[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 57 (Thursday, March 31, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H4046-H4053]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1545
MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 4521, AMERICA COMPETES ACT OF 2022
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of March
30, 2022, I offer a motion to instruct on H.R. 4521.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
The Clerk read as follows:
Mr. Lucas moves that the managers on the part of the House
at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
on the Senate amendment to the bill H.R. 4521 be instructed
to agree to section 2502 of the Senate amendment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas) and the gentlewoman from Michigan
(Ms. Stevens) each will control 30 minutes. The Chair recognizes the
gentleman from Oklahoma.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to
instruct the conferees on our competitiveness legislation.
This motion instructs conference members to agree to section 2502 of
the Senate legislation. This section is simple and common sense. It
says that no person or entity of concern can receive grants, awards, or
other support from the National Science Foundation, federally funded
manufacturing programs, or technology hubs authorized by this
legislation.
A person or entity of concern is generally defined by the Department
of Defense as directed by Congress in previous Defense Reauthorization
Acts.
DOD has identified entities of concern as Communist Chinese military
companies and companies owned or controlled by the People's Liberation
Army, and they have defined persons of concern as individuals
affiliated with these CCP military entities.
Simply put, this motion ensures that we aren't giving taxpayer
dollars to the adversaries who are trying to steal U.S. technology and
use it against us.
The Senate was right to add this important guardrail, and it is only
responsible that we urge our House conferees to ensure it is included
in the final conferenced legislation.
I would like to point out that we wouldn't have this particular
difference in our bills had the process of passing the House
legislation been done in regular order.
The COMPETES Act was developed in a back room by the Speaker's office
[[Page H4047]]
with very little input or review from relevant committees.
Although thoroughly vetted and bipartisan Science Committee bills
were included in that package, they were sandwiched in among unrelated,
partisan spending that added up to a backdoor attempt to pass parts of
the Build Back Better Act. Because of this rushed, opaque bill-writing
process, unsurprisingly, the COMPETES Act had a lot of flaws.
Despite less than 3 days to review the bill text, Members submitted
more than 600 amendments to the bill. But the Rules Committee, with
very little input, made in order only 261; and of that number, only
three Republican amendments were given individual debate time on the
floor, with all other Republican amendments being considered en bloc.
Not only did Members have little opportunity to write this bill, but
they also had almost no opportunity to fix its flaws.
I could go on about the danger of passing massive bills like this out
of regular order, but for now I will focus on this particular issue.
This provision preventing funds from going to Chinese military entities
and persons of concern was submitted as a part of multiple Republican
amendments to the Rules Committee, but none of these amendments were
made in order. I fail to see how amendments limiting taxpayer funds
from going to China isn't relevant to a bill about competitiveness with
China.
Democrats' failure to include similar language in the COMPETES Act is
an unfortunate example of an unwillingness to be strong on China and
protect our national security. But we have a chance to rectify that
now.
Madam Speaker, surely we can all agree that we shouldn't be sending
taxpayer dollars to Communist leadership in China. They are already
stealing our discoveries and using them to surpass us economically and
militarily. We are spending the time, money, and effort to plant the
seeds of new technologies, but China is the one harvesting the crop.
We have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to pass legislation to
improve U.S. technology and to set us up to be globally competitive for
the coming decade.
The Science Committee has spent 2 years preparing for this
opportunity. Working together, Republicans and Democrats held meetings
with stakeholders, conducted in-depth hearings, and individually marked
up more than a dozen bills to strategically scale-up America's research
and development capacities.
Those bills all passed out of committee unanimously, and many passed
across the floor with strong bipartisan support. They double down on
investment in basic research at the National Science Foundation, the
Department of Energy Office of Science and National Labs, and the
National Institute of Standards and Technology.
They also direct the creation and regular review of a national
science and technology strategy, as well as improving STEM education
and regional research opportunities.
The Science Committee bills are targeted to the areas where
government investment is most needed and will give us the biggest
reward. We ensure our approach is strategic, focusing on the
technologies of the future like quantum sciences, artificial
intelligence, and advanced manufacturing. We will keep America
competitive and secure and help create good jobs here at home.
This legislation should be the foundation for the conference
legislation, not the COMPETES Act, which is more of a climate change
bill than a technology bill, and not the bill formerly known as USICA,
which is a grab-bag of special interest provisions cobbled together
into a franken-bill.
There is a lot of chaff to separate from the wheat of this bill, but
I believe we can come to smart, consensus policy through the
conference. The Science Committee worked together to pass strong
bipartisan legislation, and I think our process, as well as our end
result, should serve as a model moving forward.
I am looking forward to getting to work and paring down these bills
to the smart policies we need. It is urgent that we act now. Democratic
leadership delayed the legislation for 9 months. I assure you the
Chinese Communist Party isn't doing the same. Let's stop playing
politics with something so important.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to pass this motion, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong and enthusiastic support of
moving forward to conference the America COMPETES Act of 2022 with the
Senate.
For those watching back at home, a conference committee is a joint
committee between the House and Senate, a temporary ad hoc
configuration to negotiate elements of a bill; and it is, frankly, the
best of legislative action; Congress working for the American people,
debating through democracy and deliberation to produce an end result.
As a Member of Congress, I often ask myself, I often pose the
question, what will drive our economy for the next 10 years, 20 years,
30 years? What is our moonshot of the next 50 years? What can I do
today to ensure that my neighbors in southeast Michigan are on a strong
path to a successful future? What are the technologies and research
investments that we can make today to ensure the success of the Nation
for all of us?
The legislation that we are moving to conference today, the America
COMPETES Act, tackles those big questions and secures our competitive
edge for generations to come. This bill is an investment in our people.
It reflects our ability to reach higher, to think deeper, and to invent
solutions to not only today's problems but solutions for tomorrow's
opportunities.
Americans are known for their hustle, for their ingenuity. My job,
our job in Congress is to connect people to the tools to unlock a good
life, to connected opportunity for everyone. And, frankly, the tools of
the future are in this bill.
The COMPETES Act turbocharges America's scientific research and
technological leadership while strengthening America's economic and
national security at home and abroad. Even more, this bold investment
in innovation ensures our top scientific minds have the tools to rise
to the challenge of our climate crisis, from clean energy technologies
to emissions measurement.
Not only does this bill look to the future, but it also mends the
acute stressors that we are all feeling today due to our years of
Federal underinvestment in science and innovation. A conference
committee to discuss this, my friends, the America COMPETES Act tackles
our supply chain vulnerabilities to make more goods in America and
surges production of American-made semiconductors, chips, that which we
invented here in this Nation, and in the 1990s were producing 40
percent of a crucial component in everything from cars to computers to
medical devices. And the American people are ready; ready for
investments that will spur innovative solutions to create jobs across
the Nation, support American manufacturing, and build a strong and
diverse STEM workforce ready to address the challenges we face as a
Nation.
{time} 1600
During President Biden's State of the Union Address, he called on
Congress to get our innovation package to him for his signature. So we
should be proud--I certainly am--to be here as we move to take the next
step in this process. There is, frankly, no time to waste in getting
the COMPETES Act to the President's desk.
As the chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Research and Technology, I
am so proud of the range of bipartisan Science, Space, and Technology
Committee provisions that have long been championed that are included
in this package.
I am especially proud of the NIST for the Future Act, my legislation.
This critical investment in NIST will ensure the agency and its
employees have the resources they require to be a key part of
bolstering our American technology enterprise: a resilient supply
chain, small and midsize manufacturers being brought to the table to
deliver for America, and the American workforce that compels them.
Since Michigan's 11th District sent me to Congress, I have been
laser-focused on bringing innovation economy
[[Page H4048]]
solutions not only to folks in southeastern Michigan but also,
obviously, all across the United States.
We built a transformative piece of legislation from the ground up.
The ranking member is right--bipartisan years of work on the Science,
Space, and Technology Committee to do such legislation. We heard from
the science community. We heard from industry. We heard from academia.
We heard from other stakeholders. They all told us the same thing:
Don't leave Americans behind. Don't leave anyone behind based on
geography or demographics. Bring the scientific research enterprise to
all.
We are here, and we are here with a lot of hardworking people from
the Science, Space, and Technology Committee staff. We have not had a
conference committee since 2018, albeit for NDAA. Many people have not
been able to be privy to such an action, and they deserve our
gratitude. These are the folks writing the text late into the night
based on our corrections, the Science, Space, and Technology Committee
staff who work so hard and the Science, Space, and Technology Committee
members.
The United States has long been a beacon of excellence in science and
innovation, and it is long overdue that we restore Federal support for
these vital initiatives, that we invest now and lead the world.
The House's and Senate's approaches may certainly have some
differences, but we seek the same goal: to deliver for this Nation.
I am very confident that we will have a very productive conference
process and hope to get the America COMPETES Act to President Biden's
desk for signature very soon.
The U.S. has endless potential to compete globally in science and
innovation. The America COMPETES Act provides the critical resources
and tools we need to achieve that.
I look forward to working with my colleagues throughout conference to
invest in America's most valuable resource, the talent of our people.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Babin).
Mr. BABIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for
yielding.
Madam Speaker, last month, the House passed the COMPETES Act, better
known as the concedes act, which was forced through this Chamber in a
partisan fashion and lacked the policies needed to truly bolster our
scientific infrastructure and combat threats from our foreign
adversaries.
The hard work and the bipartisan collaboration of the Science, Space,
and Technology Committee were left in the wake of partisan politics.
The House-passed concedes act let China off the hook very simply for
failing to contain COVID-19. It failed to ban funding to CCP-tied
organizations. It failed to punish the CCP for its blatant human rights
abuses. It failed to strengthen America's competitive edge over China.
Today, we have the opportunity to instruct conferees to bolster the
language and actually stand up against Communist China.
That is why I support this motion to instruct. It will ensure that no
entities identified as Chinese military companies operating in the
United States are eligible to receive funds through the new technology
directorate, the supply chain resiliency program that we set up through
Manufacturing Extension Partnership.
We must put a stop to Communist China spreading misinformation,
stealing our technology, and bolstering its economic advantages while
weakening ours. The FBI and intelligence agencies have continually
warned Congress about these same threats from Communist China.
China's investment in development, and not in basic research, implies
that they are building their technological success on the backs of
U.S.-funded basic research.
We have even seen the infiltration of Chinese influence in our
university systems and academia on several different occasions at the
top institutions of America. We must work to ensure that China cannot
undermine our open system of research and development.
This time, let's support scientific discovery, advance American
technology, and hold our foreign adversaries accountable, and let's not
waste the American people's time again.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, the ranking member, the gentleman from
Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), has given us a motion to instruct, a negotiation
that we will pursue in the conference to come.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Pallone).
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, we are at a crucial moment in our
Nation's history, and Congress has the chance to reinvigorate our
economy and ensure that we can outcompete every other nation.
The America COMPETES Act will put us on a course to lead the pack in
creating the strongest and most advanced economy of the 21st century.
Today's actions move us one step closer to making this legislation a
reality.
Over the past 40 years, America's manufacturing sector has lost
market share to economic competitors like China. This decline in
manufacturing, coupled with the COVID-19 pandemic, has led to severe
supply chain disruptions across our economy that have raised prices for
consumers.
As the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, I would like to
highlight several important provisions in the America COMPETES Act that
will help reverse this trend, strengthen our economy, bolster our
Nation's supply chains, and ensure that more critical goods are made
right here in the United States.
The legislation invests $45 billion in grants, loans, and loan
guarantees to support supply chain resilience and manufacturing of
critical goods, industrial equipment, and manufacturing technology
right here in the U.S.
It also invests $52 billion for the CHIPS for America Act,
incentivizing private-sector investments in semiconductor fabrication.
This funding will help eliminate disruptions in the semiconductor
supply chain from abroad that have hurt American automakers, medical
supply chain companies, and manufacturers of heavy machinery.
The bill invests $3 billion to help build a domestic solar
manufacturing supply chain so we can aggressively counter China's
control of the solar chain that jeopardizes our energy security
interests. The bill also keeps our electric grid secure and resilient
in the face of evolving cybersecurity and physical security threats.
Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act also improves our medical
product supply chain and strengthens our Strategic National Stockpile.
During the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were widespread
shortages of essential medicines, medical supplies, and some personal
protective equipment.
This legislation increases our domestic drug manufacturing base by
expanding the use of advanced and continuous manufacturing practices.
It also establishes a $1.5 billion supply chain manufacturing pilot
program that will help maintain domestic reserves of critical medical
supplies. It creates a $10.5 billion program that awards grants to
States to expand or maintain a State strategic stockpile of products
essential in the event of a public health emergency.
Finally, Madam Speaker, the America COMPETES Act will help innovate
our wireless supply chain and network security by funding the
deployment of cutting-edge technology and ensuring that next-generation
mobile wireless networks and technologies are safe and secure from
foreign adversaries.
Madam Speaker, for far too long, America has relied heavily on other
nations to manufacture critical goods essential to our economy. That
must come to an end as we work together to reinvigorate our
manufacturing base and create new, good-paying jobs here at home.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Kim).
Mrs. KIM of California. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
Oklahoma for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Ranking Member Lucas' motion to
instruct.
This motion will agree with section 2502 included in USICA, which
prohibits entities identified as Chinese military companies from
receiving
[[Page H4049]]
funds through the new technology directorate, the supply chain
resiliency program, the regional innovation program, or the
Manufacturing USA program.
In other words, this motion ensures taxpayer dollars spent in this
bill do not go toward the Chinese Communist Party.
On the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, we spent several
months working on a series of bipartisan competitiveness bills that we
could have gone to conference with. Unfortunately, with little notice,
we voted on a 3,000-page bill that was not bipartisan, did not include
strong protections to safeguard U.S. investments from CCP, and provided
$8 billion for a climate slush fund that we have zero oversight over
and China has already taken $100 million from.
Republicans offered several amendments with similar language to that
of Ranking Member Lucas' motion to instruct in the Rules Committee, but
unfortunately, the majority did not allow them to be considered on the
House floor.
The CCP is watching us. Today, we have an opportunity to send a
strong bipartisan and bicameral message: We are bolstering American
competitiveness and national security to ensure we lead in the
development and deployment of the technologies of the future.
It is imperative we have guardrails, such as Mr. Lucas' motion to
instruct, in order to ensure these investments do not fall into the
hands of the CCP and to attain a true bipartisan, bicameral agreement.
I thank Ranking Member Lucas for his leadership and his motion.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding
and allowing me to speak on this.
I think it is worth the wait to bring these important provisions
together to the floor to work on a path forward and maybe a little hint
of restoring regular order.
It is important that we invest in innovation for our future. And I
would note not just the cutting edge, high-tech future developments
that are so important in my State and in many others that are going to
help keep us on the front lines, but it is also important to invest in
legacy technology, legacy chips.
We had the manufacturing supply chain all over America halt for lack
of chips that cost only a few pennies because it wasn't profitable for
some to create the legacy chips moving forward. And I hope some of
these billions will be invested in opportunities to ramp up that
production. It happened very fast, and it will make a difference from
automobiles to microwaves and washing machines.
I am proud of the work we have done in the Ways and Means Committee
under the leadership of Richie Neal to develop pro-worker responsive
efforts and deal with the Chinese challenge.
Now, because the benefits of trade are broadly understood and spread
but the problems are localized, the impacts often hit individual
communities. That is why our provision has a strong Trade Adjustment
Assistance program. Sadly, it expired a year ago, setting us back,
leaving people desperately in need of this help out of luck.
We have a very strong, carefully crafted provision that will help
workers and communities alike with an updated, modernized Trade
Adjustment Assistance program.
We hear a lot of concerns about China, and I share those concerns.
Our provisions are tough on China.
For instance, we closed the de minimis loophole that allows 2 million
packages a day to be imported into the United States directly to our
consumers, uninspected in the main and evading tariffs. It is time for
us to close that de minimis loophole.
I note that the Chinese give Americans $7 of an exemption, and ours
is $800. The least we ought to do is close that de minimis loophole.
The trade title is strongly supported by American business and
organized labor. We are dealing with a TSP and MTB that will improve
global standards and strengthen American manufacturing.
The title is supported by AFL-CIO, American Alliance of
Manufacturers, the autoworkers, machinists, electricians. People who
want to build products in America are advantaged under this.
It meets workers' needs, bolsters America's ability to compete, and
is attuned to what Americans want.
Madam Speaker, I look forward to the work with the committee moving
this forward, and ultimately, its passage.
{time} 1615
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oregon for
reminding us about the importance of legacy chips and the MTB. I also
thank the previous gentlewoman from California for reminding us about
Manufacturing USA, which was probably started under the Obama
administration.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice).
Mrs. BICE of Oklahoma. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion
to instruct from my colleague and Oklahoma delegation member, Mr.
Lucas.
Safeguarding our national security, improving our supply chain
resiliency, and bolstering American innovation are things that we can
all agree on. However, in the COMPETES Act, Democrats took these
problems and drafted ineffective, partisan policies in response. As a
member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, we had
previously advanced strong legislation to combat these very issues.
On top of this, when this legislation came to the House floor for a
vote in February, Republicans in the House were denied the opportunity
to provide input on these important issues through the restrictive
processes of the majority.
While over 600 amendments were submitted, less than half of those
were made in order by the Committee on Rules. Of the 600, there were a
number that would have taken steps to address the ever-growing threat
we face from the Chinese Communist Party and their affiliated companies
operating in the United States.
This motion to instruct will ensure that the critical investments we
are making in America's innovation don't fall into the hands of our
foreign adversaries.
Democrats' failure to include similar provisions in the COMPETES Act
exemplify their continued, weak policies on China that compromise our
strategic advantage and our national security.
It is common sense that U.S. taxpayer dollars should not be lining
the pockets of the Chinese Communist Party, and instead, should be used
to strengthen our industries here at home. Investing in American
companies will strengthen the economy while keeping the Nation safe.
Madam Speaker, this should not be a partisan issue. I encourage the
adoption of the motion.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
New York (Mr. Meeks).
Mr. MEEKS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan for
yielding the time.
Madam Speaker, we find ourselves in a competition to lead in the 21st
century. And that is a competition that the United States cannot afford
to lose, and if we do what we should do here, will not lose.
A month ago, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping thought that America was
in decline, that America could no longer lead the world, and that they
could therefore simply overwhelm smaller states. They believed that
they could undermine the rules-based order whenever they chose.
Well, this incredible global coalition, binding and getting us
together, working with our allies, that President Joe Biden has put
together to condemn Russia and support the Ukrainian people, has proven
that their assertion is absolutely wrong. But the events of the past
month have underscored the need to position America for this challenge
on a long-term basis.
Therefore, it is absolutely critical that Congress get H.R. 4521 to
the President's desk. It is an investment in science, innovation, and
technology, which would allow us to excel in the global economy for
decades, bolster our domestic industry, and create jobs for American
workers.
[[Page H4050]]
Madam Speaker, I am proud that my bill, the EAGLE Act, serves as the
foreign affairs division of America COMPETES. It bolsters our diplomacy
to marshal a coalition of states to check the PRC's aggression, its
theft of technology, its shirking of global rules, and its gross
violation of human rights, of which we need to focus on.
And I know that if we put our minds to it, we can work together in a
bipartisan and bicameral way to finalize this critical legislation and
get it to the President's desk, and we must do it.
That is because our allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific are
watching. They need our help to bolster international rules, combat the
PRC's coercion, and address shared global challenges like climate
change. And after what we have seen in Ukraine, the people of Taiwan
are watching, to ensure that we deepen our economic ties, strengthen
its defense, and create greater space for Taiwan globally.
Hong Kongers and Uyghurs are also watching to make sure we get this
done because they urgently need the refugee protections that are in the
COMPETES Act. They need Congress to send a message to Beijing that its
genocide in Xinjiang, its destruction of Hong Kong's autonomy, and its
lack of regard for human rights will not stand.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, we are lucky to have such a chair of the
Committee on Foreign Affairs here in the Congress.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman).
Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, in a peewee sports competition, you can
make the case that if you are competing, you are winning. But when it
comes to global standing, energy independence, and economic security,
there are no participation trophies. Our goal can't be to just compete.
We have to dominate because if we are not winning in this area, we are
losing. And if America loses, the world loses.
Unfortunately, this so-called COMPETES Act would place America on the
loser's bench. I am baffled why, at a time when gas prices are
skyrocketing from Putin's war in Ukraine, and more Americans than ever
are facing economic instability, this majority is still laser-focused
on a blind, green-energy political agenda when America needs a
rational, domestic energy plan that results in reliable, affordable,
and clean energy.
Our constituents are paying almost $5 a gallon to fill their cars.
Yet, I am hearing my Democrat colleagues suggest the solution is just
to buy an electric vehicle. What a slap in the face to thousands of
hardworking men and women that President Biden put out of their jobs by
canceling pipelines and shuttering American mines, while turning to
international adversaries like Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela to
solve the energy and mineral crisis he created.
Madam Speaker, no, if we really want to win, we must unleash the full
power of American energy and mineral development by processing permits,
issuing leases, streamlining the regulatory process, and giving our own
homegrown industries the ability to use our American resources. We can
and we will do that safer, cleaner and faster than anyone else in the
world.
Where China uses child and slave labor to mine minerals vital to
batteries and computers, we can use state-of-the-art technology to
access those minerals that are right here in the U.S.
Where Russia controls oil rights and uses it as political leverage,
we can produce energy for our own people and be an exporter to our
allies.
Madam Speaker, we have no other option than to win.
I urge my colleagues to give Americans the power to develop,
innovate, and unleash our full potential. If you look around, Democrat
strategies are proving to be losing strategies. Americans can't afford
higher prices and more incompetence. Let's begin to put an end to the
madness by passing this motion to instruct.
Madam Speaker, I encourage that.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Luria). The gentlewoman from Michigan
has 13\3/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Oklahoma has 15
minutes remaining.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, as the gentleman from Arkansas reminds
us, I am proud that Michigan is the destination where the combustion
engine was invented and innovated, and very proud to be the destination
where our workers are manifesting and innovating electric vehicles.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Beyer).
Mr. BEYER. Madam Speaker, I confess, I cannot connect my friend from
Arkansas' comments with this motion to instruct, but I won't take any
time to refute these things.
Madam Speaker, manufacturing has long been a core strength of the
American economy. But the decades-long decline of manufacturing jobs in
the United States has cut off pathways to economic security for so many
families across this country.
Passage of the America COMPETES Act will be a landmark investment in
infrastructure, in clean technology, in innovation that will create and
preserve high-quality jobs in communities across America, and advance
U.S. competitiveness and drive long-term economic growth.
Disinvestment in American homemade products has also contributed to
the severe supply chain disruptions during the coronavirus pandemic
that have pushed up prices for so many American consumers. The America
COMPETES Act will bolster supply chains, ramp up domestic manufacturing
of critical components, like semiconductors, and insulate U.S. workers
and families from price volatility and help build their own economic
resilience.
Part of the House-passed version is the National Secure Data Service
Act, which will allow agencies to link together data collected through
surveys, Federal program administration, nongovernmental data sources
to advance evidence-based policymaking. This will be a great boon for
artificial intelligence and machine learning.
Also included in the COMPETES Act, is an amendment I cosponsored with
Representative Trahan to increase investment in fusion energy, the holy
grail for our climate and for world poverty.
The COMPETES Act bottom line gives the U.S. the competitive edge
needed to maintain our global leadership in innovation and research.
Madam Speaker, I am not sure why my Republican friends felt the need
to offer this motion in the first place. Of course, we all understand
that the essential subtext of the COMPETES Act has been to strengthen
our competitive position versus communist China or, to restate my
friend from Arkansas, to put us in the dominant position to compete
against communist China.
Of course, nothing in this landmark initiative in American research,
in American innovation, in American manufacturing, American artificial
intelligence or American chips is intended to be transferred to the
PRC. So if this is meant to show that Republicans are tougher on China
than Democrats, that is silly and untrue.
Together, we will fight China's human rights abuses. We will fight
its cheating on trade. We will fight its autocratic, dictatorial
government. And the COMPETES Act gives us the strength we need to do
that today.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. McCaul).
Mr. McCAUL. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma for
yielding.
Madam Speaker, the Chinese Communist Party poses a generational
threat to the United States and our freedom-loving allies around the
world.
They are brutally oppressing their own people. They are committing
genocide against ethnic and religious minorities. They are expanding
their military reach and carrying out territorial aggression against
their neighbors. We cannot wait any longer to address these issues.
Madam Speaker, I stand before you, quite frankly, disappointed. We
had a great opportunity here, and this bill that passed the House is
not the bill. I am very hopeful we can get to a good place in our
conference committee.
Unfortunately, the Democrat leaders chose not to work with
Republicans to pass a substantive, meaningful bill to counter this
malign influence. Instead,
[[Page H4051]]
they jammed the partisan COMPETES Act through the House.
The COMPETES Act, in my judgment, is a Trojan horse filled with
unserious, dangerous, and wasteful provisions.
{time} 1630
Those provisions include fringe, progressive priorities, like $8
billion worth of taxpayer money into an unaccountable U.N. slush fund.
This U.N. slush fund has already provided at least $100 million
directly to China, a country that this Congress, former Republican
administration, and current Democrat administration have all agreed is
committing genocide.
In fact, it is worse. The Xinjiang Province--you get this money to
make solar panels and batteries in the Xinjiang Province where they
commit genocide itself. That is not good for America and it is
certainly not good for the U.S. taxpayer.
Secretary Kerry admitted before our committee that the CCP is using
slave labor to make these green energy products--like solar panels and
batteries--that could be used by this U.N. fund. In effect, the bill
would fund their slave labor and prop up their forced abortions. We
tried to stop this from happening--to stop U.S. taxpayers from funding
slave labor in my motion to recommit, and shockingly, we were outright
rejected by the Democrats.
The motion to recommit prohibited taxpayer money going to slave
labor, genocide, and the Wuhan Lab, and every Democrat voted against
that measure. This is a test of our time.
Madam Speaker, so I remain the eternal optimist and hopeful that this
conference process will be able to rectify these glaring issues that I
have outlined. We can start today by supporting this motion that will
block billions of dollars going to the CCP military PLA companies and
human rights abusers.
Congress owes it to the American people to pass a bill that takes
this threat seriously. That includes tough export controls, outbound
investment screening and funding for the CHIPS for America Act, which I
introduced, to give us a competitive edge, bring manufacturing to the
United States to make advanced semiconductor chips and protect our
national security at the same time.
This is vitally important to our national security, and it keeps
critical U.S. technology out of the hands of the Chinese military, like
hypersonics. It ensures U.S. taxpayers are not subsidizing their
genocide.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this motion to
instruct. I hope we can all work together in a bipartisan manner on
what could be the most important legislation of this Congress.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I join the ranking member in being optimistic because
we are in a conference committee negotiating the America COMPETES Act,
we will get this CHIPS legislation done. Proudly, I have led 29
Democrats and 29 Republicans in endorsing the CHIPS Act legislation, so
it will be bipartisan. It will get done for the American people, and we
will solve some of our supply chain woes.
Madam Speaker, I am delighted to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Tonko).
Mr. TONKO. Madam Speaker, I am very proud of the efforts that have
been made by the House to advance COMPETES, an act that is about
investment; a bipartisan effort promoted with higher prioritization by
the leadership of this House to address investment: investment in
research, investment in workforce, investment in manufacturing.
It is so important that we are now investing in research as the
COMPETES Act requires so that we create the next generation of product
line and chips. It is important to invest in that pipeline of workers
that will have those precision-oriented skills in an innovation economy
that requires such precision. It is important that we retrofit our
manufacturing centers so as to compete and compete effectively.
I am impressed by the fact that we have taken the strengths of so
many committees and brought them into the forefront of COMPETES to make
certain that we invest in the CHIPS for America Act. I have industries
for microelectronics, and certainly the semiconductor industry that are
hosted in the 20th Congressional District that I am honored to
represent. They deserve and they require, more importantly, a
partnership with the Federal Government. Those resources will be there
with the passage of this bill as we bring together a consensus.
We will invest in that $52 billion worth of investment for the chips
industry, the CHIPS for America Act. We will make certain that a bill
that I authored, the Micro Act, is incorporated in the context of
COMPETES, and that will complement the provisions in CHIPS by making
certain that we accelerate early stage microelectronics research to
feed into the national semiconductor technology center.
It is so important to have that cutting-edge investment so that we
can lead the world in innovation, and making certain also that we
promote strong global leadership by positioning the interests and the
values of our United States, not China, to win on the world stage,
including with strong action to hold the PRC accountable for its trade
abuses which hurt U.S. workers, and for its human rights violations.
The America COMPETES Act will elevate American leadership in the
global arena, putting diplomacy first, strengthening our alliances,
combating unfair trade practices, and standing up for our national
values.
The COMPETES Act ensures that American goods are made in America by
American workers and boosts competition addressing supply bottlenecks,
strengthening U.S. manufacturing, and lowering those kitchen table
costs.
This is a measure that is all-inclusive. It is the boldest, strongest
statement on competitiveness for America. It is the great strength of
COMPETES that I hope will carry us now into an innovation economy with
the workforce prepared to go, a research investment that gives us the
vision and tethers that vision into future product lines and chips
development, and that will allow for us to strengthen our manufacturing
partnership. They require that assistance and they require our
partnership.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Speaker, I rise today to strongly support Mr.
Lucas' motion to instruct conferees on the American COMPETES Act.
The House-passed version of the bill should really have been called--
as a number of my colleagues have mentioned--the American concedes act.
Democratic leadership cobbled this legislation together from mostly
partisan bills without Republican support, in stark contrast to what
our colleagues in the Senate did.
As ranking member of the Asia-Pacific Subcommittee, which has
jurisdiction over China, I am deeply disappointed by the partisan
nature and the substance, in many ways, of this House-passed bill.
Competing with China should not be a partisan issue. On every front,
the Chinese Communist Party is aggressively challenging the free world
and our belief that open societies and free markets, and, yes, rule of
law are the way to a prosperous and equitable civilization.
After decades of inaction, it is time to reevaluate our basic
approach toward engagement with China. The Democrats' bill doesn't do
that. When Republicans attempted to amend the bill to make it better,
the Democrats rejected virtually every one of those attempts.
I would like to highlight two particularly concerning omissions from
the House bill. First, we should have adopted provisions to modernize
and strengthen our relationship with Taiwan which, by the way, got
bipartisan support in the Senate.
Second, we should also have used the opportunity to advance strong
export control policies to ensure that our critical technologies do not
advance the PRC's own drive for technological supremacy.
Moving forward, as we seek to bridge the gap between the House and
Senate bills, let's have these three priorities in mind. First, the
CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, is an adversary. No amount of
cajoling or diplomacy is going to get them to drop their hegemonic
ambitions. They want to be the top dog.
[[Page H4052]]
Second, the legislation must not include irrelevant pet projects like
money for the U.N. climate slush fund.
Third, at a bare minimum, we must ensure that any new technology or
grant funding doesn't end up going to China. A bill aimed at competing
with the Chinese Communist Party that simultaneously funds their
military modernization simply makes no sense.
Mr. Lucas' motion to instruct would go a long way towards making sure
that American tax dollars don't go to fund the Chinese Communist Party.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support it.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Michigan
for her leadership, along with my colleague from Texas, Congresswoman
Johnson, who chairs the Science, Space, and Technology Committee, and
the many, many committees that have worked on the COMPETES Act.
As an alum of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee and
a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I could not be more
ecstatic for America, for Houstonians, for Texans. To really take the
words of President Biden that were said to us in his comment on the
COMPETES Act: It is transformational investment in our industrial base
as well as research and development. It will help drive not only the
American economy, but the global economy. It will, in fact, bring more
manufacturing jobs back, and, yes, we will use the terminology, it will
reimagine not only the Midwest, but it will reimagine the Southwest,
the East, the West, the North, and the South. It will reimagine
opportunities for young people.
And the chips we have been waiting for, as indicated by the
gentlewoman from Michigan, I know we will have the opportunity to
really join in in a bipartisan way in conference for something that
nobody disagrees with. In addition, this ugly thing called the supply
chain that for a moment clogged the system, raised the prices, which
still have not been stabilized, but we will have the opportunity to
address that question as well by unclogging the seaways, by investing
with the infrastructure bill in ports, and getting products where they
need to go.
Let me also suggest that we will be able to build other companies,
smaller companies. Small businesses will improve or be able to result
in more investment. At the same time, this bipartisan legislation will
create opportunities for the next generation and the next generation.
I hope as well that minority businesses, minority scientists,
historically Black colleges will have the opportunity to be part of the
COMPETES Act, which I know that they will. This idea that we have a
distance between us as Republicans and Democrats has to be closed.
This is an American bill. This is a bill to say to China: We are not
going to take, sitting down, the unfair competition that you exert on
many of the inventions that actually are made right here in the United
States. Take the age-old internet and what China has done in many
instances.
Madam Speaker, I rise to support the COMPETES Act and it going to
conference, and at the same time recognize that any issue dealing with
China and the chips dealing with semiconductors will be addressed in
conference, and, as well, we will get the job done. It is
transformational and we can do no less than to invest in the great
mountain of research and development in this Nation.
Madam Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support the COMPETES Act
ultimately, and to work with conference as we go forward on this
legislation.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the motion
to instruct conferees. I welcome this opportunity to reconcile the
differences between the House and the Senate bills. This is an
opportunity to finally hold China accountable, and I hope we get to
a strong work product that we can be proud of.
The House version of this bill, the COMPETES Act, truly is a
nonstarter for House Republicans--no surprise--for both sides of the
Senate as well, and actually for the American people--and that is my
concern.
While it was messaged as legislation to combat the Chinese Communist
Party's predatory practices, the trade provisions in the House bill did
little to level the playing field with China, adding hurdles that would
hurt American consumers and small businesses.
Instead, that bill actually discourages work during a workforce
shortage by expanding and delinking the trade adjustment assistance
from new trade opportunities. It adds red tape and narrows eligibility
of trade programs like GSP and MTB. These are relief measures that we
know help small businesses and manufacturers in the marketplace. The
bill also exacerbates our supply chain crisis by making unvetted
changes to de minimus; and it also fails to address the
administration's lackluster effort to compete with China in the Indo-
Pacific and around the world.
The Senate's bipartisan approach, while imperfect, addresses China,
promotes small businesses of all sizes across our country, and more
than anything, it empowers American consumers right here at home.
{time} 1645
It offers a clean renewal of MTB, retroactively extends GSP, mandates
a section 301 exclusion process with retroactivity, and does not
include the Green New Deal wish list.
Let's work together on a final product that actually holds China
accountable.
Madam Speaker, I reiterate my support and certainly urge my
colleagues to do the same.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I have no further requests for time. I am
prepared to close, and I believe I have the right to close, so I
continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close.
We have heard today, Madam Speaker, a commitment to act, a commitment
to move into a conference, a commitment to get the America COMPETES Act
done for the United States, CHIPS Act funding, investment in scientific
research, and more. This is an exciting moment in this Chamber.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LUCAS. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank my colleagues for their words of support for this motion.
As I said when we began this debate, we have a once-in-a-generation
chance to strengthen U.S. science and technology and secure a place in
the global economy. The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has
passed strategic, bipartisan legislation to do just that. Our bills
double our investment in critical research and technology. They are a
strong commitment to America's technological development.
There is no question that our bills should be the core of the final
conferenced legislation. We can't afford to pollute these critical
policies with partisan poison pills and throw away our deliberate,
strategic approach for long-term growth in favor of the one-time
spending spree in the COMPETES Act.
There is a difference between empty spending and making an
investment. The COMPETES Act is empty, unfocused spending. The Science,
Space, and Technology Committee has passed targeted, bipartisan
investments in research and technology. They will pay off in more jobs,
a stronger economy, and a more secure homeland.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support that approach and to
support guardrails to ensure that our taxpayer investments aren't going
to Communist leadership in China. That is why this motion is so
important.
This isn't a partisan issue. It has been part of Senator Schumer's
legislative text on competitiveness from day one. That is because this
is basic, commonsense policy, and I can't imagine that any of our
constituents would disagree with that.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to pass this motion, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Without objection, the previous question is ordered.
[[Page H4053]]
There was no objection.
The question is on the motion to instruct.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Ms. STEVENS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on the motion to
instruct will be followed by 5-minute votes on:
The motion to recommit on H.R. 6833; and
Passage of H.R. 6833, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 351,
nays 74, not voting 6, as follows:
[Roll No. 100]
YEAS--351
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Arrington
Auchincloss
Axne
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Bourdeaux
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brooks
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Case
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cherfilus-McCormick
Cleaver
Cline
Cloud
Clyburn
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Connolly
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
Dean
DeFazio
DeLauro
DelBene
Delgado
Demings
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Doggett
Donalds
Doyle, Michael F.
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Eshoo
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Foster
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gallego
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Harris
Harshbarger
Hayes
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Hollingsworth
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jones
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamb
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Lesko
Letlow
Levin (CA)
Lofgren
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luria
Lynch
Mace
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Mann
Manning
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCollum
McEachin
McHenry
McKinley
McNerney
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (NC)
Neguse
Nehls
Newhouse
Norcross
Norman
O'Halleran
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Palmer
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Pence
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Pfluger
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reed
Reschenthaler
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Ross
Rouzer
Roy
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Scalise
Scanlon
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Soto
Spanberger
Spartz
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Strickland
Swalwell
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Titus
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Veasey
Vela
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Wasserman Schultz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wexton
Wild
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin
NAYS--74
Barragan
Bass
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Brown (MD)
Bush
Butterfield
Casten
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cohen
Correa
Davis, Danny K.
DeGette
Dingell
Escobar
Espaillat
Evans
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Green, Al (TX)
Huffman
Jeffries
Johnson (TX)
Kelly (IL)
Kind
Lee (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lowenthal
Matsui
McBath
McGovern
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Newman
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Payne
Pressley
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stevens
Suozzi
Takano
Thompson (MS)
Tlaib
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Vargas
Velazquez
Waters
Watson Coleman
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
NOT VOTING--6
Armstrong
Brady
Bustos
Cheney
Fortenberry
Hartzler
{time} 1724
Mses. CHU, LEE of California, Mr. TRONE, Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts,
Messrs. VARGAS, COHEN, Mrs. McBATH, Messrs. MFUME, GREEN of Texas,
SMITH of Washington, LIEU, TAKANO, BROWN of Maryland, Mrs. TRAHAN,
Messrs. MEEKS, EVANS, THOMPSON of Mississippi, Ms. BARRAGAN, Mrs.
DINGELL, Mses. BLUNT ROCHESTER, and PRESSLEY changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. MOORE of Alabama, SCHNEIDER, CARDENAS, Mses. SEWELL,
UNDERWOOD, Mr. RASKIN, Ms. KAPTUR, and Mr. JONES changed their vote
from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to instruct was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress
Baird (Walorski)
Bilirakis (Fleischmann)
Bowman (Meng)
Brooks (Green (TN))
Cawthorn (Nehls)
Comer (Fleischmann)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
Cuellar (Pappas)
Curtis (Stewart)
DeGette (Blunt Rochester)
Espaillat (Correa)
Harder (CA) (Gomez)
Jayapal (Gomez)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Joyce (OH) (Garbarino)
Kahele (Takano)
Kind (Beyer)
Kinzinger (Meijer)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Beyer)
LaMalfa (Palazzo)
Lawson (FL) (Wasserman Schultz)
Mace (Rice (SC))
Manning (Beyer)
McClain (Fitzgerald)
Mrvan (Takano)
Newman (Beyer)
Owens (Stewart)
Roybal-Allard (Wasserman Schultz)
Salazar (Gimenez)
Sanchez (Gomez)
Scott, David (Jeffries)
Sessions (Babin)
Sires (Pallone)
Speier (Scanlon)
Steel (Obernolte)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Taylor (Carter (TX))
Thompson (MS) (Evans)
Trone (Beyer)
Waltz (Mast)
Wilson (FL) (Jeffries)
Wilson (SC) (Rice (SC))
Yarmuth (Beyer)
____________________