[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 148 (Wednesday, September 14, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H7804-H7814]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 302, PREVENTING A PATRONAGE SYSTEM 
 ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2988, WHISTLEBLOWER 
PROTECTION IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 
 8326, ENSURING A FAIR AND ACCURATE CENSUS ACT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 1339 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 1339

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 302) to 
     impose limits on excepting competitive service positions from 
     the competitive service, and for other purposes. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on Oversight and Reform now printed in the bill 
     shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall 
     be considered as read. All points of order against provisions 
     in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and 
     on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform or their 
     respective designees; (2) the further amendment printed in 
     part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution, if offered by the Member designated in the 
     report, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
     point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be 
     separately debatable for the time specified in the report 
     equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
     opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
     of the question; and (3) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 2.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     2988) to amend title 5, United States Code, to modify and 
     enhance protections for Federal Government whistleblowers, 
     and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall 
     be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration 
     of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to 
     the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Oversight and Reform or their respective 
     designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
     for amendment under the five-minute rule. The amendment in 
     the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Oversight and Reform now printed in the bill, modified by the 
     amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on 
     Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as 
     adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The 
     bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill 
     for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute 
     rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived.
       Sec. 3. (a) No further amendment to the bill, as amended, 
     shall be in order except those printed in part C of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 
     considered pursuant to subsection (b) and amendments en bloc 
     described in section 4 of this resolution.
       (b) Each further amendment printed in part C of the report 
     of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as 
     amendments en bloc pursuant to section 4 of this resolution 
     shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, 
     may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, 
     shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
     specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the 
     proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, 
     and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
     question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
       (c) All points of order against the further amendments 
     printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules or 
     amendments en bloc described in section 4 of this resolution 
     are waived.
       Sec. 4.  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of 
     the Committee on Oversight and Reform or her designee to 
     offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in 
     part C of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc 
     offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, 
     shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Oversight and Reform or their respective 
     designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 
     be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 
     House or in the Committee of the Whole.
       Sec. 5.  At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
     amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as 
     amended, to the House with such further amendments as may 
     have been adopted. In the case of sundry further amendments 
     reported from the Committee, the question of their adoption 
     shall be put to the House en gros and without division of the 
     question. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 6.  At any time after adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     8326) to amend title 13, United States Code, to improve the 
     operations of the Bureau of the Census, and for other 
     purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed 
     with. All points of order against consideration of the bill 
     are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and 
     shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by 
     the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 
     Oversight and Reform or their respective designees. After 
     general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 
     under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on 
     Oversight and Reform now printed in the bill, an amendment in 
     the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules 
     Committee Print 117-64, modified by the amendment printed in 
     part D of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution, shall be considered

[[Page H7805]]

     as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. 
     The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original 
     bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-
     minute rule and shall be considered as read. All points of 
     order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived.
       Sec. 7. (a) No further amendment to the bill, as amended, 
     shall be in order except those printed in part E of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution 
     considered pursuant to subsection (b) and amendments en bloc 
     described in section 8 of this resolution.
       (b) Each further amendment printed in part E of the report 
     of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as 
     amendments en bloc pursuant to section 8 of this resolution 
     shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, 
     may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, 
     shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time 
     specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the 
     proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, 
     and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
     question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
       (c) All points of order against the further amendments 
     printed in part E of the report of the Committee on Rules or 
     amendments en bloc described in section 8 of this resolution 
     are waived.
       Sec. 8.  It shall be in order at any time for the chair of 
     the Committee on Oversight and Reform or her designee to 
     offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in 
     part E of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying 
     this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc 
     offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, 
     shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Oversight and Reform or their respective 
     designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not 
     be subject to a demand for division of the question in the 
     House or in the Committee of the Whole.
       Sec. 9.  At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for 
     amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as 
     amended, to the House with such further amendments as may 
     have been adopted. In the case of sundry further amendments 
     reported from the Committee, the question of their adoption 
     shall be put to the House en gros and without division of the 
     question. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 10.  During consideration of H.R. 2988 and H.R. 8326, 
     the Chair may entertain a motion that the Committee rise only 
     if offered by the chair of the Committee on Oversight and 
     Reform or her designee. The Chair may not entertain a motion 
     to strike out the enacting words of the bill (as described in 
     clause 9 of rule XVIII).
       Sec. 11. (a) At any time through the legislative day of 
     Friday, September 16, 2022, the Speaker may entertain motions 
     offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House 
     suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with 
     respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and 
     the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without 
     debate or intervening motion.
       (b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any 
     measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules 
     on the legislative day of September 13, 2022, September 14, 
     2022, September 15, 2022, or September 16, 2022, in the form 
     as so offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and 
     further proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule 
     XX.
       (c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection 
     (a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas 
     and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with 
     respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such 
     motions are considered as withdrawn.
       Sec. 12.  The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a 
     two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on 
     Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived 
     with respect to any resolution reported through the 
     legislative day of September 30, 2022, relating to a measure 
     making or continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2023.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Reschenthaler), pending which I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is 
for the purpose of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. 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 (Mr. Cuellar). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and 
reported a rule, House Resolution 1339, providing for consideration of 
three measures: H.R. 302, H.R. 2988, and H.R. 8326, all under 
structured rules.
  For H.R. 302, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
Committee on Oversight and Reform, makes in order one amendment, and 
provides a motion to recommit.
  For H.R. 2988 and H.R. 8326, the rule provides 1 hour of general 
debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform for each bill, makes in 
order four amendments for H.R. 2988 and three amendments for H.R. 8326, 
and provides en bloc authority for both bills and motions to recommit 
for both bills.
  The rule further provides the majority leader or his designee the 
ability this week to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension 
bills considered from September 13 to September 16.
  Lastly, the rule provides same-day authority through September 30 for 
a measure dealing with continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 
ending September 30, 2023.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. Speaker, I rise proudly today in support of House Resolution 
1339, the rule for three crucial bills, each of which will protect an 
essential institution in American Government and public life that came 
under serious attack in the previous administration: our Federal civil 
service, whistleblowers acting against public corruption, and the 
Census Bureau. All three bills were marked up and passed by the House 
Committee on Oversight and Reform.
  H.R. 302, the Preventing a Patronage System Act, is a bipartisan bill 
led by Congressman Connolly of Virginia and Congressman Fitzpatrick of 
Pennsylvania. This legislation will insulate our civil service against 
partisan political interference and ensure that no future President can 
fire government experts and civil servants simply to replace them with 
their own political loyalists and sycophants.
  The civil service system was created in the 19th century with the 
explicit purpose of ending the so-called spoils system and ensuring 
that Federal employees are hired, promoted, and fired based on their 
qualifications and performance, not their political party connections 
or the political favors and services they are willing to render to 
elected officials.
  The merit-based Federal workforce exists to effectively implement 
Federal laws and programs passed by Congress and signed into law by the 
President and translate those laws and programs into concrete results 
and benefits for the American people. Professional civil servants, like 
scientists, engineers, meteorologists, statisticians, economic 
researchers, and policy analysts must be able to do their jobs and 
advise government officials and the public based on empirical methods, 
facts and data, not ideological filters and bars of political 
correctness, and without fear of retaliation and discharge for 
political reasons.
  But the previous administration attempted to turn our civil service, 
Mr. Speaker, into a top-down political and ideological party machine, 
the kind that the original architects of civil service tried to 
dismantle in the 19th century. In October of 2020, the former President 
issued Executive Order 13957 to create Schedule F, a sweeping new 
employment category for career civil servants who work on public policy 
issues. Schedule F specifically targeted about 50,000 presently 
nonpartisan policy experts, many of them holding advanced degrees and 
having served for decades as policy experts across different 
administrations with Presidents from different political parties.
  For these civil servants, Schedule F would have stripped away their 
rights, their merit-based legal protections, and their professional 
independence. Civil servants transferred into the new Schedule F could 
have been fired and replaced at any time for any political or 
ideological reason or for no reason at all given by a hostile 
administration. The 50,000 civil servants deemed to be involved in 
formulating policy could have been swept up in a Schedule F political 
purge and replaced with unqualified loyalists and flunkies, with 
potentially catastrophic consequences for national security, the 
continuity of

[[Page H7806]]

governance, and the evenhanded and effective enforcement of Federal 
laws and programs.
  The President already has the opportunity to appoint more than 4,000 
political appointees. But Schedule F sought to go much further in 
radically transforming the civil service into an instrument of the 
chosen political ends and designs of the President.
  Thankfully, President Joe Biden rescinded the order in January 2021. 
However, several top Republicans have already expressed support for 
picking up right where the previous administration left off with a new 
Schedule F.
  Our civil servants must be hired based on their merits and then 
evaluated based on their actual job performance in office, not their 
political party membership, not their ideological viewpoints, and not 
their political campaign activism. Indeed, there are already processes 
in place for evaluating Federal employees' actual job performance, 
which is why in 2021, more than 10,000 Federal employees were removed 
from their jobs for not living up to job expectations. That is how you 
deal with people who are not actually doing their jobs. This bill is 
precisely about ensuring that civil servants will be evaluated based on 
their job performance and not the partisan political goals or 
extracurricular demands of a particular administration.
  As a member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, which 
considered this legislation carefully and reported it favorably and the 
proud Representative of tens of thousands of Federal workers in 
Maryland's beautiful Eighth District, I am proud to advance this bill 
and urge all of my colleagues to support its passage on a bipartisan 
basis. We have an urgent mandate to protect the historic merit-based 
civil service and the integrity of the Federal Government against 
anyone who would turn the clock back more than a century to allow 
Presidents to convert our Federal workforce in service of agreed-upon 
Federal laws and programs into an instrument of personal ambition, 
campaign reelection, or party patronage.
  Now, turning to H.R. 2988, the bipartisan Whistleblower Protection 
Improvement Act of 2021, led by Chairwoman Maloney. This is another 
piece of critical legislation in defense of another critical democratic 
safeguard.
  Whistleblowers are a great American institution and an important 
mechanism for guaranteeing the integrity of government. Our protection 
of whistleblowers reflects the fact that in our system of government, 
we have checks and balances all the way down. An individual Federal 
employee can hold even the most powerful government officials 
accountable to the rule of law, which binds all of us. Whistleblowers 
in American history have exposed self-dealing, bribery, kickbacks, 
sweetheart contracts, lost and stolen Federal property, national 
security failures, criminal coverups, other political corruption, war 
crimes, rape and sexual harassment in the military, major public health 
violations, episodes of environmental and toxic contamination, and the 
systematic waste or pilfering of taxpayer dollars.
  This bill will improve current protections for whistleblowers by 
clearly prohibiting retaliatory investigations and other actions 
against Federal employees who share information with Congress, the 
House of Representatives, or the Senate, or with their supervisor. The 
bill limits the public disclosure of the identity of whistleblowers and 
extends whistleblower protections to new categories of Federal officers 
and employees, including Public Health Service workers and the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's commissioned officers.
  The bill also contains provisions to ensure a timely and fair 
procedure for whistleblowers facing discrimination and retaliation. 
Currently, the backlog at the Merit Systems Protection Board means that 
some whistleblowers may wait years for a hearing to be scheduled on 
their claims. This bill grants whistleblowers access to a jury trial in 
Federal district court if the Merit Systems Protection Board does not 
render a timely decision in their case.
  Whistleblowers are integral to government transparency and 
accountability in our country. I strongly support this bill to ensure 
whistleblowers can come forward without fear of reprisal or punishment.
  The last bill before us, Mr. Speaker, H.R. 8326, the Ensuring a Fair 
and Accurate Census Act, also led by Chairwoman Maloney, will protect 
the Census Bureau against future efforts at political interference, and 
it will ensure the Bureau's independence in the performance of its 
essential duties.
  The Census is a constitutional mandate and imperative. The U.S. 
Constitution requires an actual enumeration of the whole number of 
persons in the country for apportioning Representatives among the 
States and Congress. The Census is an expression of the original 
principle that democracy must rest on the Jeffersonian idea of the 
consent of the governed. And, therefore, we need to know everyone who 
is here and part of the sovereign people of the Nation. The Census 
determines congressional apportionment of House seats and the 
allocation of trillions of dollars of Federal spending. Even many 
businesses in the private sector rely on Census Bureau statistics to 
guide their decisions.
  The previous administration's spectacular contempt for our 
constitutional system was on full display during its many efforts to 
interfere with the 2020 Census for purposes of political gain. The 
effort to complete a comprehensive and effective Census was undermined 
at every turn by efforts such as the unlawful plot to add the 
citizenship question to the short form, which was struck down by the 
Supreme Court, or the installation of a record-breaking number of 
highly partisan political appointees to the ranks of the Bureau's 
leadership. The reforms contained in the Ensuring a Fair and Accurate 
Census Act will safeguard the integrity of the Census count against 
this type of sinister political interference in the many years to come.
  Mr. Speaker, I will reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentleman 
and my good friend from Maryland for yielding me the customary 30 
minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the rule before us today provides for consideration for 
three pieces of legislation that are laser-focused on a President who 
has not been in office for almost 2 years now.
  Meanwhile, yesterday's CPI reading came in higher than expected, 
registering an 8.3 percent year-over-year increase. That is another 40-
year high, literally the highest in my lifetime.
  It is abundantly clear that Democrats are focused on their efforts of 
political gamesmanship, hoping to distract the American people from the 
absolute failures of the Biden administration.
  Let's just go through these bills. The first bill, H.R. 302, makes it 
even harder for the President to remove insubordinate Federal employees 
in policy-making roles. All this legislation accomplishes is further 
shielding unelected career bureaucrats from accountability to the 
American voter, who are footing the bill for their salary. The Federal 
Government should be responsive to the voters and their elected 
Representatives, not the whims and the ideological leanings of 
unelected bureaucrats.
  Additionally, this rule provides for consideration of H.R. 2988, the 
Whistleblower Protection Improvement Act. Let me start by just saying 
that the need to protect whistleblowers is one of the most bipartisan 
points of agreement in Congress. However, this legislation does nothing 
to protect actual whistleblowers. There is a significant difference 
lost in this bill between retaliation against legitimate whistleblowers 
and the consequences in response to unacceptable actions taken by a 
government employee.
  Finally, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 8326, Ensuring a 
Fair and Accurate Census Act. Yet, this bill does everything but ensure 
a fair and accurate Census. Specifically, H.R. 8326 provides the 
director of the Census Bureau with unprecedented power and authority to 
make all operational, statistical, and technical decisions for the 
Census.

  Further, this bill constrains the ability of future Censuses to 
include critical questions, including a citizenship question, ensuring 
that future Censuses will be unfair and inaccurate.
  Instead of focusing on real-life issues facing everyday Americans, 
House

[[Page H7807]]

Democrats this week are focusing on three bills that are completely 
irrelevant to the multiple crises created by Joe Biden's policies.
  In fact, two of these bills have already passed in the House this 
Congress in larger packages. The failed policies of the far left and 
the Biden administration have plunged our economy into a recession. 
And, yes, it is a recession. They have stolen wages from the American 
workforce, they have destroyed seniors' retirement savings, and they 
have left families with the highest food prices since 1979. Let me 
repeat that. Grocery prices surged 13 percent in August, the largest 
increase in over 40 years.
  Mr. Speaker, 80 percent of Americans say that inflation is the most 
important issue facing the country, but you wouldn't know it by the 
bills the Democrats are prioritizing and running on the floor this 
week.
  I think it is time my Democratic colleagues listened to the people 
and work with Republicans on real economic solutions, rather than 
doubling down on these dangerous, reckless, out-of-control spending and 
far-left policy bills, the same policies that have created the crises 
that we are now facing.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1315

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to hear my good friend from 
Pennsylvania make his presentation. I was surprised that he described 
these three bills as completely irrelevant, given that one is about 
protecting the integrity of the Federal civil service, a force of more 
than 2 million people who are doing the work of the American people in 
the National Park Service, the Department of Energy, the Department of 
Defense, the Department of State, the Department of Homeland Security, 
and so on.
  I don't know what is completely irrelevant about that. Nor do I 
understand what is completely irrelevant about protecting the rights 
and our encouragement of Federal workers to be whistleblowers when 
there is massive waste, fraud, abuse, or exploitation taking place with 
the taxpayers' money. That is an essential purpose of government.
  We have a government that is an instrument of the will of the people, 
and we have a lot of public policies that are being enforced, but we 
want to make sure that they are being enforced correctly and that the 
people's taxpayer moneys are being respected.
  The whistleblowers are helping us do that in blowing the whistle on 
hundreds of millions of dollars of waste, corruption, and abuse that 
have taken place. Why we would turn a blind eye to that and describe it 
as completely irrelevant is beyond me.
  Of course, the Census is foundational to the workings of American 
democracy, and we want to prevent precisely the kind of political 
finger-pointing all over the Census Bureau and our laws that we saw in 
the last administration.
  I am just curious whether the gentleman really believes that if the 
current President suggested that we take 40,000 or 50,000 Federal 
workers who presently have civil service protection and put them 
directly under his control for political appointment, he would think 
that is a good idea because our legislation will prevent any President 
in the future from doing that, including this Democratic President, any 
future Democratic Presidents, any future Republican Presidents or 
Independents or anyone else.
  We don't think that is a good idea, and I can't believe that my good 
friend from Pennsylvania would just be agnostic as to that proposition.
  Let me just say, finally, about the whole question of what is 
relevant and what is irrelevant, it seems like all we are hearing from 
the other side is embodied in the big statement coming out of the 
Senate from Senator Lindsey Graham, saying it is time for a national 
Federal ban on abortion that could even be exceeded by the States.
  Now, originally, they said: Well, Roe v. Wade is settled precedent, 
and we accept that.
  Then, they packed the Court with their Justices, who were determined, 
hellbent, on overturning Roe v. Wade, and they did it.
  Then, we heard from our friends across the aisle: Well, this is a 
matter for the States. Let the States decide.
  Now, we hear from our colleagues in Congress that, no, they want a 
national criminal ban on the right of women to make their own decisions 
about their health, their families, their careers, and their futures.
  Then, they will even allow States to go beyond that to completely ban 
abortion, which is, of course, the essential pro-life position which we 
have heard from our colleagues across the aisle. That is what they are 
focused on.
  Meantime, the President signed, this week, the Inflation Reduction 
Act, which will dramatically lower healthcare costs for tens of 
millions of Americans and, finally, overturn the Republican ban on the 
government negotiating in the Medicare program with Big Pharma for 
lower prescription drug prices.
  We are actually making progress. They want to drag everyone into 
their insatiable efforts to ban the right to abortion in America.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I will double down on the comment that these bills are 
irrelevant. They are absolutely irrelevant in that two of them are 
superfluous. One has already passed. One passed in an amendment to the 
NDAA, and the other one is an unprecedented grant of authority to the 
Census, which is completely inappropriate. So, yes, these bills, I 
would argue, are irrelevant.
  Do you know who would think they are irrelevant? Any person you talk 
to on the street. If you go up to somebody filling up their gas tank, 
and you ask them about these three bills, these are irrelevant to their 
lives. They are worried about the price of gas.
  If you ask somebody at a grocery store who is trying to feed a family 
about these bills, these bills are irrelevant to their grocery bill.
  If you are talking about real wages and fighting the loss of wages 
and inflation, these bills are irrelevant to that. A lot of blue-collar 
workers want wages to increase like they did under the last 
administration, not decrease like they are today.
  So, yes, these bills are absolutely irrelevant to everyday Americans.
  But let's just talk about the high cost of inflation. Inflation is 
the top concern reported by businesses and voters alike. However, 
instead of working to lower costs for businesses and workers, the SEC 
proposed burdensome new rules requiring businesses to disclose 
extensive climate-related data and additional climate risks.
  That is why if we defeat the previous question, I will personally 
offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider H.R. 8589, which 
would prohibit the SEC's woke climate rule from ever moving forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment into the Record, along with any extraneous material, 
immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cuellar). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?

  There was no objection.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume 
to the gentleman from the Commonwealth of Kentucky (Mr. Barr), my good 
friend, to explain the amendment.
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. 
Reschenthaler) for yielding.
  I rise to oppose the previous question so that we can immediately 
consider Representative French Hill's H.R. 8589 to prohibit the 
Securities and Exchange Commission from trading its independence and 
statutory authority away in the name of alarmist climate advocacy.
  The proposed climate change rule from the Securities and Exchange 
Commission will further crush our fragile economy, and struggling 
families will ultimately pay the price.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the 
Consumer Price Index numbers for the month of August. As has been 
mentioned already today, CPI surged to 8.3 percent, above projections, 
still a 40-year high, showing that this inflation crisis is not going 
away anytime soon.

[[Page H7808]]

Americans are paying more for everything, and rising prices continue to 
wreak havoc on farmers, middle-class families, and small businesses 
struggling to stay afloat all across America.
  Of course, Democrats' overspending for the last year and a half has 
produced excess demand, pushing up prices, but no amount of Fed 
tightening can fix the inflationary supply-demand mismatch without also 
addressing the supply side.
  At the heart of this inflation crisis is the Biden administration's 
war on American energy production. This policy of deliberately 
constraining the supply of energy is taking its toll on the American 
people. According to a Penn Wharton study, inflation reduced the 
purchasing power of American households by approximately $6,000 last 
year. That is like taking an entire paycheck away for an entire month 
for every American household.
  Real earnings, hourly earnings, dropped 2.8 percent over the year in 
August. Wages are down because of this inflation crisis. Credit card 
debt is up. It hit an all-time high last month.
  One in six American households are now behind paying their 
electricity bills and in danger of losing their utility services 
altogether, with natural gas prices up 30 percent since last July. 
Effectively, electricity prices are now up 15 percent, a 14-year high.
  When Joe Biden took office, the average price of gasoline was $2.36 
per gallon. Today, the average gas price in America is $3.72 per 
gallon, and stubbornly, diesel prices are much, much higher. That goes 
into everything: transportation, manufacturing, farmers having to fill 
up the tank on their tractors. All of that is passed on at the retail 
point of sale. In less than 2 years, America has gone from energy 
dominant to energy desperate.
  Mr. Speaker, ground zero for the Biden administration's war on 
American energy is the weaponization of financial regulation and the 
politicization of access to capital.
  What do I mean by this? We all know that the Biden administration 
killed the Keystone XL pipeline and other critical energy 
infrastructure projects. We know that they are frustrating the 
construction of new refineries. We know that they have held up 4,400 
drilling permits. But ground zero is the weaponization of financial 
regulation to deny American energy the access to the capital that they 
need to invest in a very capital-intensive business.
  Throughout the executive branch, at the Treasury Department, the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the OCC, and 
other financial regulators, Biden has installed or nominated unelected 
climate alarmists and given them free rein to attack American energy 
businesses, all in the name of climate change.
  The sad irony, Mr. Speaker, is that if we want to innovate and 
actually solve climate change, we wouldn't be denying American energy 
companies and the scientists there access to financing. We would be 
giving them more financing to innovate and to solve the problem the 
American way, through free enterprise and innovation. One of these 
radical nominees even called for bankrupting American fossil fuel 
companies.
  Perhaps the most dangerous regulation issued by the Biden 
administration to destroy American energy is the SEC's climate risk 
disclosure rule proposed in March. This 534-page monstrosity marks the 
transformation of the SEC from an independent agency dedicated to 
investor protection to an unaccountable and politicized bureaucracy 
intent on advancing radical environmental and social policy over which 
it has neither expertise nor jurisdiction.
  This proposed rule is totally disconnected from the longstanding 
investor-driven materiality standard and will politicize the agency and 
reduce its credibility by hurting investors, elevating nonpecuniary 
factors above financial returns, and steering retail investors into 
lower performing, higher fee, and less-diversified ESG investments.
  As a reminder, Mr. Speaker, the statutory mission of the SEC is to 
protect investors; maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets; and 
facilitate capital formation. This is not about protecting investors. 
It is about hurting investors. It is not about capital formation. It is 
about capital destruction. It is definitively not to reduce carbon 
emissions or solve climate change, but the SEC is wading into 
environmental policy debates like climate change with its top-down, 
government-directed, one-size-fits-all mandatory environmental, social, 
and governance disclosure regulation, or ESG.
  SEC Chair Gary Gensler claims that the requirements in the proposal 
are material because institutional investors are demanding this 
information. But according to a study conducted by the University of 
Chicago and FINRA, only 21 percent of surveyed retail investors in this 
country even knew what ESG stands for.
  The fact of the matter is, retail investors are not demanding this 
information. They want returns, not politics, guiding their retirement 
and college savings.

  What do retail investors really care about? Yesterday's bloodbath in 
the stock market when the Dow plummeted by over 1,000 points in a 
single day, the worst drop since June 2020.
  That tells me what investors actually want, Mr. Speaker, and it is 
returns. They need returns. They don't need an inflationary environment 
that is eating away their purchasing power and rising interest rates 
because of it that result in turmoil in the financial markets, 
destroying retirement savings.
  ESG funds are hurting American investors. They are tech-heavy, and in 
a market where tech stocks are in a massive sell-off and are vastly 
underperforming non-ESG funds that contain investments in energy, who 
are the losers? Retail investors who are unwittingly invested in and 
overexposed to ESG. On top of that, ESG funds charge 43 percent higher 
fees than non-ESG funds.
  In short, the government is redirecting capital away from energy, and 
it is costing retail investors, which include teachers, police 
officers, and other ordinary Americans saving for retirement, 
extraordinary amounts of money.
  But, today, Congress can actually do something to protect investors. 
I am leading this previous question that would amend the rule to 
immediately consider H.R. 8589, legislation offered by the gentleman 
from Arkansas (Mr. Hill), my friend, to stop this SEC rule in its 
tracks before it causes more damage to retail investors and to 
Americans struggling to keep up with unsustainable energy prices.
  Mr. Speaker, House Republicans will keep pushing for America to get 
back to basics. We need to deliver economic relief to the American 
people to alleviate the pain of inflation. To do that, we need to 
unleash the supply side. That means more, not less, financing of 
American energy to lower the price at the pump, to reduce the cost of 
heating your home.
  Yes, Mr. Speaker, we need financial advisers to get back to the 
basics of investing. That means diversified portfolios that include 
American energy, not just tech, because the point of investing your 
hard-earned money isn't to further a political agenda or some far-left 
view of America that some woke asset manager on Wall Street thinks. 
Instead, it is to generate a financial return that will enable you to 
send your kid to college, ensure you can live a comfortable life in 
retirement, or pursue some other aspect of your American Dream.
  Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is about capital formation. It is about giving 
heroic American energy companies access to the capital and the 
financing that they need, not only to make energy affordable and 
reliable for the American people but to make America competitive in the 
global economy.
  It is for all of these reasons, Mr. Speaker, that I urge my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join me in supporting this 
previous question.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues tempt me to wander afield from 
what we have come here to talk about since they want to talk about 
seemingly everything else. So let me try to respond to a few of the 
points that have just been lobbed in our direction.
  First, they seem to want to assign responsibility to the President of 
the United States for the inflation rate. But then, surely, they will 
assign responsibility to the President of the

[[Page H7809]]

United States for the unemployment rate, which now stands at around 3.5 
percent, the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. You have got to go 
back a half century to find the kind of job situation that President 
Biden has brought to the United States of America.
  Last week, we learned that payroll employment is up by 315,000 in the 
month of August alone. Since President Biden came into office, we have 
added 668,000 manufacturing jobs.
  Now, it is true the President has been fighting inflation ever since 
he got into office. Why?
  Well, the economy started to come roaring back--not just in America, 
but all over the world in the wake of the pandemic. So we saw a 
tremendous demand with broken supply chains. So what happens under the 
law of supply and demand? The prices go up. But, unlike our colleagues 
who seem to want to chortle about it and use it as a campaign talking 
point, President Biden and the Democrats have been acting to bring 
inflation down. Every single day.
  Yesterday's Consumer Price Index data showed continued progress in 
bringing global inflation down here in the U.S. economy. Gas prices are 
down an average of $1.30 a gallon since the beginning of the summer. 
Price increases slowed at the grocery store this month. Still too high. 
But real wages went up again for a second month in a row, giving 
hardworking families more breathing room.
  It is amazing to me that some of the time has been delegated to one 
of our distinguished colleagues who seem to want to blame these global 
economic conditions arising from COVID-19 and the pandemic and broken 
supply chains, as well as Vladimir Putin's filthy imperialist war in 
Ukraine, which fortunately, the people of Ukraine, with the support of 
a lot of people in this body--but not everybody--is starting to win. 
And we have seen dramatic reversal of fortune in that war as the 
democratic forces are beating Vladimir Putin and the autocrats in 
Russia.
  But in any event, we just heard someone who wanted to blame all of 
these global economic conditions on an SEC regulation, which we are not 
here to discuss and, therefore, unfortunately, I can't address. I might 
agree with the gentleman, for all I know. It has nothing to do with the 
legislation before us, and it is hard for me to believe that that is 
the source of inflation around the world or the unemployment, which now 
is practically at the bottom level that we have ever seen in over a 
century.
  But in any event, Mr. Speaker, back to the point at hand, I thought 
we were going to be distracted with Republican calls to ban abortion 
across the country. Well, the polls must be teaching them something 
because I am not hearing about abortion today.
  For many years, all I heard from them was abortion is murder, and the 
millions of persons who are being murdered by abortion. They demanded 
the overthrow of Roe v. Wade, and they got their way.
  Yesterday, Senator Lindsey Graham introduced legislation for a 
national criminal ban on abortion. But, of course, the so-called pro-
life forces want to go further in the States and ban it completely. A 
lot of them don't even want to allow exceptions for rape or incest.
  I thought our colleagues were going to explain what their position 
really is. I would invite them to do so as long as they don't want to 
talk about the legislation before us today.
  Why don't they tell us what their position on abortion is, because 
America wants to know.
  I think their position has changed somewhat. They are singing a 
somewhat different tune since the people of Kansas, by 20 points, 
destroyed their anti-choice agenda, and explained to them in numerical 
terms that the people of America are on the side of freedom and the 
rights of women and men and families to make their own decisions and 
not to have those decisions be made by Lindsey Graham, one Senator, who 
yesterday pronounced that he chose 15 weeks as the right point to 
criminalize abortion. He chose that himself.
  What is their position now? America wants to know. What is their 
position?
  Do they support a national criminal ban on abortion? Are they going 
to allow any exceptions for rape or incest? What is their position on 
it, if they don't want to talk about the legislation at hand?
  Meantime, the Democrats continue to fight for lower drug prices, for 
a record, unprecedented, historic investment in renewable energy.
  We are addressing the problems of the future. At the same time, we 
are defending the integrity of the Federal civil service and our 
workforce, which was compromised and abused in so many ways by the last 
administration.
  We are defending the rights of whistleblowers to tell the truth about 
what is taking place in terms of political and public corruption and 
not to have to face retaliation from their supervisors. We are 
defending the institutions of democracy, including the Census, against 
all of the kinds of machinations and corruption and political abuse 
that we saw in the last administration.
  We are glad that the Supreme Court struck down their last 
interference with the Census by trying to paste questions outside of 
the rule of law on the short form. This legislation is designed to 
protect the integrity of the Census along with the civil service, along 
with the whistleblowers.
  But as long as my dear colleagues and friends don't want to talk 
about the legislation at hand, please clarify for America what their 
plan is to take away the health rights of American women and their 
families. Are they supporting the plan we heard yesterday announced by 
Lindsey Graham for a nationwide Federal criminal ban?

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume for just a few points in rebuttal.
  Mr. Speaker, we keep hearing that inflation is a global issue, like 
somehow it is not Biden's fault and the fault of far-left Democrats--
which it is.
  The reason why this is a global issue--and remind my friends on the 
other side of the aisle--is because we are the world's largest GDP. We 
also just happen to be the world's reserve currency.
  So, of course, when we have inflation, the world will have it. That 
is just economics. So it is amazing how the principles of economics are 
just cherry-picked to make points. But I would remind my colleagues of 
those two facts. In short, we are exporting the inflation.
  Now, as far as what we are doing to cause the inflation, well, it is 
pretty simple. We have injected trillions of dollars into the economy. 
That causes inflation. And then to double down on the failed policy, 
Joe Biden unilaterally, and I would argue unconstitutionally, canceled 
the debt of a swath of college students so you now have even more 
liquidity in the market because of them.
  And the sick irony here is that the guy that is driving the pickup 
truck, the guy that went to school to be a plumber, an HVAC repairman, 
that guy is now subsidizing the lawyer who is driving to his downtown 
job in a BMW. That is what is so perverse about what is happening.
  Now let's just talk about gas prices.
  My colleague and my friend from Maryland said gas prices are down. 
Yeah, they are down from like a week ago; they are not down from 
January 2021 when they were less than $2.50 a gallon. So let's continue 
to move that goalpost.
  You can't argue that gas prices are up. Americans know gas prices are 
up. They are feeling the pain at the pump. They are also feeling it in 
the higher cost of all energy and food.
  Finally, blaming Putin on gas prices and issues. Yeah, Putin is 
partially to blame, but who encouraged Putin to invade Ukraine? That 
would be Joe Biden by his surrender of Afghanistan.
  Let me be clear that any weakness on the foreign stage is an 
indication of aggression. When Joe Biden showed weakness by abandoning 
the Bagram Air Base, by leaving our allies on the ground to predations 
of the Taliban, that was weakness, and Putin seized on that to invade 
Ukraine.
  Instead of giving the Ukrainians the MiGs they needed, the proper 
military supplies they needed, we decided to go halfway. Joe Biden 
didn't fully commit. Now we have a protracted war in Ukraine, which is 
going to lead to a humanitarian crisis not only in Central

[[Page H7810]]

Europe but all across Africa, for example, and higher energy prices 
here.
  Mr. Speaker, but that is all traced back to Biden being weak on 
foreign policy.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Kentucky (Mr. Barr).
  Mr. BARR. Mr. Speaker, let me respond to my friend from Maryland on 
some of the specific points that he made in rebuttal to my opposition 
to the previous question.
  The gentleman says that we don't want to talk about the underlying 
bills.
  What Republicans want to talk about is what the American people are 
worried about, which is rising prices. What we are focused on is 
opposing a previous question so that we could actually go and consider 
legislation that would actually help improve the record inflation, 40-
year-high inflation that Americans are suffering with.
  What we are talking about is how we are going to lower the pain at 
the pump and lower the cost of heating your home, which is at a 15-year 
high in America right now. That is what Republicans want to talk about; 
what the American people actually care about right now.
  The gentleman says that, Oh, unemployment is down.
  Let me tell you the statistic that matters.
  It is the fact that we have 12 million unfilled jobs in America 
because the Democrats' spending spree has paid Americans to not go to 
work, because employers in my district and every district around the 
country can't find labor.
  The supply-demand mismatch that has produced this inflation crisis is 
the result of fiscal policy errors. It is the result of a war on 
American energy constraining the supply of energy. It is because of 
excessive spending that has discouraged people to return to the labor 
force.
  So we have excess demand from overspending, and we have constrained 
labor supply and constrained energy supply, which is impounded into 
everything and results in higher retail prices.
  The gentleman says that, Oh, don't look here; don't look at us; don't 
look at the Biden administration's war on energy and labor supply. No, 
it is not that. It is not the Fed that continued to keep interest rates 
too low for too long and flooded our money supply at a time when all of 
these fiscal policy errors were going on. No, it is not that. It is 
global inflation.
  Well, why is it, then, in March of 2021, at the precise time that 
this Congress passed the American recovery plan, $2 trillion of unpaid-
for spending, why is it then that U.S. inflation rates became 
untethered from global price increases? That is what happened, in 
synchronicity with their legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, finally, he blames Vladimir Putin.
  Gas prices on the day Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine were the highest 
in 40 years. Inflation was over 8 percent on the CPI, the highest in 40 
years, the highest since 1981 on the day Vladimir Putin invaded 
Ukraine.
  This is not about Vladimir Putin. It is about Americans not producing 
energy anymore.
  And why do we want this particular legislation, the legislation to 
block the SEC's climate disclosure rule? Because we need more financing 
of American energy.

  Mr. Speaker, I would argue to my friend from Maryland, also, if the 
obsession on the other side with the climate, if that is the concern, 
if that is why we have this SEC rule, if that is why we have weaponized 
financial regulators to go after the American energy sector and 
redirect capital and financing away from the American energy sector, if 
that is the solution to climate change, I want the gentleman to explain 
that to me. Because the best scientists in the world working on the 
issue of carbon capturing, carbon sequestration, and harnessing the 
carbon cycle, they work at American energy companies.
  The answer to climate change is not to centralize power in Washington 
and add a thousand pages to the Federal Register. That will not change 
the weather. What will solve climate change is to solve that problem 
the American way. The American way is through innovation, technology, 
and science, and that means robust, free enterprise. That means more, 
not less capital formation. That means more financing of American 
energy, more financing of innovation. That is the Republican solution 
to climate.
  It is also the Republican solution to our energy crisis and our 
inflation crisis. That is what we are focused on, not these bills that 
the American people don't care about.
  We are focused on lowering prices at the grocery store and at the 
pump and financing American competitiveness, American innovation, and 
American know-how.
  That is what we want to do.

                              {time}  1345

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, the very distinguished gentleman from 
Kentucky purported to speak for what Americans are worried about. 
Undoubtedly, many Americans are worried about inflation, which is why 
this administration has been taking strong action not just to get jobs 
for everybody who wants a job and good jobs and union jobs for people, 
but also to bring inflation down.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a New York Times article titled 
``U.S. Gas Prices Have Fallen for 91 Straight Days, a Relief for 
Consumers.''

               [From the New York Times, Sept. 13, 2022]

    U.S. Gas Prices Have Fallen for 91 Straight Days, a Relief for 
                               Consumers

                        (By Isabella Simonetti)

       The price of gasoline continues to fall steadily, easing 
     pressure on American consumers as the cost of filling a tank 
     continued to tumble from record levels reached earlier in the 
     summer.
       Gas prices fell 10.6 percent in August, which helped 
     moderate still-sky-high inflation, Tuesday's Consumer Price 
     Index report showed.
       The energy index, which tracks gasoline and electricity 
     among other energy sources, dropped 5 percent last month, as 
     electricity and natural gas prices rose.
       After peaking at $5.02 in June, gasoline prices have 
     dropped for 91 straight days, and the national average stood 
     at just over $3.70 a gallon on Tuesday, data from AAA show. 
     But analysts point to a few reasons this streak of declines 
     is unlikely to continue.
       Because they're determined by oil prices, gasoline prices 
     are also susceptible to a wide range of challenges, like 
     hurricanes that knock out drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and 
     efforts to punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine by 
     curbing its ability to sell crude on the global market.
       While gas prices are down, the overall energy index still 
     remains up 23.8 percent over the 12 months that ended in 
     August. Electricity prices alone jumped 15.8 percent, 
     representing the largest 12-month increase since August 1981, 
     the inflation report said. The jump in electricity prices is 
     largely attributable to the high cost of natural gas, said 
     Laura Rosner-Warburton, an economist at MacroPolicy 
     Perspectives.
       As winter approaches, other fuel prices could influence 
     inflation data. The cost of heating a home with natural gas, 
     the most common source of home-heating fuel in the United 
     States, is expected to jump more than 25 percent from last 
     year, to $952 for the six months from October through March, 
     according to the National Energy Assistance Directors 
     Association.
       ``You would expect that a hard winter could create a 
     significant increase in demand in price of natural gas,'' 
     said Bryan Benoit, U.S. national managing partner of energy 
     at Grant Thornton. ``And then of course all of this is 
     further exacerbated by what's going on with the war in the 
     Ukraine.''

  Mr. RASKIN. I want to talk about some of the other things that 
Americans are worried about since my colleague purported to speak for 
Americans because I saw a poll recently saying that Americans are 
worried about the attack on democracy and voting rights.
  Part of that may be the fact that some of our colleagues seem to be 
ambivalent about whether or not to denounce the rampant violence that 
was unleashed against this institution, this body, on January 6, 2021, 
when thousands of rioters came and attacked our officers, wounding and 
injuring more than 150 of them, breaking their jaws, their necks, lost 
fingers, strokes, heart attacks, concussions, and contusions. And, of 
course, the former President says that his mob actually greeted the 
police with hugs and kisses.
  Some of our colleagues shamefully have followed the former President 
in trying to whitewash the worst episode of domestic mass 
insurrectionary violence ever unleashed on the Capitol of the United 
States with an attack on the Vice President, Mike Pence. We heard those 
words, ``Hang Mike Pence. Hang Mike Pence,'' bouncing off of the walls 
of the Capitol and against the Congress of the United States.

[[Page H7811]]

  So, yes, people are worried about the state of our democracy with so 
many members of the GOP following Donald Trump in not only his terrible 
big lie, the first time we have ever seen that in American history, but 
also the big lie encompassing this mob violence and this insurrection 
against the Government of the United States.
  Do you know what else Americans are worried about, Mr. Speaker? 
Americans are now worried about State politicians and Federal 
politicians trampling the rights of women. For more than a half 
century, women have had a right to make their most intimate procreative 
and reproductive decisions with their families, with their husbands, 
with their partners, with their ministers, and with their church 
leaders.
  Then, they gerrymandered the Supreme Court. They kept Merrick Garland 
off the Supreme Court by not even giving him a hearing over on the 
Senate side.
  Then, what do you know, Mr. Speaker? They followed what the RNC was 
asking for in all of their platforms for all of these years: Overturn 
Roe v. Wade. They overturned Roe v. Wade.
  Then, we heard from our colleagues: Well, we just want the States to 
decide.
  But, yesterday, Senator Lindsey Graham unveiled what the real plan 
is: a nationwide criminal ban on abortion, and if they can go further 
in the States, they will go further in the States.
  We have Republican proposals all over America to completely ban 
abortion from the moment of conception, which is the pro-life 
orthodoxy, which is life begins at conception.
  We heard it in the Judiciary Committee. We have heard it in the 
Oversight and Reform Committee. We have been hearing it for years. But 
now they have fallen strangely and demurely silent. Why is that? Part 
of it is because of the good people of Kansas, who showed them just 
where America is on this.
  America is a country committed to individual freedom and the rights 
of the people to make their own decisions and not having busybody, 
theocrat politicians in State capitals telling them how to make their 
own decisions about their careers, about their lives, about their 
families, and about their healthcare--and certainly not allowing 
Lindsey Graham to dictate to the women of America what their destiny 
will be.
  They won't say a word about it. They will talk about an SEC 
regulation nobody heard of that we are not here to talk about today. 
They will blame Joe Biden for global inflation. They will blame Joe 
Biden for Vladimir Putin's filthy, imperialist invasion of Ukraine.
  I hear them denouncing Joe Biden. They won't denounce Vladimir Putin 
for 1 second.
  I would happily yield 1 minute if they would denounce Vladimir Putin, 
but they won't do it. We have heard people over on their side 
cheerleading for Vladimir Putin. I heard the gentlewoman from Georgia 
say: Russia wins.
  Guess what? Russia doesn't win. The people of Ukraine are winning 
today, and the people of America are with the people of Ukraine. We are 
on the side of democrats, small d democrats, all over the world against 
the autocrats like Putin, against the theocrats like people who would 
dictate to the women of America their own health decisions.
  We are against the tyrants, the bullies, and the despots. We are 
against Presidents who get into office and try to dictate the political 
decisionmaking of individual members of the workforce and try to push 
their ideological program into the government. We are for defending 
whistleblowers; we are for defending the Census; and we are for 
defending democratic institutions in America.
  I am just shocked that I hear from my good friend from Pennsylvania, 
someone I like and someone I trust, that he actually is defending Putin 
against Biden and blaming Joe Biden for Putin's long-running plan to 
invade Ukraine. That is a remarkable thing to me, and I hope we can 
have that clarified.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I let my good friend from Maryland know that I like him, 
too, and I would certainly clarify the remarks on Putin.
  I will denounce Putin right now. Remember, I was the one calling in 
the beginning of this conflict for a no-fly zone to be established led 
by the United States. I don't think there is anybody more hawkish on 
Russia and the Ukraine issue than myself on this side of the aisle. So, 
to say that I was up here defending Putin is ludicrous.
  We, of course, needed to beat Putin. We should have been much more 
engaged from the beginning of this conflict, not just to send a message 
to the Russians but to send a message to the Iranians and a message to 
the Chinese vis-a-vis Taiwan. But I could go on.
  I would say it is a total mischaracterization of my position to say 
that I am up here saying good things about dictator Putin.

  I remind my friend from Maryland about the history of this building. 
In 1814, it was literally burned to the ground. In the seventies, 
Puerto Rican separatists stormed in and detonated a bomb. So, let's 
just get the historical context in place.
  As far as denouncing violence, everyone on this side of the aisle has 
denounced political violence consistently. The inconsistency is from my 
friends from across the other side of the aisle who cherry-pick when 
they denounce political violence.
  I remember that during the entire summer of 2020, my friends across 
the aisle treated the destructive BLM and antifa protests that caused 
$2 billion worth of damage, they treated those protesters with kid 
gloves. You had the current Vice President paying the bail for the 
protesters. You had the gentlewoman from New York, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, 
saying: ``The whole point of protesting is to make people 
uncomfortable. . . . To folks who complain protest demands make others 
uncomfortable, that is the point.'' Those are the words of the 
Democrats, not of us. We could go on.
  Chris Cuomo, CNN host: ``Please, show me where it says protesters are 
supposed to be polite and peaceful.'' The last time I checked, that was 
a Democrat.
  New York BLM cofounder Hawk Newsome said in response to Eric Adams 
trying to put plainclothes police officers on the street: ``There will 
be riots; there will be fire; and there will be bloodshed.''
  It sounds to me that the political violence and the support for the 
rhetoric that is coming to support political violence and upheaval are 
coming from one side of the aisle, the Democrat side of the aisle.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Barr) for more rebuttal.
  Mr. BARR. We may have found a point of bipartisan agreement that we 
all dislike Vladimir Putin. But one of the main reasons why Vladimir 
Putin was able to invade Ukraine was the removal of deterrence: 
unilaterally waiving sanctions on Nord Stream 2, refusing to respond 
for a full year of a buildup, inviting aggression by retreating from 
Afghanistan, and signaling to our allies that we are not coming to help 
you. That might be one of the reasons why we have a problem with 
Vladimir Putin right now.
  To the gentleman from Maryland's argument that we are just purporting 
to speak for all Americans, we are the Representatives of the American 
people, and we are their only voice in this Chamber. I am not 
purporting to speak for Americans. I am telling you what my 
constituents in Kentucky are telling me.
  Charlie from Fleming County says that he can't afford to fill up his 
tractor as a farmer because diesel prices are where they are. He says: 
I don't know where they get their numbers in Washington, Congressman, 
but it feels three times 8 percent on the CPI.
  Lorna from Mount Sterling, Kentucky, owns a floral business, a Main 
Street small business, and everything costs more. She said: This is not 
the America I know.
  Then, Jamie, who is a mom of two kids, she goes to get baby formula. 
She goes to the grocery, and she can't afford groceries. She tries to 
fill up her car to take her kids on errands, and she can't afford it.
  This is not purporting to speak for the American people. These are 
the American people, and they are suffering because this administration 
will not fix the supply side.

[[Page H7812]]

  They raise taxes on businesses, which discourages business investment 
and capital expenditures that we need to fix the supply bottlenecks. 
They raise prices at the pump by declaring war on American energy 
production by weaponizing financial regulation. They refuse to take 
actions that actually will solve the supply problem by encouraging 
people to go back to work.
  We don't need to be discouraging people from going back to work. We 
need to fill those 12 million unfilled jobs right now by encouraging 
productivity and American people going back to work.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so 
that we can go to some legislation that would actually help lower 
prices, what the American people do care about, not what they purport 
to care about, what they tell us they care about, and that is lowering 
prices.
  This bill would help us do that because it would unlock the financing 
we need to make America energy dominant once again and lower prices 
across the board.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I am 
prepared to close, and I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the CPI just released yesterday 
shows that prices have increased 8.3 percent from August of last year. 
Real wages are down 2.8 percent. The cost of electricity has 
skyrocketed 15.8 percent. That is the most since 1981, the most since I 
was alive.
  As of August, nearly one quarter of all Americans reported forgoing 
basic needs like food and medicine just to be able to afford their 
energy bill. This number will only get worse because we are going to 
face even higher costs to heat our homes this winter, with natural gas 
prices nearing a 14-year high.
  Yet, Democrats want to focus their efforts on, again, I would call 
it, irrelevant legislation that has already passed the House. It will 
not provide any relief to American workers and American families.
  For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the 
previous question and to vote ``no'' on the rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Kentucky spoke about what his 
constituents are interested in. Apparently, they are interested only in 
the question of inflation.
  My constituents are interested in that and are satisfied about the 
fact that we have had more than 90 days of decline in gas prices and 
that this administration is fighting to reduce inflation, including 
with the Inflation Reduction Act, which dramatically reduces healthcare 
costs, saying that nobody will have to spend more than $35 a month on 
insulin--no diabetic in America--and no one in the Medicare program 
will have to spend more than $2,000 a year on prescription drugs, 
generally.

  How is that for getting inflation down?
  But that is not all they care about. They care about women's right to 
choose and the GOP assault on the freedoms of the people, something 
which our colleagues maintain their demure and uncharacteristic 
circumspect silence about today. They didn't want to talk about this 
new GOP plan to ban abortion all across America. That is what we heard 
yesterday from Senator Graham about his plan for America.
  My constituents want freedom in America. They want democracy in 
voting rights. They don't want to see violence unleashed against the 
Capitol of the United States, against school boards, against State 
capitols, or any of the political violence we have seen from whatever 
source. I am happy to denounce all of it.
  I wish my colleagues would denounce political violence when it comes 
to our very doors, when it enters this Chamber, rather than playing 
follow the leader with the former President who has disgraced himself 
as the first President in U.S. history to be impeached twice and 
continues to be embroiled in all the political corruption 
investigations all over the country, as it has been shown that he egged 
on armed protesters to come to try to attack this body, to drive Vice 
President Pence out of the body, and to drive us out of the body, as 
well, interfering with a Federal proceeding.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on this rule and the previous 
question.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as 
follows:

                   Amendment to House Resolution 1339

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 13. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (H.R. 8589) to prohibit the Securities and Exchange 
     Commission from finalizing the proposed rule titled ``The 
     Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related 
     Disclosures for Investors''. 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 
     Financial Services; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 14. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 8589.

  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.

                              {time}  1400

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Tonko). The question is on ordering the 
previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on ordering the previous question will be followed by 5-
minute votes on:
  Adoption of the resolution, if ordered;
  En bloc motion to suspend the rules, if offered; and
  Motions to suspend the rules and pass:
  H.R. 884;
  H.R. 5774;
  S. 2293; and
  S. 442.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 213, 
nays 206, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 424]

                               YEAS--213

     Adams
     Aguilar
     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
     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
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Murphy (FL)
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Newman
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Payne
     Peltola
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (NY)
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Suozzi

[[Page H7813]]


     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
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--206

     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
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Conway
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     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
     Hice (GA)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Issa
     Jackson
     Jacobs (NY)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kim (CA)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sempolinski
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Allred
     Budd
     Cheney
     Herrera Beutler
     Mfume
     Nadler
     Pascrell
     Rose
     Salazar
     Sewell
     Sires
     Upton
     Wild

                              {time}  1441

  Ms. STEFANIK and Mr. CAWTHORN changed their vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Ms. BOURDEAUX changed her 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

     Baird (Bucshon)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Bass (Correa)
     Bush (Bowman)
     Cardenas (Correa)
     Conway (Valadao)
     DeSaulnier (Beyer)
     Dingell (Kuster)
     Fallon (Nehls)
     Gaetz (Cawthorn)
     Higgins (NY) (Pallone)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Jones (Beyer)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Lawrence (Beatty)
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     Levin (MI) (Correa)
     McEachin (Beyer)
     Miller (WV) (Kim (CA))
     Moore (WI) (Beyer)
     Newman (Beyer)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Pingree (Kuster)
     Rice (NY) (Deutch)
     Schiff (Deutch)
     Schrader (Correa)
     Scott (VA) (Beyer)
     Scott, Austin (Cammack)
     Stansbury (Pallone)
     Stevens (Kuster)
     Tlaib (Bowman)
     Wexton (Beyer)
  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.
  Mr. RESCHENTHALER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 219, 
nays 209, not voting 4, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 425]

                               YEAS--219

     Adams
     Aguilar
     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
     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
     Peltola
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (NY)
     Ryan (OH)
     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--209

     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
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cawthorn
     Chabot
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Comer
     Conway
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     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)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Meijer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Obernolte
     Owens
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sempolinski
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Allred
     Budd
     Cheney
     Rose

                              {time}  1458

  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.

[[Page H7814]]

  



    Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

     Baird (Bucshon)
     Barragan (Correa)
     Bass (Correa)
     Bush (Bowman)
     Cardenas (Correa)
     Conway (Valadao)
     DeSaulnier (Beyer)
     Dingell (Kuster)
     Fallon (Nehls)
     Gaetz (Cawthorn)
     Higgins (NY) (Pallone)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Jones (Beyer)
     Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
     Lawrence (Beatty)
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     Levin (MI) (Correa)
     McEachin (Beyer)
     Miller (WV) (Kim (CA))
     Moore (WI) (Beyer)
     Newman (Beyer)
     Payne (Pallone)
     Pingree (Kuster)
     Rice (NY) (Deutch)
     Schiff (Deutch)
     Schrader (Correa)
     Scott (VA) (Beyer)
     Scott, Austin (Cammack)
     Stansbury (Pallone)
     Stevens (Kuster)
     Tlaib (Bowman)
     Upton (Katko)
     Wexton (Beyer)

                          ____________________