[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 108 (Friday, June 24, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H5883-H5891]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENTS TO HOUSE AMENDMENT TO 
 S. 2938, JOSEPH WOODROW HATCHETT UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE AND FEDERAL 
  BUILDING; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO HOUSE 
     AMENDMENT TO S. 2089, KEEP KIDS FED ACT OF 2022; RELATING TO 
  CONSIDERATION OF SENATE AMENDMENT TO H.R. 4346, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH 
            APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2022; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 1204 and ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1204

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 2938) 
     to designate the United States Courthouse and Federal 
     Building located at 111 North Adams Street in Tallahassee, 
     Florida, as the ``Joseph Woodrow Hatchett United States 
     Courthouse and Federal Building'', and for other purposes, 
     with the Senate amendments to the House amendment thereto, 
     and to consider in the House, without intervention of any 
     point of order, a single motion offered by the chair of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary or his designee that the House 
     concur in the Senate amendments to the House amendment. The 
     Senate amendments and the motion shall be considered as read. 
     The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided 
     and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of 
     the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     motion to its adoption without intervening motion or demand 
     for division of the question.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (S. 2089) to 
     amend the Families First Coronavirus Response Act to extend 
     child nutrition waiver authority, and for other purposes, 
     with the Senate amendment to the House amendment thereto, and 
     to consider in the House, without intervention of any point 
     of order, a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on 
     Education and Labor or his designee that the House concur in 
     the Senate amendment to the House amendment. The Senate 
     amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The 
     motion shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Education and Labor or their respective 
     designees. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening 
     motion.
       Sec. 3.  Upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall 
     be considered to have taken from the Speaker's table the bill 
     (H.R. 4346) making appropriations for Legislative Branch for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2022, and for other 
     purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to have 
     concurred in the Senate amendment with an amendment 
     consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-53.
       Sec. 4.  House Resolution 1132 is hereby adopted.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts is 
recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the

[[Page H5884]]

customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. 
Fischbach), 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. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which 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. Madam Speaker, earlier today, the Rules Committee met 
and reported a rule, House Resolution 1204, for two measures.
  First, it provides for consideration of the Senate amendments to the 
House amendment to S. 2938, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. The 
rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on 
the Judiciary that the House concur in the Senate amendments. It 
provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair 
and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Second, the rule provides for consideration of the Senate amendment 
to the House amendment to S. 2089, the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022. The 
rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on 
Education and Labor that the House concur in the Senate amendment and 
provides 10 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the 
chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor.
  Finally, the rule deems passage of H. Res. 1132 and deems that the 
House concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 4346 with an amendment.
  Madam Speaker, let me first say that I am so disappointed with where 
this school meals extension landed. We had a bipartisan, bicameral 
agreement in place, a measure that, in my opinion, didn't go far 
enough. But I was willing to support it because we have a hunger cliff 
looming in 6 days.
  It passed the House yesterday by a vote of 376-42. Then, one Senator 
decided to hold up the bill, a bill to give kids free meals over the 
summer and provide administrative flexibilities and extra funding to 
schools in the fall. The objection? A provision that gave free meals at 
school for kids at 185 percent of poverty or below. For a family of 
four, that is a family with a maximum total household income of just 
over $50,000 a year.
  What a rotten thing to do. I can't say the words I would like to use 
on the House floor to describe just how callous this is, so let me just 
say this: It takes a real jerk to take food out of the mouths of kids.
  I am going to support this bill. The stakes are too high for us not 
to support it, and there are a lot of good provisions in here, 
provisions that extend the flexibilities and provide a reimbursement 
rate increase to schools to help them continue serving kids nutritious 
meals and extend universal free meals over the summer.
  But I am going to continue fighting like hell at every chance to make 
sure that every child gets a free breakfast and lunch as part of their 
school day.
  Food is a right. I believe it is a fundamental human right. And for 
kids living in poverty, school meals are sometimes the only nutritious 
food that they have access to.
  I thank my friends, Chairman Scott and Chairwoman Stabenow, for their 
work in averting the hunger cliff and getting free meals to kids this 
summer. I thank Speaker Pelosi for her incredible leadership. I thank 
Chairwoman Rosa DeLauro for her persistence on this.
  They are all dedicated to ending hunger, especially among children. I 
am going to continue to work with them until we finally end hunger in 
this country once and for all.
  In addition, Madam Speaker, let me just say that this is a historic 
moment. We are on the threshold of passing the first major overhaul of 
Federal gun safety legislation in decades. This bill that we will soon 
vote on will save lives, and it couldn't come at a more important time.
  As the American people are demanding that we do more to prevent gun 
violence, the Supreme Court is recklessly striking down gun safety laws 
that have been on the books for over a century.
  As the American people look to Congress to take action to prevent the 
next mass shooting, House Republican leaders are caving to the gun 
lobby, whipping against a bipartisan, bicameral agreement of 
commonsense gun safety measures that an overwhelming majority of the 
American people support.
  Despite what you will hear on the floor today, the American people 
get it. They know the terrible toll gun violence has taken on 
communities all across this country: over 100 per day killed by guns; 
more children killed with a gun in the last two decades than on-duty 
police officers and Active-Duty military combined; the list of mass 
shootings and tragedies grows longer and longer by the month.
  Yet, if you talk to Republicans here in the House, you would think we 
are living in an alternative universe. Just this week, most Republicans 
voted down a bill to alert people when a mass shooting was happening 
near them. Let me repeat that: Just this week, Republicans voted down a 
bill to alert people when a mass shooting was happening near them.
  Are you kidding me? What kind of people don't even want you to know 
which way to run if there is a shooting nearby?
  I am so sick and tired of the stranglehold that the gun lobby and 
their blood money have on the Republican Party. Enough is enough. The 
time has come for action. The time has come for us to put aside 
politics and actually do the right thing.
  I commend the many Republicans who have done just that. I don't think 
I could agree with Senator Mitch McConnell on where to go to have 
lunch, but he said that the Safer Communities Act is ``a commonsense 
package of popular steps that will help make these horrifying incidents 
less likely while fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-
abiding citizens.'' That is Mitch McConnell.

  Senator Lindsey Graham--and we are polar opposites--said: ``The 
legislation is not perfect, but we must not let the perfect become the 
enemy of the good.'' That is Lindsey Graham.
  Even here in the House, some courageous Republicans have said that 
they will support this bill, like Congressman Tony Gonzales, who said: 
``It is my duty to pass laws that never infringe on the Constitution 
while protecting the lives of the innocent.''
  The U.S. Senate is notorious for not being able to build consensus 
around solutions to fix the most straightforward of problems, yet here 
they have come up with a reasonable, bipartisan deal on a contentious 
issue.
  I think it is shameful, quite frankly, that GOP Leader McCarthy and 
his team are parroting the gun lobby's talking points. But what I find 
even more disappointing, frankly, are the crocodile tears about 
bipartisanship from the GOP when they vote time and time again against 
substantial bipartisan deals like this one.
  Please spare us the lectures. Nothing in this bill is new. Nothing in 
this bill is controversial. These ideas have been around for decades, 
and they are what the American people want.
  If people are worried about backlash back home, this is an 
opportunity for you to correct the record. Go home and tell the truth 
that this bill does nothing to infringe on the Second Amendment, and it 
doesn't punish law-abiding gun owners.

                              {time}  0930

  This country is crying out for action. Americans are begging us to 
work together to protect our kids and our communities.
  I know I am asking you to vote against your party's leadership. I 
know that is a tough spot to put some of my Republican friends in. But 
I think at the end of the day, you owe it to yourself to consider this 
one idea: What if this bill stops even one mass shooting from 
happening? Is a ``no'' vote worth the lives of your constituents?
  Don't listen to those who are spreading crazy conspiracy theories, 
saying that this is going to lead to everyone's guns getting taken 
away. We hear it over and over and over again. Listen to your GOP 
colleagues who helped write this bill and who passed it over in the 
Senate. Listen to the American people who overwhelmingly support this 
bill, and then listen to your conscience.

[[Page H5885]]

  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I thank the Representative from Massachusetts and the distinguished 
chair of the Rules Committee for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Madam Speaker, S. 2938, as amended in the Senate, is at its core an 
effort to chip away at the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding 
citizens. It has received no hearings, no committee process, and has 
only recently been released in bill form for the public to review. It 
came to us very early this morning after the Senate passed it late last 
night, and my colleagues expect us to vote on this bill later today, 
despite the egregious procedural violations. Unfortunately for the 
American people, that is not a unique development here in Congress. I 
am disappointed that this is the way the majority has chosen to proceed 
with legislation, with no hearing and no public input.
  The bill provides $750 million over 5 years in Federal Byrne JAG 
grant funding to States for crisis intervention proceedings, including 
State-level red flag programs. However, this bill fails to provide 
explicit due process requirements. We have seen in places where red 
flag laws have been adopted that these types of laws always infringe on 
the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners. This ambiguous 
language contains insufficient guardrails to ensure that the money is 
actually going toward keeping guns out of the hands of criminals or 
preventing mass violence.
  Vague red flag laws are ripe for abuse and can become extremely 
dangerous. For example, a person could have just gotten out of an 
abusive relationship and has a firearm to defend themselves against 
their ex-partner. Their abusive partner could report this individual 
and have their firearm taken away, putting the victim at even greater 
risk.
  This bill also includes provisions that will lead to enhanced 
scrutiny of certain adults based on their age before they can exercise 
their constitutionally guaranteed rights. There are no other 
constitutional rights in which we require enhanced screenings of 
certain adults based solely on their age.
  There is also surprisingly little in this bill that actually focuses 
on making our schools safer. The bill does nothing to help provide for 
additional school resource officers. I suspect this is due to the fact 
that some of my Democrat colleagues are still incapable of supporting 
funding for additional law enforcement officers, even in our children's 
schools.
  Lastly, we know that this is just the tip of the iceberg. President 
Biden and my Democrat colleagues have made it abundantly clear that 
this is just a ``small step'' toward their larger gun-grabbing agenda. 
The actions of this administration's Department of Justice, FBI, and 
ATF have completely whittled away the confidence of gun-owning 
Americans that the provisions in these bills will not be abused beyond 
their stated scope.
  House Republicans are committed to identifying and solving the root 
causes of violent crimes and bolstering school security, but doing so 
must not infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding 
citizens. For example, just earlier this week, we voted on the 
bipartisan Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-Being Act. This 
bill contains the bulk of the mental health care provisions included in 
the Senate bill, without infringing on Second Amendment rights.
  In this case, the bill we are considering under this rule is not only 
a blatant infringement on lawful gun owners' Second Amendment rights, 
but an unnecessary duplication of the bipartisan work we have already 
done.
  Madam Speaker, for these reasons, I oppose the rule, ask Members to 
do the same, and I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, let me just say that it is a little frustrating to 
kind of hear my colleagues imply that somehow we are moving too fast, 
after decades of inaction, of doing absolutely nothing, after massacre 
after massacre after massacre, doing nothing. Now we are being accused 
of moving too fast.
  Want to talk about the process? We have had countless hearings on gun 
violence and on measures to combat gun violence in a variety of 
committees here. We had a committee hold a hearing with a young girl 
from Uvalde who told Members of Congress that she had to cover herself 
with the blood of her dead classmate and pretend that she was dead in 
order to escape being killed herself.
  We have heard from law enforcement officials. We have heard from 
grieving parents. Nothing in this bill is controversial. People have 
seen--the text of this bill has been available since Tuesday. It is not 
that complicated.
  So when people say: Process, oh, we just need more time, and we 
should do more hearings, and we should do this and we should do that--
no. I mean, this is put up or shut up time for all of us. This is an 
opportunity that we cannot miss.
  So the choice for Members on both sides is simple. I mean, we are 
either going to do something--again, this is way more modest than 
anything that I would suggest that we do. But we are either going to do 
something, or we are going to do the same old same old, nothing.

  Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
(Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
  Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, the American people know that we cannot 
sit idly by and watch preventable gun deaths happen day after day, year 
after year.
  Over the past few weeks, I have heard from hundreds of constituents 
of all ages and all walks of life who are demanding action to reduce 
gun violence.
  When our Framers gathered in Philadelphia to write the Constitution, 
they were explicit about the purposes of that entire document: . . . 
establish justice, to insure domestic tranquility, provide for the 
common defense''--not individual Armageddon--``promote the general 
welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our 
posterity.''
  With those words, our Government was created to meet the needs of the 
people.
  But how can we meet the needs of the people if we don't take action 
to prevent them from being gunned down in their schools, workplaces, 
houses of worship, or neighborhood streets?
  How can we be faithful to the purposes of the Constitution while 
allowing the routine terrorization and slaughter of our children, 
neighbors, teachers, doctors, and seniors?
  I refuse to tell the American people, and particularly our children, 
that they must be sacrificial lambs to a twisted theory of armed Second 
Amendment liberty that defies the express purposes of our Constitution 
by undermining the general welfare and destroying domestic tranquility.
  The American people know, as well as we do, that the time is now to 
act. The Safer Communities Act is a minimal first step in taking action 
to keep our children and communities safe. But after 30 years of Senate 
inaction, it is a step, and we know that it should not be the last.
  Our children deserve a brighter future in which they can enjoy the 
blessings of liberty, instead of being traumatized by active-shooter 
drills and actual active shooters.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I would just like to mention that my distinguished colleague 
repeatedly talks about how this is not controversial. If it is not 
controversial, then committee hearings held by the majority should not 
be a problem. So I would ask again that we follow the procedures of the 
House.
  Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to immediately consider Congressman Hudson's STOP 
II Act, critical legislation that addresses two issues that both sides 
of the aisle should be able to agree on, hardening for schools and 
active-shooter training, law enforcement, and mental health funding.
  I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the 
Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote 
on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.

[[Page H5886]]

  

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, House Republicans are committed to 
addressing the tragedy of these school shootings, but we cannot and 
should not impede the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens. 
This is not a matter of Democrat or Republican; it is a matter of what 
is in the Constitution.
  Congressman Hudson's legislation is something we can pass right now, 
today, that will have immediate positive effects, keeping students safe 
while getting Americans the mental health resources they need.
  Many of these solutions are included in the bill we are considering 
under the rule, but Congressman Hudson's solution achieves the same 
outcome without infringing on our Second Amendment rights.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Hudson), to speak further on the amendment.
  Mr. HUDSON. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so 
that we can immediately consider my bill, H.R. 7966, the STOP II, 
Secure Every School and Protect our Nation's Children Act.
  It is an honor to be here today. In fact, what an honor that the 
people of North Carolina's Eighth Congressional District have bestowed 
upon me to allow me to be their Representative here in the United 
States Congress.
  As I walked the Halls of this Capitol building this morning, I 
couldn't help but think of the great American patriots who have served 
here before us.
  I think about the patriots who came before, who pledged their lives, 
their property, and their sacred honor so that we could live in the 
freedom and prosperity we enjoy today. People like Patrick Henry, who 
famously said: ``Give me liberty or give me death.''
  The courage of our Founders, the faith, the strength of their 
convictions, the belief in an ideal--indeed, an idea--that all people 
are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. And they 
devised a Constitution that protects and guarantees these rights. It is 
an incredible thing to think about, the legacy they have left in the 
hands of this, the 117th Congress. Each one of us swore an oath when we 
accepted this office. It wasn't an oath to a person or a political 
party. It was an oath to defend the Constitution.
  The issue before us today is what can we do--no, what should we do 
when faced with the challenge before us, this epidemic of children 
taking the lives of other children in our schools?
  Every single one of us grieves for the lives taken. As the father of 
an elementary school child, my heart aches for the lives lost and the 
unimaginable pain and grief felt by those who love them. Neither party 
cares more about this. Neither political party has a monopoly on 
wanting to do something.

  That is why Republicans have come to the table with ideas that will 
actually get to some of the root causes of this violence. More than 12 
pieces of legislation have been introduced by Republican Members of 
this House to strengthen background checks, to improve law enforcement 
coordination and response, to address the mental health needs of our 
children, to make schools safer, and to prevent this violence.
  To date, my colleagues across the aisle have been unwilling to engage 
with us, to seek consensus, to work together to solve this problem.
  Just a few weeks ago, the majority party brought forth a package of 
gun control measures. This legislation targeted the constitutional 
rights of law-abiding citizens. This legislation did nothing to address 
the security in our schools. It did nothing to provide better mental 
health resources to improve the ability of school officials and law 
enforcement to intervene with these children in crisis. But it did let 
a lot of people around here feel better, because they could go home and 
say: We did something.
  Over in the Senate, they aren't even considering this reckless 
package of bills. But Republicans and Democrats in the Senate did 
attempt to work together to find a solution, and there are many things 
that I like about this Senate legislation. In fact, I am flattered that 
they use much of the mental health and school safety provisions from my 
legislation. But as much as we feel the need to do something to tackle 
this problem, we cannot forget that oath that we all took on the first 
day of this Congress.

                              {time}  0945

  Our highest calling as a Member of Congress is to defend the 
Constitution. And that is where this legislation sent to us by the 
Senate falls short. This open-ended gun control legislation opens the 
door to Federal funding of State red flag laws. First of all, these 
laws don't work.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a list of 12 mass shootings 
that have taken place in States that already have red flag laws.

                         ``Red Flag'' Failures

       May 14, 2022, Buffalo, N.Y.
       Payton S. Gedron, 10 fatalities
       New York's ``Red Flag'' law went into effect August 24, 
     2019
       May 26, 2021, San Jose, Calif.
       Samuel Cassidy, 9 fatalities
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016
       April 15, 2021, Indianapolis, Ind.
       Brandon Scott Hole, 8 fatalities
       Indiana's ``Red Flag'' law went into effect in 2005
       March 31, 2021, Orange, Calif.
       Aminadab Gaxiola Gonzalez, 4 fatalities
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016
       March 22, 2021, Boulder, Colo.
       Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, 10 fatalities
       Colorado's ``Red Flag'' law went into effect January 2020
       December 10, 2019, Jersey City, N.J.
       David N. Anderson and Francine Graham, 4 fatalities
       New Jersey's ``Red Flag'' law went into effect September 1, 
     2019
       July 28, 2019, Gilroy, Calif.
       Santino William LeGan, 3 fatalities, 12 injured
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016
       February 15, 2019, Aurora, Ill.
       Gary Martin, 5 fatalities
       Illinois's ``Red Flag'' law went into effect January 1, 
     2019
       January 23, 2019, Sebring, Fla.
       Zephen A. Xaver, 5 fatalities
       Florida's ``Red Flag'' law took effect March 2018
       November 7, 2018, Thousand Oaks, Calif.
       Ian David Long, 12 fatalities
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016
       September 12, 2018, Bakersfield, Calif.
       Javier Casarez, 5 fatalities
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016
       November 14, 2017, Rancho Tehama, Calif.
       Kevin Janson Neal, 5 fatalities
       California's ``Red Flag'' law was enacted in 2016

  Mr. HUDSON. Madam Speaker, the State with the most mass shootings is 
California. California has the most restrictive gun laws in America. 
California already has a red flag law. But more important to this 
debate, red flag laws subvert due process protections and threaten the 
constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens.
  Why would we agree to borrow more money that we don't have so the 
Federal Government can give it to States to enact laws that don't work 
and that actually threaten the rights of our citizens?
  Why would we do that?
  Second, this legislation singles out law-abiding citizens under the 
age of 21 by giving the government discretion to delay, for any reason, 
their constitutionally protected right to a firearm--a right, by the 
way, affirmed, yet again, by the Supreme Court just yesterday.
  We all want to keep firearms out of the hands of people that 
shouldn't have them, and I am willing to consider ways to better 
identify people with mental health challenges, but I can't help but 
think about that 20-year-old paratrooper stationed in Fort Bragg, North 
Carolina.
  Our Nation entrusted him to defend us with an automatic weapon or a 
multimillion-dollar-weapon system, but we can't trust him with a 
semiautomatic weapon to defend themselves in their own home?
  What about the 20-year-old spouse back home in Spring Lake, North 
Carolina, alone because our paratrooper has deployed in service of our 
Nation. Are we to tell this spouse that the government doesn't trust 
you to defend your home?
  Instead, we are going to delay your purchase for 10 days. At the end 
of the 10 days, the government doesn't even have to get back to the gun 
owner or the gun store. Let that gun dealer decide if they want to take 
a risk on selling you this firearm while an FBI investigation is still 
open.
  No, this is a de facto ban on gun sales to law-abiding citizens under 
the age of 21.

[[Page H5887]]

  Third, this legislation also broadens firearm prohibitions for 
misdemeanors and nonviolent offenders. I think most of us can agree, 
someone convicted of beating up their spouse ought to be put on the 
background check system. The law extends this to misdemeanor assault on 
a spouse or someone with whom you share a child. But we have to be 
careful when we are talking about taking away a constitutionally 
protected right over other misdemeanors.
  The language of this bill is so broad it can include nonviolent 
offenders, and I am concerned that the due process protections are 
simply not there.
  So what are we proposing today? Let's set aside these controversial 
unconstitutional provisions that divide us. Let's unite around the idea 
that we are going to tackle the real causes of this violence. These 
school shootings are almost always done by a young male, often from a 
single-parent or no-parent home. They have experienced some trauma in 
their life. Most are likely on some behavioral medication, and they 
have shown plenty of signs of being in crisis. Yet, effective 
intervention and mental health treatment did not happen.
  So let's start there. Today, I rise to propose we defeat this 
previous question and replace the Senate language with H.R. 7966.
  This legislation builds on the STOP School Violence Act signed into 
law in 2018 by providing a billion dollars in grants to hire more 
school resource officers. It provides $1 billion to hire mental health 
guidance counselors so that schools have the resources to intervene 
with these children in crisis.
  Imagine, if we had been able to intervene with the shooter in Uvalde 
before he dropped out of high school.
  This legislation includes $5 billion to fund STOP School Violence 
programs to make schools safer, to provide active shooter training to 
law enforcement, and to better equip school officials and students and 
law enforcement to intervene before one of these students reaches the 
breaking point. This $7 billion is paid for by redirecting unspent 
COVID-19 funds that have already been approved.
  Also, under my legislation, schools can apply for a threat assessment 
to identify weaknesses in their security and to assess the mental 
health services at the school. We would also codify a clearinghouse at 
Homeland Security to collect and share best practices for school 
safety. These are practical, commonsense solutions that we should all 
be able to agree will have a real impact.
  Madam Speaker, I agree with my friend. Now is our moment. Today, we 
can come together--Republicans and Democrats--and really address these 
issues in a meaningful way. We can do this while at the same time 
keeping the promise made by the sacrifice and the courage of our 
Founders by upholding our pledge on the first day in office to defend 
this Constitution.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against the previous 
question so we can immediately consider this important legislation. God 
bless you.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let me just say a couple of words in response to the gentleman from 
North Carolina.
  He just said that Democrats and Republicans should come together. 
Well, they did. I mean, Mitch McConnell is a Republican. Lindsey Graham 
is Republican. Tony Gonzalez is a Republican. I mean, Republicans and 
Democrats have come together like they never have before on this issue. 
Maybe my Republican friends ought to get together with their Republican 
friends to try to work it out on their side. But Democrats and 
Republicans have come together.
  I am having trouble following the gentleman's logic when he basically 
implies that if we can't do something to stop all shootings, then maybe 
it is not worth doing anything. Nobody is saying that what we are doing 
today will prevent every shooting. What we are saying today is that it 
will prevent some. What we are saying today is it will protect lives.
  In the aftermath of Uvalde and Buffalo, people all across this 
country, regardless of their politics, were so horrified. They are 
demanding that we act. Again, as I said at the outset, I would have 
preferred that we do more. I understand that we can only get done what 
we can get done in the reality in which we are living here in the 
Congress; and in the Senate you need 10 Republicans to get permission 
to have a cup of coffee. The fact of the matter is, there is a process 
over there that has prevented even a debate on gun safety legislation 
because of the filibuster. But a number of Republican Senators came 
together because they listened to their constituents, and I think they 
finally said we have to do something.

  No one is saying this will stop every shooting, but under that logic, 
why do we have fire departments?
  We have fire departments but there are still fires.
  Why do we have seatbelt laws?
  There are seatbelt laws and there are still people that get killed in 
car crash fatalities.
  I mean, the bottom line is, we have them because they save some 
lives, and it is worth it. As I said at the outset, for every item in 
this bipartisan package there has been a hearing on at some point. None 
of these ideas are new. So there has been a process.
  But what I find particularly ironic is that as we are being lectured 
about, oh, we need more time, we need more hearings, the gentlewoman 
says that we should bring up the gentleman's bill and consider it 
immediately with no hearings, with no process. I mean, I get whiplash 
just trying to follow the logic of my friends from the other side.
  Madam Speaker, the bottom line is either we are going to do 
something, or we are not. And those who are arguing for delaying this 
more and more and more are the same people who will never vote for it.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, let my thank the chairman very much 
for yielding, and for the expeditious way in which the Committee on 
Rules realized that we are in crisis.
  Let me just start by saying to stop the carnage and the bloodshed, I 
rise in support of the bipartisan Safer Communities Act. And since I 
know that this Congress has vision and it has passion to move, as well, 
the Protect Our Kids Act as we go forward in the future.
  I realize that this bipartisan effort is historic, particularly in 
light of the Supreme Court decision which took history and literally 
shredded the constitutional privileges of life and liberty by 
suggesting that laws that under Heller were legal, could not be in 
place. Legislation that is going to come before us will, in fact, 
emphasize that we want to save lives.
  Madam Speaker, I support this effort going forward because I want to 
say to the grieving families of Buffalo, the grieving families of 
Mother Emanuel, the grieving families in Uvalde, the parent who spoke 
to me just two nights ago whose daughter bled out, that we are 
listening.
  I also rise today to support H. Res. 1132, which says to the world 
that the United States Congress calls on the Government of Russia, the 
Russian Federation, to immediately release Brittney Griner.
  This bill was introduced by myself, Congressman Stanton and 
Congressman Allred, because we realize this young woman who grew up and 
was born in Houston, Texas, who, was a two-time Olympian, who is a 
renowned WNBA player, is now wrongfully detained in Russia. She has had 
a prolific collegiate career and went to Nimitz High School and Baylor 
University.
  She is someone who has been known to be generous in her community by 
providing an outstanding program that helps young people. She has the 
Heart and Soul Shoe Drive. She is an American's American.
  We ask that you support this H. Res. 1132 to release Brittney Griner 
now.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule which brings to the 
floor S. 2938, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, and H. Res. 1132, 
``Calling for the immediate release of Brittney Griner''.
  Both the bill and the resolution addressed by this rule advance 
bedrock American values and priorities that are intrinsic to our 
national character.
  The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act provides reasonable, common-
sense measures to enhance safety and reduce gun violence that is 
increasingly inflicting unspeakable pain and suffering on American 
families.

[[Page H5888]]

  I have never met an American who does not want to keep their children 
safe, and especially protect them from gun violence. The bipartisan 
nature of the bill emphasizes the universal desire to protect our 
children and families.
  When modest, reasonable measures can be taken to protect lives and 
avert tragedy, it is our responsibility to embrace that opportunity.
  The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act will surely save lives. Even if 
it prevents just one mass shooting--or even if it only saves one life--
its worth will be proven.
  Consider what America would think if, without enactment of this bill, 
children were murdered in a mass shooting, and it were determined that 
the killer would have been prevented from their heinous acts if only 
this bill had become law. For those families in mourning, Congress's 
failure to act would be unforgiveable.
  Instead, by advancing this legislation, we will be averting the most 
painful tragedy that a family could experience, and many families will 
be spared that devastation.
  The bill's reasonable steps will have a positive impact on public 
safety and family security for years to come.
  H. Res. 1132, which is also addressed by this rule, calls for the 
release of Brittney Griner and, in so doing, puts Congress on record 
emphatically defending true American values such as our devotion to 
human rights, respect and dignity for each person, the right to due 
process, and justice based on truth.
  Each of these have been offended by Russia unjustifiably holding 
Griner, and by the Russian distortion of a judicial system that extends 
her detention, preventing her release to return home, without a factual 
or legal basis for doing so.
  Brittney Griner, who grew up in Houston, Texas, is an extension of 
all of us. She represents quintessential American stories and 
qualities. The injustices inflicted upon her by Putin and his acolytes 
in Russia could have been imposed on any Americans within their reach.
  The denial of basic rights from Brittney offends all Americans 
because they are rights to which we believe all people are entitled. We 
do not accept the dehumanization that is commonplace in Russia, and our 
values compel us to seek justice for Brittney, her immediate release, 
and her return home to her family and friends.
  As a mother who has raised a family, I can only imagine the gut-
wrenching pain that her parents, family, and friends must be feeling 
right now. There is no worse feeling than when someone in your family 
is in imminent danger and they are beyond your reach to help them.
  As a Black woman, I can say there's no greater fear than having a 
loved one being wrongfully placed in a situation or environment over 
which there is no control.
  For any of us, if we had a loved one placed in this situation, we 
would be doing everything in our power to ensure their prompt and safe 
return.
  We would be calling and seeking the help of everyone possible--
including the media, the U.S. State Department, and even allies in 
Russia.
  We would press every politician and public figure to fight against 
the corrupt government of Russia to ensure that our family member is 
guaranteed their natural born rights to due process, a fair trial, and 
a prompt release from detention.
  No American citizen should be detained in a foreign country for 
months, denied access to American consular officials, and dependent 
upon the performance of a Russian lawyer, especially in absence of 
substantial evidence of a crime.
  Ms. Griner is suffering from Russia's heinous demonstration of power 
and control that stems from centuries of bigotry and hatred embodied in 
an autocratic leader who is the very antithesis of everything Ms. 
Griner represents.
  Ms. Griner's detention is primarily based on the country of her 
citizenship, in a game of political leverage. Since she was targeted 
because of being an American, every American should take this 
personally. Her detention is an offense against our country, and 
against our people.
  Griner was detained on February 17, 2022, her initial release date 
was set to be May 19th, it was then shifted to June 19th, and when that 
date approached, it was delayed to July 2nd.
  That is not justice--it's oppression. We call on Putin and the 
Russian government to comply with their international treaty 
obligations.
  By passing the rule bringing H. Res. 1132 before us, Congress 
insists, alongside the Griner family, that Brittney Griner must be 
immediately and safely released and returned home to the U.S. We are 
unified in demanding respectful treatment and justice for her, in 
accordance with American values.
  I also rise in support of the rule by which the House has passed H. 
Res. 1132, ``Calling for the immediate release of Brittney Griner''.
  A very important component of the rule currently before the House is 
that it: ``Provides that House Resolution 1132 is hereby adopted.''
  I fought hard for passage of H. Res. 1132, introduced by Congressman 
Stanton, myself, and Congressman Allred, because, by raising our voices 
for Brittney Griner, we raise our voices for bedrock American values 
and priorities that are intrinsic to our national character.
  H. Res. 1132 calls for the release of Brittney Griner and, in so 
doing, puts Congress on record emphatically defending true American 
values such as our devotion to human rights, respect and dignity for 
each person, the right to due process, and justice based on truth.
  Each of these have been offended by Russia unjustifiably holding 
Griner, and by the Russian distortion of a judicial system that extends 
her detention, preventing her release to return home, without a factual 
or legal basis for doing so.
  Brittney Griner, who grew up in Houston, Texas, is an extension of 
all of us. She represents quintessential American stories and 
qualities. The injustices inflicted upon her by Putin and his acolytes 
in Russia could have been imposed on any Americans within their reach.
  The denial of basic rights from Brittney offends all Americans 
because they are rights to which we believe all people are entitled. We 
do not accept the dehumanization that is commonplace in Russia, and our 
values compel us to seek justice for Brittney, her immediate release, 
and her return home to her family and friends.
  As a mother who has raised a family, I can only imagine the gut-
wrenching pain that her parents, family, and friends must be feeling 
right now. There is no worse feeling than when someone in your family 
is in imminent danger and they are beyond your reach to help them.
  As a Black woman, I can say there's no greater fear than having a 
loved one being wrongfully placed in a situation or environment over 
which there is no control.
  For any of us, if we had a loved one placed in this situation, we 
would be doing everything in our power to ensure their prompt and safe 
return.
  We would be calling and seeking the help of everyone possible--
including the media, the U.S. State Department, and even allies in 
Russia.
  We would press every politician and public figure to fight against 
the corrupt government of Russia to ensure that our family member is 
guaranteed their natural born rights to due process, a fair trial, and 
a prompt release from detention.
  No American citizen should be detained in a foreign country for 
months, denied access to American consular officials, and dependent 
upon the performance of a Russian lawyer, especially in absence of 
substantial evidence of a crime.
  Ms. Griner is suffering from Russia's heinous demonstration of power 
and control that stems from centuries of bigotry and hatred embodied in 
an autocratic leader who is the very antithesis of everything Ms. 
Griner represents.
  Ms. Griner's detention is primarily based on the country of her 
citizenship, in a game of political leverage. Since she was targeted 
because of being an American, every American should take this 
personally. Her detention is an offense against our country, and 
against our people.
  Griner was detained on February 17, 2022, her initial release date 
was set to be May 19th, it was then shifted to June 19th, and when that 
date approached, it was delayed to July 2nd.
  That is not justice--it's oppression. We call on Putin and the 
Russian government to comply with their international treaty 
obligations.
  By passing the rule and adopting H. Res. 1132, the House insists, 
alongside the Griner family, that Brittney Griner must be immediately 
and safely released and returned home to the U.S.
  We are unified in demanding respectful treatment and justice for her, 
in accordance with American values.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I wanted to point out to the gentleman 
from the Massachusetts that the majority solely holds the power to give 
the bill a hearing. And I am sure I can speak on behalf of the 
gentleman from North Carolina that he would be happy to be granted a 
hearing on his bill and would love to have that done given that you are 
in control of those hearings.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Weber).
  Mr. WEBER of Texas. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  Madam Speaker, it is a privilege to be here. This is a somber time. 
Yes, the Senate has sent us something over

[[Page H5889]]

again that we never got to really look into before we have to vote in 
the House.
  Madam Speaker, I actually have a bill, H.R. 7909, that I think you 
all would be interested if I had gotten to speak to it in the Committee 
on Rules this morning.
  It does three things: It says to our law enforcement retired 
professionals if they want to get a part-time job as an armed resource 
officer with the school district, they don't have to pay Social 
Security, withholding taxes, FICA--none of that--that is so they don't 
get thrown into a higher income tax bracket.
  The second thing it does, is it allows schools to hire an absolute 
professional, a retired law enforcement professional at a reduced rate, 
because they don't have to match Social Security, withholding, and 
FICA.
  But third and most importantly what it does, is it gives the students 
and the teachers and the staff of that facility, first-class armed 
protection in that school system and in that school district so that 
when and if this happens, they have got a professional there.
  May 18, 2018. It was a Friday; 10 people were killed in Santa Fe High 
School, in my district.
  John Barns, a police officer, an unarmed police officer was there 
within 3 minutes.
  He came around to confront the gunman, and the gunman pretty much 
eviscerated his right arm with a shotgun. Other police officers showed 
up quickly.
  Madam Speaker, we can do this with help to the school districts. We 
can get armed professional police officers there to help protect our 
schools, the kids, teachers, and the staff. It doesn't have to be about 
violating the Second Amendment. It doesn't have to be about taking away 
gun rights. This is one simple thing.
  Madam Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to look at that bill, see 
if they are interested in it because it is one way we can help.

                              {time}  1000

  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I just want to take a moment to 
recognize and thank a longtime Rules staffer who will be leaving us 
next week for the Department of Commerce as their director of 
legislative affairs.
  Rose Laughlin, who is next to me, has been with the Rules Committee 
for 8 years, starting as an intern with the late Congresswoman, Chair 
Louise Slaughter. Rose was Ms. Slaughter's right-hand woman.
  Rose, I know that Louise was terribly proud of all of your 
accomplishments and your dedication to the people of this country.
  Madam Speaker, I think it is fitting today that Rose is here because 
this will be her last rule on the House floor. It is fitting that she 
is here because this is a historic bipartisan measure on gun reform 
that will actually make it to the President's desk. No one on this 
committee has worked harder or more thoughtfully over the years for gun 
reform than Rose.
  Her dependable, resourceful, collaborative attitude has made this 
work easier for us all. This institution, and those we serve, are 
better off because of her dedication to public service.
  Rose, you always will have a home here at the Capitol. We are going 
to miss you, but we are excited about continuing to work with you in 
your new role, and we are very proud of you.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, we join the chairman in wishing Rose 
the best in her future endeavors. Thank you for that.
  Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, House Republicans want to ensure that our schools and 
communities are safe, but today the lack of hearings, the lack of 
public input, and the lack of procedure offends our duty to our 
constituents and our oath to defend the Constitution.
  We are not willing to subvert constitutional rights of law-abiding 
Americans, like this bill would do. There are solutions to prevent 
tragedies like we have seen without affecting law-abiding gun owners. 
We can pass those today, and that, both sides can agree on.
  Unfortunately, the legislation provided under the rule attaches these 
solutions to unconstitutional and misguided policies that are a ``small 
step'' in the Democrats' broader gun control agenda.
  Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule, and I ask Members to do the same. I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues, Democrats and 
Republicans, to vote for this bipartisan bill. It is not that long, and 
people have had it since Tuesday. It has been posted since Tuesday.
  As I said, it is not everything that I think needs to be done. 
Certainly, it is not everything that we have passed in this House, but 
it is a start. If we pass this and send it to the President for his 
signature, and it becomes law, it will save lives. It is what the 
American people want.
  Madam Speaker, I have talked to so many families who have lost loved 
ones to gun violence. I have watched the hearings in which grieving 
parents and brothers and sisters have talked about how horrific it was 
to lose a loved one to gun violence, begging us to do something so that 
no other family has to go through that.
  For years, all of those pleas have fallen on deaf ears. When we have 
even tried to get anything done here, modest legislation, we send it 
over to the Senate and couldn't get the 60 votes to even have a 
discussion on the Senate floor. That just changed.
  It changed, I think, because people are so horrified about what just 
recently happened, but also what has been happening time and time again 
in this country.
  I know the question for everybody here is not about: Does this 
violate the Second Amendment, or is this taking away guns from lawful 
gun owners? It is not. That is all garbage. It really is. That is not 
what this is about.
  I get it. The gun lobby is making phone calls and threatening to hold 
back checks if people somehow don't frustrate this bill so that it 
can't get to the President's desk.
  We were elected to help people and to protect people. In the Senate, 
we have this remarkable bipartisan collaboration, and in the House, we 
have Republicans who have supported sensible gun safety legislation.
  Madam Speaker, I hope this is an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote in 
the House. I know that it may not be because the leadership here has 
urged Republican Members to oppose this. I regret that very much.
  When people say that this is somehow a leftwing bill--I mean, Mitch 
McConnell, Lindsey Graham? Give me a break. This is a truly bipartisan 
bill. It is a compromise.
  To suggest that we need more hearings on a bill on a compromise that 
every single topic in this compromise has had hearings on before, to 
suggest to do that by people who don't want this to move to begin with, 
come on.
  This is the put-up-or-shut-up moment for people here. We either do 
something, or we are going to do nothing. We have been doing nothing 
for years.
  I urged in my opening that people think long and hard before they 
vote. Consult your conscience.
  I can't go back and talk to parents who lost loved ones to violence 
and say: ``Oh, we tried, but it wasn't perfect.'' I could easily go 
back and say: ``I wish it were bigger and more. It is not perfect, so I 
am not going to support it.'' I am supporting this because it is 
something, and it is going to save lives.
  Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to please support this. I 
urge a ``yes'' on the rule and a ``yes'' on the previous question.
  The material previously referred to by Mrs. Fischbach is as follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 1204

  Strike the first section after the resolving clause and insert the 
following:

       That immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (H.R. 7966) to provide for increased authorization of 
     funding to secure schools, and for other purposes. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against 
     provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any 
     amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion 
     except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
     by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on

[[Page H5890]]

     the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to recommit. Clause 1(c) of 
     rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 7966.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. 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, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes 
the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of 
the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 218, 
nays 204, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 297]

                               YEAS--218

     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
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Frankel, Lois
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs (CA)
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Jones
     Kahele
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     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
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--204

     Aderholt
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gohmert
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     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 (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     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
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Allen
     Conway
     Kinzinger
     Pence
     Price (NC)
     Turner
     Zeldin

                              {time}  1058

  Mr. CHABOT changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. CLEAVER changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


    MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

     Allred (Gomez)
     Auchincloss (Beyer)
     Babin (Weber (TX))
     Barr (McHenry)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Boebert (Bishop (NC))
     Bonamici (Beyer)
     Bourdeaux (Correa)
     Bowman (Chu)
     Brown (OH) (Stevens)
     Bush (Williams (GA))
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Carter (LA) (Williams (GA))
     Carter (TX) (Weber (TX))
     Casten (Foster)
     Cawthorn (Donalds)
     Cherfilus-McCormick (Williams (GA))
     Cohen (Beyer)
     Costa (Correa)
     Crist (Soto)
     Davis, Danny K. (Gomez)
     DeSaulnier (Beyer)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Pallone)
     Espaillat (Correa)
     Fletcher (Pallone)
     Frankel, Lois (Kuster)
     Garcia (IL) (Beyer)
     Gimenez (Waltz)
     Gohmert (Weber (TX))
     Gosar (Weber (TX))
     Gottheimer (Neguse)
     Guest (Fleischmann)
     Hartzler (Bacon)
     Hayes (Neguse)
     Hice (GA) (Bishop (NC))
     Jacobs (NY) (Smucker)
     Jayapal (Gomez)
     Jeffries (Neguse)
     Johnson (GA) (Williams (GA))
     Johnson (TX) (Stevens)
     Katko (Meijer)
     Keating (Neguse)
     Khanna (Ocasio-Cortez)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Krishnamoorthi (Neguse)
     LaMalfa (Van Duyne)
     Lawson (FL) (Soto)
     Manning (Bera)
     McEachin (Beyer)
     Moore (WI) (Beyer)
     Moulton (Stevens)
     Newman (Beyer)
     Palazzo (Fleischmann)
     Pascrell (Pallone)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Porter (Neguse)
     Pressley (Trahan)
     Rice (SC) (Meijer)
     Rogers (KY)
     (Reschenthaler)
     Rush (Neguse)
     Salazar (Diaz-Balart)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Spartz (Harshbarger)
     Stansbury (Stevens)
     Strickland (Neguse)
     Suozzi (Neguse)
     Takano (Chu)
     Taylor (Nehls)
     Timmons (Wilson (SC))
     Tlaib (Gomez)
     Underwood (Neguse)
     Van Drew
     (Reschenthaler)
     Walorski (Baird)
     Wasserman Schultz (Soto)
     Watson Coleman (Pallone)
     Wilson (FL) (Williams (GA))
     Wittman (Carl)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. 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.
  This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217, 
nays 203, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 298]

                               YEAS--217

     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
     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
     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

[[Page H5891]]


     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs (CA)
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Jones
     Kahele
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     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
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--203

     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice (OK)
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brady
     Brooks
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia (CA)
     Gibbs
     Gimenez
     Gohmert
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     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 (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     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
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Cawthorn
     Cicilline
     Conway
     Donalds
     Kinzinger
     Pence
     Price (NC)
     Turner
     Zeldin

                              {time}  1115

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.


    MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

     Allred (Gomez)
     Auchincloss (Beyer)
     Babin (Weber (TX))
     Barr (McHenry)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Boebert (Bishop (NC))
     Bonamici (Beyer)
     Bourdeaux (Correa)
     Bowman (Chu)
     Brown (OH) (Stevens)
     Bush (Williams (GA))
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Carter (LA) (Williams (GA))
     Carter (TX) (Weber (TX))
     Casten (Foster)
     Cherfilus-McCormick (Williams (GA))
     Cohen (Beyer)
     Costa (Correa)
     Crist (Soto)
     Davis, Danny K. (Gomez)
     DeSaulnier (Beyer)
     Doyle, Michael F. (Pallone)
     Espaillat (Correa)
     Fletcher (Pallone)
     Frankel, Lois (Kuster)
     Garcia (IL) (Beyer)
     Gimenez (Waltz)
     Gohmert (Weber (TX))
     Gottheimer (Neguse)
     Guest (Fleischmann)
     Hartzler (Bacon)
     Hayes (Neguse)
     Hice (GA) (Bishop (NC))
     Jacobs (NY) (Smucker)
     Jayapal (Gomez)
     Jeffries (Neguse)
     Johnson (GA) (Williams (GA))
     Johnson (TX) (Stevens)
     Katko (Meijer)
     Keating (Neguse)
     Khanna (Ocasio-Cortez)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Krishnamoorthi (Neguse)
     LaMalfa (Van Duyne)
     Lawson (FL) (Soto)
     Manning (Bera)
     McEachin (Beyer)
     Moore (WI) (Beyer)
     Moulton (Stevens)
     Newman (Beyer)
     Palazzo (Fleischmann)
     Pascrell (Pallone)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Porter (Neguse)
     Pressley (Trahan)
     Rice (SC) (Meijer)
     Rogers (KY)
     (Reschenthaler)
     Rush (Neguse)
     Salazar (Diaz-Balart)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Spartz (Harshbarger)
     Stansbury (Stevens)
     Strickland (Neguse)
     Suozzi (Neguse)
     Takano (Chu)
     Taylor (Nehls)
     Timmons (Wilson (SC))
     Tlaib (Gomez)
     Underwood (Neguse)
     Van Drew
     (Reschenthaler)
     Walorski (Baird)
     Wasserman Schultz (Soto)
     Watson Coleman (Pallone)
     Wilson (FL) (Williams (GA))
     Wittman (Carl)

                          ____________________