn Pits 360. 
     Torres started advocating for veterans suffering from toxic 
     exposure-related illnesses after her husband, an Army 
     veteran, was diagnosed with constrictive bronchiolitis.
       ``I would challenge any congressperson who says, `Well, 
     we're going to wait for the science to be settled,' to dig a 
     hundred-yard pit in the middle of a town where your 
     constituents live, and burn everything in that town with jet 
     fuel,'' Stewart said. ``And then come and tell me that, 
     `Yeah, they're cool with it, because there's a lot of 
     confusion about whether or not the science is settled that 
     this is harmful to your health.' ''

[[Page H1195]]

       For most veterans who think they are suffering from a burn 
     pit or other toxic exposure-related illness, getting the VA 
     to acknowledge their condition and treat them has been a 
     losing battle. Veterans must prove to the VA that they were 
     exposed to a burn pit during their service, and that the 
     exposure caused their condition.
       Further complicating matters, veterans affected by toxic 
     exposure often find themselves against the clock when it 
     comes to gaining access to health care through the VA. If 
     veterans don't seek treatment during an initial five-year 
     period in which the VA offers combat veterans free health 
     care--and experts say many of the diseases that stem from 
     toxic exposure typically manifest slowly--they have to wait 
     for their claim to be approved before getting care at a VA 
     facility.
       Even if they do meet the burden of proof and have their 
     claim approved, veterans say the approval process can take 
     months to years, wasting precious time for those with 
     terminal illnesses.
       Gina Cancelino, whose husband, Joseph, died of an 
     aggressive form of testicular cancer in 2019, said they only 
     learned about the possible link between burn pits and the 
     disease months before he passed away.
       ``I said, `Hon, burn pits, burn pits in Iraq,'' she recalls 
     telling the former Marine Corps gunnery sergeant. `` `Look, 
     I'm reading about this. Were you near these?' And he's like, 
     `Yeah, I'm pretty sure I was.' ''
       Joseph Cancelino, who worked as a New York City Police 
     Department sergeant, had deployed to Iraq in 2003 during the 
     first wave of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
       Now, his wife has made it her mission to piece together his 
     exposure to burn pits.
       ``Had we known earlier that this was an issue, maybe he 
     goes annually and gets checked,'' Gina Cancelino said. 
     ``Maybe we find it earlier, and we don't give it a chance to 
     harbor in there, and fester in there. So I'm disappointed. 
     I'm disappointed in the lack of communication.''
       Gen. Michael Heston was one of the rare few whose claims 
     were approved. He served three tours in Afghanistan with the 
     Vermont Army National Guard, and died in 2018 after a battle 
     with pancreatic cancer. He was 58 years old.
       Heston's wife, June, said she remembers her husband 
     questioning the safety of the burn pits while he was still 
     deployed. At one of the bases where Heston was stationed, she 
     said, the burn pit was initially near the airfield, but the 
     smoke and soot were interfering with the jet engines, so it 
     was moved to another area of the base, closer to where troops 
     lived and worked.
       ``He just couldn't understand,'' she said. ``If it's doing 
     that to a jet engine, well, why would you think it would be 
     OK to be moving [it] closer to human beings that are 
     breathing that in?''
       When Heston started complaining of back pain and rapidly 
     losing weight in 2016, it took doctors 10 months to deliver a 
     diagnosis.
       By that time, the cancer had metastasized to other parts of 
     his body.
       Abrams, the Dana-Farber oncologist, had never heard of burn 
     pits before treating Heston. When Heston first explained 
     them, Abrams said, he was shocked.
       ``I was just horrified because I thought that was probably 
     one of the most toxic kinds of things you could possibly 
     have,'' Abrams, who is also a faculty member at the Harvard 
     Medical School, said. ``It's extremely unhealthy to be 
     exposed to the products of massive combustion for years on 
     end.''
       Abrams ultimately came to the conclusion that Heston's 
     cancer was likely caused by his exposure to toxic substances 
     in Afghanistan, and wrote a letter spelling that out to 
     bolster his application for VA benefits.
       ``Most patients are diagnosed [with pancreatic cancer] in 
     their mid- to late-60s or early 70s,'' Abrams said. ``He had 
     no risk factors, he was not a diabetic, he was in excellent 
     shape. And he had this long term, very significant toxic 
     exposure that was certainly not something that was common at 
     the time.''
       The VA ultimately acknowledged that Heston's cancer was due 
     to his toxic exposures during service, due in large part, 
     June Heston thinks, to Abrams' letter. But a letter like that 
     is not easy to come by, experts say, because doctors are 
     tasked with treating an illness, not investigating its cause.
       ``It's very difficult to definitively say that X causes 
     Y,'' Abrams said. ``But on some level, I think it's important 
     to at least acknowledge that exposure to high levels of toxic 
     smoke is a contributor to lots of diseases in general. And I 
     don't think you need to necessarily pore through the data for 
     years to make at least that kind of general claim.''
       Andrew Myatt deployed to Iraq in 2004 as a combat engineer 
     with the Army National Guard, disarming improvised explosive 
     devices, or IEDs. He believes the acute lymphocytic leukemia 
     he was diagnosed with in 2019 is connected to his exposure to 
     burn pits in Iraq, but when he applied for health care and 
     benefits, the VA denied his claim.
       Myatt, 53, said he'd be lost without the help of Anita 
     Ritchie, the senior national service officer at the nonprofit 
     Wounded Warrior Project, who is helping him gather evidence 
     for an appeal.
       ``Toxic exposure is one of the few instances where there's 
     not a lot of people in the civilian world who know anything 
     about this stuff,'' Ritchie said.
       Myatt said he is happy with his current private health 
     care, but getting the VA to accept that his cancer was 
     related to his service would ensure he has access to medical 
     care in the future.
       ``If this [cancer] shows up 20 years from now, when I'm 
     retired and living someplace, then I can go to them for 
     help,'' he said.
       In 2014, the VA created a burn pit registry to start 
     tracking the long term health effects for service members who 
     were exposed to burn pits and other airborne hazards. Since 
     then, nearly 240,000 current and former service members have 
     joined.
       But the practice hasn't stopped. In an April 2019 memo to 
     Congress, the Defense Department acknowledged that it had 
     nine active burn pits at bases throughout the Middle East.
       Legislators and advocates are hopeful that this will be the 
     year that burn pit reform makes its way through Congress in 
     part because of a unique connection to President Joe Biden.
       In the past, Biden has suggested that his son Beau's 
     deployment to Balad Air Base in Iraq may have had something 
     to do with his brain cancer diagnosis.
       Balad Air Base had one of the largest burn pits, spanning 
     more than 10 acres. ``Because of exposure to burn pits--in my 
     view, I can't prove it yet--he came back with stage 4 
     glioblastoma,'' Biden told a Service Employees International 
     Union convention in 2019.
       But for veterans like Scott Evans, who said he was told he 
     had between six months and a year to live, legislation may 
     not come soon enough.
       Evans first contacted the VA medical center closest to his 
     home last April after his weight began to plummet and the 
     whites of his eyes had turned yellow. But he said he was told 
     he was ineligible because there was no evidence his condition 
     was connected to his service and he didn't qualify for 
     financial need.
       He was eventually able to start receiving care at the VA in 
     July due to a different condition. The following month, he 
     was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer at age 32.
       Evans said he tries not to dwell on how things may have 
     been different if he had been able to access VA care last 
     April.
       ``Would [the tumor] have been operable? What would the 
     outcome have been of it?'' he said. ``For me, it's done and 
     over with, we can't change that. But the big thing that I 
     would like to see happen is that if somebody comes in and 
     they need help, and they're a veteran, be able to get that 
     help right away. And let's ask questions later.''
       Still, Evans said he has no regrets over his military 
     service.
       ``Even knowing what I know now, and knowing the 
     consequences, I'd still do exactly the same thing, because it 
     was about the guys you're with,'' he said, pausing to collect 
     himself. ``The thing I'm most proud of is everybody who 
     walked behind me has all their limbs, and came back safe. And 
     if the cost of it was getting cancer, that's fine.''

  Mr. McGOVERN: Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, and still I rise. And I rise today 
understanding that the greatness of America will not be measured by the 
number of nuclear-powered submarines we have. Its greatness won't be 
measured by our B-1 bombers or our number of soldiers in uniform. The 
greatness of our Nation will be measured by how do you treat the 
persons who fly the B-1 bombers; how do you treat the persons who will 
take on the challenges of the world who become the front line of 
democracy; how do you treat them when they return home? This is how the 
greatness of America will be measured.
  The greatness of America will be measured by what kind of housing do 
we give them, do we help them to transition from military life to a job 
in civilian life? The greatness of America will be measured by the kind 
of insurance that they get so that they can have the best healthcare 
the world can afford.
  This bill, this legislation, among other things, expands healthcare 
services for a larger group of veterans who were exposed to toxic 
substances, Agent Orange, for example. Many men have died and suffered 
and didn't get the healthcare that they earned because we allowed a 
nebulous notion as to what Agent Orange was doing to them to persist. 
There is a presumption now.
  This bill increases the number of veterans without service-connected 
disabilities who can receive healthcare. If I had my way, you would get 
all of your healthcare whether service-connected or not. But I don't 
have my way. But I am going to support this bill because I want my 
record to show that when I had the chance to help the veterans, I did 
what I could, and I voted ``yes.'' I didn't cop out. I stood tall with 
them. I want my record to show that I came to this floor and encouraged 
my colleagues to vote ``yes.''

[[Page H1196]]

  

  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I have talked a lot today about the 
Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act, which is again, the Senate 
version. That legislation carries the support of leading veteran 
service organizations, VSOs, including Disabled American Veterans, 
Veterans of Foreign Wars, the Wounded Warrior Project, Iraq and 
Afghanistan Veterans of America, and the American Legion, as well as 
the Military Officers Association of America.
  Again, that Senate version passed unanimously. We could be running 
that here today and get it on the President's desk at the end of the 
week. The only thing that stands between getting help to veterans right 
now in terms of the burn pit issues is the Democrat Party's refusal to 
just run the Senate version of the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
McCarthy), the Republican leader.
  Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding, but more 
importantly, for his service to our Nation, and when he talks about 
that bill, you think, in Congress, when can you find something that is 
bipartisan?
  Here you have something come out of the Senate that Republicans and 
Democrats both agree upon. Republicans on this side of the aisle will 
vote for that. The only thing holding it up for these veterans are the 
Democrats. They know the bill they are going to produce won't go 
anywhere, and hopefully, we can come back and get this done, and it 
will go to the President's desk. It would have been nice for the 
President to have a bill before he came for the State of the Union, so 
he could actually sign something, but unfortunately, politics again 
gets in the way.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and to support Mrs. 
McMorris Rodgers' and Mr. Westerman's legislation.
  The crisis in Ukraine is a crisis of American energy security.
  Over the past decade, we have had every opportunity to lead. During 
the previous administration, we were energy independent and an exporter 
of energy for the first time in 50 years.
  Today, however, we have an administration that crippled domestic 
production. This administration has increased its daily reliance on 
Russian oil by 34 percent.
  As every American is glued to their television to see what is 
happening in Ukraine, to see the bombing of innocent children and 
women, there is no one American who would want any of our money to go 
to fund that. But in this administration, you had actually done that, 
increased the production of oil and natural gas coming from Russia to 
America. Meanwhile, it slow-walked oil and natural gas exports to our 
allies in Europe. In doing so, it made Europe more reliant on Putin.
  Today, 40 percent of natural gas and 25 percent of crude oil in 
Europe comes from Russian. The Biden administration has made the free 
world dependent on despots for oil and natural gas from Russia.
  We all know that is shameful.
  As an economic and energy superpower why are we relying on dictators 
when we should be supplying the world?
  If you are like me and you are concerned about the environment, do 
you realize that American natural gas is 42 percent cleaner than 
Russian natural gas? That crude oil could have come from Canada and 
been refined in America if President Biden hadn't pulled the plug on 
the Keystone Pipeline. But instead, he allowed Putin to have Nord 
Stream 2.
  For those at home that are wondering, what is the Nord Stream 2 
pipeline? It is another pipeline built by Russia to go in to supply 
natural gas to Europe, but it goes around Ukraine because the current 
pipeline goes through Ukraine, and Ukraine gets part of the money.
  But with this new administration and President Biden going to meet 
with Mr. Putin, what did he do? He waived the sanctions. But when 
President Biden watched Putin put hundreds of thousands of men along 
the border of Ukraine there was an amendment offered in the Senate to 
put sanctions on Nord Stream 2. People wondered; did it pass? It came 
close, but it failed.
  Do you want to know why it failed? Because the Biden administration 
used all their political will to lobby against it passing. And more of 
American millions of dollars went to fund Putin who uses it for his 
military.

  That natural gas that goes to Europe, it could have come from 
America, from our Federal lands and waters where President Biden hasn't 
approved a single new lease--not one; he has actually shut them down--
and if we had continued the energy policies of the Trump 
administration, we would actually be safer today and Putin would have 
less money to fund his military weaponry. Our allies would be safer 
today, and American families would be paying less for cleaner energy. 
In California it is more than $5 a gallon, as you know, Mr. Speaker. I 
don't know if you can remember back when when it was much less.
  Now, I hear from our colleagues on the other side that the reason 
American resources must stay in the ground is climate change. I 
listened to Mr. Kerry be interviewed as Russia invaded Ukraine, and he 
was concerned. This former Secretary of State, now helping in this 
administration, I thought he would be concerned about the men and women 
in Ukraine. He was concerned with; would Putin still work with climate 
change? I think you should tell that to the Ukrainian people. I don't 
think one of them is concerned about that right now.
  Now, I hear our colleagues when they talk about climate change, but 
if they really studied it, the truth is what I told you before, 
American natural gas is 42 percent cleaner than Russian natural gas. 
And we can guarantee you this, we are not invading Ukraine. We won't 
use the resources to carpet-bomb, to shoot innocent women and children.
  If you are concerned about the environment, like I am, you should 
support this bill. You could, Mr. Speaker. It immediately approves the 
Keystone Pipeline because we have waited long enough and can't afford 
to wait a minute longer. It removes all restriction on liquid natural 
gas exports so we could become an arsenal of energy for the free world. 
And it restarts the leases on Federal lands and waters which are being 
held up by the Biden administration.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. Speaker, it is interesting. You have the majority here on the 
floor. You have the Biden administration. It is in the power of your 
party. But those six permits that sit at the desk of the Secretary of 
Energy that could take money away from Putin, provide American jobs, 
and provide Europe with cleaner natural gas from America still sit 
there to this day because somehow you think it is better for climate 
change.
  Mr. Speaker, a vote for this bill is a vote to produce more energy 
for our allies. It means American jobs. It means our allies don't have 
to deal with Putin, be held hostage to him. It means Putin will not 
have millions of dollars from Americans to buy the weaponry that he 
uses to kill innocent people in Ukraine.
  A vote for this bill is a vote to provide relief for working families 
at the pump. It means Americans won't have to pay the high prices they 
are today.
  I know at the White House, when they were asked this question, they 
said it is okay that the price is high because that way somehow it 
helps them with climate change if they could get more renewable energy.
  Mr. Speaker, that is a tax on all Americans, especially low-income. 
But I don't know, in this administration, they have the highest 
inflation we have had in 40 years. Somehow, they must think that is 
positive, too.
  Mr. Speaker, in this new administration, when you have crime, we have 
a border that is not secure. People are coming across the border that 
are on the terrorist watch list. We now have more fentanyl in America 
today than at any time, enough to kill every single American seven 
times over.
  Mr. Speaker, I know you would care about this because you know, 
today, the number one cause of death of those between the ages of 18 to 
45 is fentanyl. You know where it comes from, the chemicals of China, 
across the border of Mexico that no longer is attended to.
  Mr. Speaker, I know the President of your party has put the Vice 
President in charge, and she has been there one time--one time. Every 
city in America has become a border city today every single weekend.

[[Page H1197]]

  Mr. Speaker, you know this based upon your background. You see the 
deaths that are happening. It is unwanted. It is unneeded. And we could 
do better.
  Mr. Speaker, a vote for this bill is a vote to deprive Putin of a 
major revenue stream.
  It is not difficult. There won't be any pressure. All Members have to 
do is walk onto the floor, take the card out of their pocket, put it in 
the little box. And if you are somebody that because you are afraid of 
COVID, you are still home, or you are on a boat, you could still vote 
by proxy with this majority.
  What you could do is you could vote for this bill. You could vote to 
make America energy independent. You could lower the gas prices. You 
could take the money out of Putin's hands that he uses to kill innocent 
people.
  Everybody in the world is watching. Mr. Speaker, the sad part, I bet 
if this bill was on the floor in any country in Europe, it would be 100 
percent voted for. I will be watching. I think America will be 
watching.
  Would we stand for America and for freedom? Would we stand for 
President Zelensky, who didn't take the advice of President Biden and 
leave his country, who doesn't ask for men and women from America to 
come to fight? He just asks to provide some weapons so they can defend 
against Putin.
  Mr. Speaker, the sad part about that is every day that we allow crude 
or natural gas to come from Russia, American money is going to Putin. 
Let's stop that and stop that today.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the world is watching. And I am not going 
to be lectured by someone who takes their marching orders from Donald 
Trump, who said that Putin's invasion of Ukraine was a genius and savvy 
move. I wish the gentleman would have condemned that.
  Listening to that speech, you would think that Joe Biden invaded 
Ukraine. I mean, he spent all this time criticizing Joe Biden, John 
Kerry, and everybody else but hardly criticized Vladimir Putin.
  You know, look, I also wish, because I think it would be helpful for 
this country and a signal to the world, if the gentleman who just spoke 
would reprimand Members of his own party who cozy up to white 
nationalists and go to pro-Putin rallies. That would send a signal to 
people in this country and to people around the world on whose side we 
are on.
  Bottom line is, the people of Ukraine are being invaded by a brutal 
dictator, Vladimir Putin. And when their standard-bearer, Donald Trump, 
was in charge, he spread propaganda about Ukrainian interference in the 
2016 election, which was a lie. He ousted a well-regarded U.S. 
Ambassador to Ukraine because they weren't doing what he wanted to in 
terms of finding dirt on his political opponents. He froze military 
assistance to Ukraine; they said nothing. He withheld a White House 
meeting with Zelensky, turned Ukraine policy over to Giuliani--I could 
go on and on and on.
  We are not going to be lectured by them. Instead, we are going to 
move forward and pass a bill to help America's veterans, with or 
without them.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, so just a quick history lesson. The 
Obama-Biden administration sent Ukraine blankets and well-wishes. The 
Trump administration sent Javelin missiles. That is the big difference.
  You know, I have said numerous times standing up here that the 
Democratic Party is a party of political science. I could be even more 
generous. The Democratic Party is also a party of false choices and 
false narratives. The Democrats have presented us with a false choice 
when it comes to U.S. energy and also a false narrative.
  Let me be clear: We can unleash domestic energy and be good stewards 
of the environment. Thanks to American energy innovation, thanks to the 
energy sector, the U.S., at least under President Trump, was actually 
reducing carbon emissions. In Pennsylvania, for example, thanks to 
natural gas, our energy sector has reduced emissions by 41 percent 
since 2005.

  Again, it is an absolutely false choice. It is a false narrative that 
we cannot unleash the American energy sector and be good stewards of 
the environment. In fact, quite the opposite. We actually are good 
stewards of the environment when we are using clean natural gas, 
particularly from Pennsylvania.
  But here to talk more about that issue is my good friend, the ranking 
member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and one of the authors 
of the American Energy Independence from Russia Act, Cathy McMorris 
Rodgers.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington 
(Mrs. Rodgers).
  Mrs. RODGERS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge 
immediate consideration of the American Energy Independence from Russia 
Act.
  Innocent blood is being spilled in Ukraine as we speak. Women and 
children are being separated from their fathers. Democracy is under 
attack. Freedom must prevail. What do the people in Ukraine want? They 
want self-determination and independence from Russia.
  Mr. Speaker, Russia's economy is entirely dependent upon energy 
production and exports. Putin uses energy and pipelines as weapons, 
threatening to cut off supplies or hike prices when the West confronts 
Russia's aggression. Russia's energy exports fund its military and its 
current attack on Ukraine. America, not Russia, is the world's number 
one energy producer. We should act like it and lead.
  President Biden must restore American energy dominance and use energy 
resources to help Ukraine and Europe fight back. We shouldn't be buying 
a single barrel of oil from Russia, and our allies shouldn't be 
beholden to aggressors that attack their freedom. Europe should have 
the choice to buy American energy and say no to Russian pipelines and 
Nord Stream 2.
  That is why Congressman Bruce Westerman and I are leading on the 
American Energy Independence from Russia Act. This bill flips the 
switch on American energy. We need more pipelines, including Keystone 
XL, so this bill immediately approves the Keystone XL pipeline so that 
we can import crude oil from Canada, not Russia.
  It also removes all restrictions on U.S. energy exports to deliver 
natural gas to our allies in Europe, and it restarts oil and gas 
leasing on our Federal lands and offshore waters.
  This is how we shut down Putin's war chest, stand by Ukraine, empower 
our allies, protect our national security, and create jobs here at 
home.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to say ``no'' on this previous 
question and ``yes'' on the American Energy Independence from Russia 
Act.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers at this 
time, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am an Iraq war veteran. I was in Baghdad for 6 months 
in 2009. I can tell you that I am committed to ensuring the men and 
women who served our Nation receive the care and benefits they deserve. 
It is of utmost importance to me as a Member of this body and as an 
Iraq war veteran.
  That is the reason why I am so disappointed in my friends across the 
aisle. I am disappointed that instead of considering the Senate-passed 
Health Care for Burn Pit Veterans Act--which, again, could immediately 
be sent to the President's desk--House Democrats are prioritizing 
legislation that is still a long way away from enactment and will delay 
benefits for toxic-exposed veterans.
  Let me be clear. We can get help to veterans. We can get this bill to 
the desk of the President by the end of this week. The only thing 
standing in the way are my friends on the other side of the aisle.
  It is for that reason I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the 
previous question and vote ``no'' on the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, before I conclude, I want to thank and acknowledge Jeff 
Gohringer, who has served as the communications director for the House 
Committee on Rules in both the majority and minority over the last 6 
years. Today is his last day with the Committee on Rules, and I speak 
for Members and staff on both sides of the aisle when I say to Jeff 
that we are grateful

[[Page H1198]]

for your years of service in this institution. We wish you well in your 
future endeavors, and you will always have a home here.
  I also thank James Fitzella, who is leaving as well. The staff are 
incredible on the Committee on Rules, and James will be dearly missed.
  Mr. Speaker, let me just close by saying that we heard a lot on the 
other side and barely a mention about our veterans. The gentlewoman 
from Washington, who came on the floor just recently and read the oil 
company talking points, couldn't even bring herself to mention veterans 
once.
  The bill that we are talking about here today is to make sure 
veterans who have been exposed to toxic chemicals, who get cancer, who 
get other ailments, get the healthcare they need.
  You would like to think that we could all come together on it. The 
gentleman from Pennsylvania keeps on talking about this narrow bill. I 
mean, they are not even serious about it because if they were, they 
would have used the previous question vote, which would give them the 
right to control the floor, to bring that up. But they didn't. Instead, 
they are bringing up an oil company's wish list.
  This really is obnoxious. I get it. They don't like President Biden, 
and they will let no crisis go by without trying to make it about 
President Biden.
  But let me just say this: We should be together in standing with the 
people of Ukraine, and we should be together in standing with our 
veterans.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as 
follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 950

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 5. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (H.R. 6858) to strengthen United States energy security, 
     encourage domestic production of crude oil, petroleum 
     products, and natural gas, 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 
     Energy and Commerce; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 6858.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 221, 
nays 202, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 49]

                               YEAS--221

     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)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     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
     Gaetz
     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
     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--202

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Brady
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     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
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hartzler
     Hern
     Herrell
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kim (CA)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (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 (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Bost
     Cloud
     Gallagher
     Gohmert
     Mfume
     Miller (IL)
     Taylor
     Weber (TX)
     Zeldin
       

                              {time}  1417

  Mr. STEWART 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

     Aguilar (Correa)
     Babin (Norman)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Blumenauer (Beyer)
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Carter (TX) (Cawthorn)
     Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
     Cuellar (Correa)
     DelBene (Kuster)
     Deutch (Rice (NY))
     Doggett (Beyer)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Connolly)
     Evans (Brown (MD))
     Fallon (Jackson)
     Fletcher (Wexton)
     Gonzalez, Vicente (Correa)
     Gosar (Greene (GA))
     Granger (Van Duyne)
     Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
     Johnson (SD) (Armstrong)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Kahele (Correa)
     Kelly (PA) (Keller)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Lawson (FL) (Soto)
     Manning (Beyer)
     McEachin (Wexton)
     Meng (Kuster)
     Miller (WV) (LaHood)
     Nehls (Cawthorn)
     Pfluger (Ellzey)
     Pocan (Jayapal)
     Raskin (Cicilline)
     Roybal-Allard (Takano)
     Rush (Jeffries)
     Scott, David (Jeffries)
     Sessions (Duncan)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Strickland (Jeffries)
     Suozzi (Beyer)
     Trone (Connolly)
     Underwood (Jeffries)
     Van Drew
     (Reschenthaler)
       
     Veasey (Beyer)
     Wilson (FL)
     (Cicilline)
       
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.

[[Page H1199]]

  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, 
nays 200, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 50]

                               YEAS--220

     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)
     Cartwright
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     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
     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--200

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Brady
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     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
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hartzler
     Hern
     Herrell
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kim (CA)
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (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 (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson
     (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Young

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Balderson
     Bost
     Cloud
     Crawford
     Gallagher
     Gohmert
     Kinzinger
     Mfume
     Miller (IL)
     Taylor
     Weber (TX)
     Zeldin

                              {time}  1437

  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. BOST. Mr. Speaker, I was unavailable to vote in the House. Had I 
been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 49 and ``nay'' 
on rollcall No. 50.


    Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

     Aguilar (Correa)
     Babin (Norman)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Blumenauer (Beyer)
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Carter (TX) (Cawthorn)
     Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
     Cuellar (Correa)
     DelBene (Kuster)
     Deutch (Rice (NY))
     Doggett (Beyer)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Connolly)
     Evans (Brown (MD))
     Fallon (Jackson)
     Fletcher (Wexton)
     Gonzalez, Vicente (Correa)
     Gosar (Greene (GA))
     Granger (Van Duyne)
     Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
     Johnson (SD) (Armstrong)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Kahele (Correa)
     Kelly (PA) (Keller)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Lawson (FL) (Soto)
     Manning (Beyer)
     McEachin (Wexton)
     Meng (Kuster)
     Miller (WV) (LaHood)
     Nehls (Cawthorn)
     Pfluger (Ellzey)
     Pocan (Jayapal)
     Raskin (Cicilline)
     Roybal-Allard (Takano)
     Rush (Jeffries)
     Scott, David (Jeffries)
     Sessions (Duncan)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Stauber (Bergman)
     Strickland (Jeffries)
     Suozzi (Beyer)
     Trone (Connolly)
     Underwood (Jeffries)
     Van Drew
     (Reschenthaler)
       
     Veasey (Beyer)
     Wilson (FL)
     (Cicilline)
       

                          ____________________