[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 153 (Thursday, September 22, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H8081-H8085]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1330
MENTAL HEALTH JUSTICE ACT OF 2022
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1377, I call
up the bill (H.R. 8542) to amend the Public Health Service Act to
authorize grants to States, Indian Tribes, Tribal organizations, Urban
Indian organizations, and political subdivisions thereof to hire,
employ, train, and dispatch mental health professionals to respond in
lieu of law enforcement officers in emergencies involving one or more
persons with a mental illness or an intellectual or developmental
disability, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate
consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kildee). Pursuant to House Resolution
1377, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 8542
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Mental Health Justice Act of
2022''.
SEC. 2. GRANTS FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS TO ACT AS
FIRST RESPONDERS.
Subpart 3 of part B of title V of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 290bb-31 et seq.) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``SEC. 520N. GRANTS FOR MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS TO ACT AS
FIRST RESPONDERS.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the
Assistant Secretary, and in consultation with the Assistant
Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of the
Department of Justice, shall award grants to States, Indian
Tribes, Tribal organizations, Urban Indian organizations, and
political subdivisions thereof to establish or expand
programs--
``(1) to hire, employ, train, and dispatch mental health
professionals to respond in lieu of law enforcement officers
in emergencies in which--
``(A) an individual calling 911, 988, or another emergency
hotline states that a person--
``(i) is in a mental health crisis; or
``(ii) may have a mental illness or an intellectual or
developmental disability;
``(B) a law enforcement officer or other first responder
identifies a person as having (or possibly having) a mental
illness or an intellectual or developmental disability; or
``(C) a law enforcement officer or other first responder
identifies a person as being (or possibly being) under the
influence of a legal or illegal substance;
``(2) to include in the training for mental health
professionals pursuant to paragraph (1) training in--
``(A) the principles of deescalation; and
``(B) developmentally appropriate techniques;
``(3) to ensure that such mental health professionals link
persons described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of
paragraph (1) with voluntary community-based services where
appropriate;
``(4) to train the staff of dispatch centers regarding the
proper handling of a report of an emergency described in
paragraph (1), including training in the principles and
techniques referred to in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
paragraph (2); and
``(5) to coordinate with law enforcement agencies, which
may include operating independently from but in collaboration
with a law enforcement agency, or operating within such an
agency.
``(b) Additional Awards.--The Secretary shall make an
additional award of funds under this section each fiscal year
to grantees that--
``(1) are in compliance with all conditions of their awards
under this section, including the conditions specified in
subsections (a) and (d); and
``(2) demonstrate that their programs under this section
resulted in--
``(A) a notable reduction in the incarceration and death of
persons with mental illness or an intellectual or
developmental disability; or
``(B) a notable reduction in the use of force by police and
a notable increase in referrals of persons with a mental
illness or intellectual disability to community-based,
voluntary support services (other than institutionalization
or carceral support services).
``(c) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the
Secretary shall give priority to States, Indian Tribes,
Tribal organizations, Urban Indian organizations, and
political subdivisions thereof that--
``(1) have high rates of arrests and incarceration of
persons with a mental illness or an intellectual or
developmental disability;
``(2) commit to increasing resources for mental health and
community-based support services or solutions for such
persons; or
``(3) include peer support specialists in their current
first responder model.
``(d) Reporting.--
``(1) By grantees.--A recipient of a grant under this
section shall submit to the Secretary--
``(A) a quarterly report on--
``(i) the number and percentage of emergencies where mental
health professionals were dispatched in lieu of law
enforcement officers pursuant to assistance under this
section;
``(ii) such other matters as the Secretary may require for
determining whether the recipient should receive an
additional award under subsection (b); and
``(iii) any increase or decrease, compared to any previous
quarter, in incarceration or institutionalization as a result
of dispatching mental health professionals pursuant to
assistance under this section, disaggregated to include data
specific to persons with intellectual and developmental
disabilities and mental illnesses where available and
permitted to be disclosed under applicable privacy law, so
as--
``(I) to provide a critical baseline analysis; and
``(II) to ensure that mental health practitioners are not
simply funneling individuals into other institutionalized
settings; and
``(B) a final report on the use of such grant.
``(2) By secretary.--Not later than 1 year after awarding
the first grant under this section, and annually thereafter,
the Secretary shall submit to the Congress a report on the
grant program under this section.
``(3) Disaggregation of data.--The reporting pursuant to
paragraphs (1) and (2) shall, to the extent determined by the
Secretary to be applicable, be disaggregated by age, sex,
gender, race, and ethnicity.
``(e) Revocation of Grant.--If the Secretary finds, based
on reporting under subsection (d) or other information, that
activities funded through a grant under this section are
leading to a significant increase in incarceration or
institutionalization--
``(1) the Secretary shall revoke the grant; and
``(2) the grantee shall repay to the Federal Government any
amounts that the grantee--
``(A) received through the grant; and
``(B) has not obligated or expended.
``(f) Technical Assistance.--The Secretary, acting through
the Assistant Secretary, and in consultation with the
Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division of
the Department of Justice, shall provide technical assistance
to grantees under this section (or other Federal law), and to
other States, Indian Tribes, Tribal organizations, Urban
Indian organizations, and political subdivisions thereof to
hire, employ, train, and dispatch mental health professionals
to respond in lieu of law enforcement officers, as described
in subsection (a).
``(g) Definitions.--In this section, the terms `Indian
Tribe', `Tribal organization', and `Urban Indian
organization' have the meanings given to the terms `Indian
tribe', `tribal organization', and `Urban Indian
organization', respectively, in section 4 of the Indian
Health Care Improvement Act.
``(h) Funding.--To carry out this section, there is
authorized to be appropriated $250,000,000 for the period of
fiscal years 2023 through 2027.''.
SEC. 3. STUDY.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services
and the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights
Division of the Department of Justice shall conduct a study
on the effectiveness of programs and
[[Page H8082]]
activities under section 520N of the Public Health Service
Act, as added by section 2.
(b) Qualitative and Longitudinal Examination.--The study
under subsection (a) shall include a qualitative and
longitudinal study of--
(1) the number of persons diverted from arrests; and
(2) short- and long-term outcomes for those persons,
including reduced recidivism, reduced incidences of use of
force, and reduced utilization of resources.
(c) Completion; Report.--Not later than 3 years after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and
Human Services and the Assistant Attorney General for the
Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice shall--
(1) complete the study under subsection (a);
(2) submit a report to the Congress on the results of such
study; and
(3) publish such report.
SEC. 4. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
(a) Hiring of Law Enforcement Officers.--Nothing in this
Act shall be construed to remove, supplant, alter, or limit
the authority of States, public agencies, or municipalities
from hiring or recruiting career law enforcement officers (as
defined in section 1709 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10389)) to engage in or
supervise the prevention, detection, or investigation of
violations of criminal laws when appropriate.
(b) Circumstances of Imminent or Immediate Danger.--Nothing
in this Act shall be construed to impede, supplant, alter, or
limit the use of career law enforcement officers during
emergencies which career law enforcement officers may be best
suited to handle, including circumstances that are urgent,
sudden, serious, or necessitate immediate action to remedy
harm or avert imminent danger to life, health, or property.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 30 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees.
The gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) and the gentleman from
North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong) each will control 15 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
General Leave
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and include extraneous material on H.R. 8542, the Mental Health Justice
Act of 2022.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New Jersey?
There was no objection.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today in support of H.R. 8542, the Mental Health Justice Act
of 2022, sponsored by Congresswoman Katie Porter of California.
As my colleagues well know, the Nation is facing a mental health
crisis. One in five adults experience a mental health illness in their
life, and 1 in 20 experience a serious mental illness.
The Mental Health Justice Act creates a grant program for local
governments to hire, train, and dispatch mental health professionals
when 911 is called because someone is experiencing a mental health
crisis.
Mr. Speaker, we must ensure people have access to the support they
need, especially in moments of crisis when emergency responders are
called.
This legislation would help support connecting those experiencing a
mental health crisis with the appropriate responders, resources, and
care. The appropriate responder here is crucial. In an effort to
balance the needs of individuals and communities, this bill still
maintains States' and public entities' hiring and recruiting authority
for law enforcement officers and in no way limits their ability to
intervene in dangerous circumstances.
It is through such coordination and collaboration with law
enforcement and the community that we make our communities safer.
By ensuring that a mental health professional is the responder in
situations where a person is experiencing a mental health or
disability-related crisis, this bill will help keep some of the most
vulnerable members of our community safe.
This is a good bill that will help strengthen the communities we
serve, and I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 8542 today.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 8542, the Mental
Health Justice Act of 2022.
``In lieu of law enforcement officers in emergencies.'' I am going to
say it again, because that is the exact language used repeatedly in the
bill. ``In lieu of law enforcement officers in emergencies.''
Mr. Speaker, this bill is dangerous. This legislation gives Federal
grants to States, Tribes, and localities to hire mental health
providers to respond to certain emergencies involving an individual
with an intellectual disability or developmental disability; an
individual experiencing a mental health crisis; or an individual under
the influence.
There is nothing wrong with mental health professionals assisting law
enforcement in appropriate circumstances. Communities around the
country are adopting these models with law enforcement, mental health
providers, and prosecutors.
I would be open to supporting legislation limited to training mental
health providers to assist law enforcement in appropriate situations,
but that is not what this bill does.
A sentence in the bill begins by stating that ``mental health
providers may coordinate with law enforcement.'' Sounds acceptable, but
it continues to read, ``which may include operating independently''
from law enforcement.
Let's be clear. The purpose of this legislation is to provide
financial incentives to deploy mental health providers to inherently
dangerous situations in lieu of law enforcement and operating
independently of law enforcement. That is a policy that will endanger
the mental health professional, the suspect, the person experiencing
the mental health crisis, and the person who called 911.
A crime scene or a home experiencing a domestic violence dispute is
not the setting to provide mental health care.
In the first half of 2022, the leading circumstance of law
enforcement officers killed with firearms was in response to domestic
violence calls.
Nobody can confidently tell us they know in advance which domestic
violence call should get a mental health response instead of a law
enforcement response.
Mental health professionals are not trained for the inevitable
physical confrontations that occur in these situations. The priority in
an emergency situation is to secure the scene and all individuals
involved, which is a law enforcement function. Once the scene is
secure, I will be the first person calling for mental health services,
whether it is addiction-related, trauma, or mental illness.
There is a time and a place for mental health care, but it is not
rolling up to a scene without the training and tools to defend yourself
and at-risk civilians. A first responder typically does not have the
time and information to know when it is appropriate to provide mental
health services.
Who are we expecting to make the distinction on mental health? The
911 dispatcher? An elected official inserted into the emergency
dispatch process?
Every additional second layer of bureaucracy will cost lives. The
risks are even greater in rural parts of the country, like my home
State of North Dakota, where backup is often measured in hours, not
minutes.
Ask a mental health provider if they want to be deployed without law
enforcement at 1 a.m. on the side of Highway 85 between Dickinson and
Watford City.
As if the public safety concerns aren't enough, the bill provides
additional financial incentives for the actions that may not be in the
best interest of the individual, the community, or comply with
established laws of the jurisdiction.
The bill provides additional awards for referrals to community-based,
voluntary support services without consideration of the specific needs
and circumstances.
Community-based care could be the appropriate setting, but there are
circumstances where inpatient care or incarceration are simply more
appropriate.
The bill also provides incentives for decarceration rates of certain
groups of individuals. Again, decarceration may make sense at times. I
have advocated for it in lots of circumstances, but it is
[[Page H8083]]
case specific. I have seen it before. Police arrest on a domestic
violence charge, release, and respond to a murder 2 hours later.
These decisions should be made at the local level based on specific
circumstances with State and local input.
This bill attempts to treat the subject of the 911 call with fairness
and dignity. That is something we should all strive toward. The flip
side is that this bill does not account for the person who made the 911
call.
These policies will not work in the real world. It will only make
dangerous situations more dangerous. The unintended consequences of
this bill are extensive, and emergency situations will become more
dangerous than they already are.
This is why we need committee process to work through these
challenging issues. Criminal justice reform is hard. There are lots and
lots of unintended consequences. I have legitimately worked on it my
entire adult life. But my Democratic colleagues skipped that process
because their focus is on frontline elections in the House, not
frontline communities battling rising crime rates.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Guthrie).
Mr. GUTHRIE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this bill.
Make no mistake, this bill is a Trojan horse to advance the radical
defund the police movement and will hurt people who need help the most.
This bill would not only keep our dedicated law enforcement officers
off the streets at a time when crime is rising and illicit drugs are
flooding communities but, also, could significantly reduce access to
care for individuals with severe mental illness or substance use
disorder. This bill would penalize organizations that have higher rates
of institutionalization.
To be clear, we need to promote access to all types of behavioral
healthcare and substance use disorder services. However, this bill does
not take into account that sometimes these organizations provide the
safest, most effective care for individuals with serious mental
illness.
If Democrats' goal is to provide effective care for individuals with
disabilities, severe mental illness, and substance use disorder, then
we already have legislative solutions which this very body
overwhelmingly passed in June of this year.
{time} 1345
In June of this year, the Restoring Hope for Mental Health and Well-
Being Act was passed, and it would bolster behavioral health and
substance use disorder treatment and recovery services for millions of
Americans, most notably our children.
Democrats need to work with Republicans on addressing some of the
root causes of crime, such as our border crisis that the Vice President
insists is secure despite record numbers of border encounters and
illicit drugs being trafficked into our country.
We have a solution in the Energy and Commerce Committee to provide
law enforcement officers the tools they need to get drugs off our
streets and break the cycle of addiction. The HALT Fentanyl Act would
permanently schedule fentanyl-related substances as schedule I drugs.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to work with Republicans on passing
this legislation.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I only have one speaker, so I will continue
to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Pence), my good friend.
Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R.
8542.
Plain and simple, this legislation would only amplify the violent
crime wave we are currently seeing under Democratic leadership. Turn on
the TV, watch the news. Night after night, we have to hear about the
innocent lives taken from us because of the violence we are seeing in
our streets. Just like other communities across the country,
communities in Indiana aren't immune. Our hardworking law enforcement
heroes alone are already struggling to keep up with this spike in
crime.
This legislation does absolutely nothing to help. In fact, it will
make the situation worse, making good on Democrats' promise to
dismantle and defund the police.
These aren't policing bills. This is a way for the Democrats to just
check a box in this election year. It is disrespectful to our law
enforcement community and an insult to those struggling with mental
health and substance abuse issues.
I have heard from countless county sheriffs and police chiefs back in
my district who want to be a partner with mental health providers, not
be replaced by them.
I implore my Democratic colleagues to end their war on law
enforcement and come together to work with Republicans who want to make
our communities safer.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Porter), the sponsor of this legislation, someone who
has worked so hard in her time here on mental health and behavioral
health issues.
Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support getting Americans
the help that they need.
More than one in five 911 calls involve mental health or substance
use crises. That amounts to millions of calls per year.
To keep these Americans safe, we need to connect them to healthcare.
It is wasteful, hurtful, and a travesty of justice to criminalize
people in mental health crises rather than deliver care.
One in four fatal law enforcement encounters ends the life of someone
with mental illness. We cannot improve public safety without giving our
communities a better response system for mental health crises.
My bill, the Mental Health Justice Act, funds local communities to
create specialized mental health response units. Made up of trained
health professionals, these units can be dispatched to respond to
emergency calls for mental health. That way, people in crisis can get
the care they need; police officers can focus on crime, including
stopping violent crime and other core law enforcement duties; and our
communities get another tool to address our mental health crisis.
The Mental Health Justice Act has widespread support from advocacy
organizations fighting for mental health and civil rights because this
approach works. In cities that already have these programs across the
country, we see incredible, positive results and support from local law
enforcement.
In Orange County, our law enforcement officials support this bill
because their job is already difficult enough. They know their sworn
duty is to prevent and solve crime and hold criminals accountable.
Sending police to mental health situations diverts their attention from
crime fighting. I have heard firsthand from officers who want
specialized mental health response units. This bill empowers police to
stay where they are needed, fighting crime.
At the same time, entangling people in mental health crises in the
criminal justice system or holding them in jail wastes taxpayer dollars
and doesn't deliver on public safety.
When we send police to people in crisis, we fail to get those people
desperately needed healthcare, and we take law enforcement away from
tackling the violent crime that they are trained to take on. This hurts
everyone in our community.
The Mental Health Justice Act is supported by a broad bipartisan
coalition, co-led by my colleague from Orange County, Republican
Michelle Steel, and my colleagues Ayanna Pressley, Tony Cardenas, and
Mary Gay Scanlon.
Keeping Americans safe and healthy is not a partisan issue. I am
proud to champion the Mental Health Justice Act, a tested, effective
solution to promote public safety and well-being for every American.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Joyce), my good friend.
Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to
this bill.
The crime rates that we have seen skyrocket across the United States
can be traced directly back to calls from far-left Members of Congress
to defund the police.
[[Page H8084]]
In my own district, we have seen more violent crimes than ever
before. In the city of Johnstown, Pennsylvania, a community of just
20,000 people, we have already seen 10 murders so far this year.
Instead of confronting this issue head-on, this legislative package
hands out over $2 billion to far-left programs while only funding $60
million worth of grants for police officers, and that $60 million would
be spread out over 50 States.
This bill is deeply misguided and will not address the root issues of
the crisis that we are facing. Instead, it spends Federal tax dollars
funding social workers under the guise of supporting law enforcement.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on these
bills, and I myself will vote ``no.''
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this letter from the National
District Attorneys Association in opposition to this legislation.
National District
Attorneys Association,
Washington, DC, September 21, 2022.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington,
DC.
Hon. Kevin McCarthy,
Republican Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Speaker Pelosi and Leader McCarthy: I am reaching out
on behalf of the National District Attorneys Association
(NDAA), the oldest and largest national organization
representing state and local prosecutors in the country. With
more than 5,500 members nationwide, NDAA is recognized as the
leading source of national expertise on the prosecution
function and is a valuable resource for the media, academia,
government, and community leaders. Today, I write with
concern about H.R. 8542, the Mental Health Justice Act, as
part of the policing package moving through Congress.
NDAA is strongly supportive of increasing funding for our
partner law enforcement agencies, implementing new grants
focused on reducing community violence, and assisting
investigators in solving cold cases to better support victims
of violent crime. However, prosecutors have significant
concerns about the fourth legislative proposal which would
establish new grants to ``hire, employ, train, and dispatch
mental health professionals to respond in lieu of law
enforcement officers in emergencies.''
Currently, law enforcement, prosecutors, and mental health
professionals across the country are proactively and
organically forming multidisciplinary teams and engaging in
the co-responder model to better handle incidents involving
individuals suffering from mental health crises. For example,
jurisdictions have paired law enforcement officers, mental
health clinicians, and community advocates together when
responding to an individual's mental health emergency called
into a 911 dispatcher. This partnership is the first line of
response and is then followed by coordination on the back end
between additional health professionals and prosecutors to
ensure a plan can be enacted to provide the individual in
crisis with a plan of rehabilitation that also ensures there
is no public safety risk to the community. The language in
the Mental Health Justice Act would undermine these
collaborative efforts which have been shown to reduce violent
crime, limit harm to responding law enforcement officers, and
improve community trust in the criminal justice system.
Further, the legislation takes unprecedented steps to
impose new grant conditions that require mental health
professionals and community grantees to decrease
incarceration and restrict partnership with law enforcement
agencies. NDAA has long stated that any diversion or
rehabilitation program, such as those led by co-responder
teams, must include tools to ensure consequences are imposed
if there are incidents of re-offending by the individual
receiving treatment. Local communities are best suited to
decide which models work best and these onerous new
requirements could restrict or discourage programs from
forming that serve the dual purpose of rehabilitation and
community safety. These new conditions would undermine this
principal and require our mental health partners to create
new barriers between law enforcement and the clinical
professionals working together to improve our Nation's
response to ongoing mental health emergencies.
For these reasons, NDAA urges the House of Representatives
to strongly reconsider including the Mental Health Justice
Act as part of the important police funding package moving
through the chamber. We thank you for your tireless efforts
to improve the criminal justice system and look forward to
working alongside you and your staff to ensure law
enforcement and the mental health community have the tools
needed to keep our communities safe.
Sincerely,
John J. Flynn,
NDAA President.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close. The only time you know a traffic stop is routine is when it is
over. The only time you know it is only a mental health service call is
after the scene is secure.
Far too often, and more complicated, are addiction-related issues and
mental health-related issues, but none of those preclude the fact that
a weapon is there or domestic violence has occurred.
When you continue to coordinate this stuff for cash-strapped
departments across the country with decarceration, you will have real
consequences.
For well over 25 years, victims' rights groups have fought all across
this country to get domestic violence offenders held for the weekend on
misdemeanor charges, and there are reasons for that. You need them to
sober up; you need everybody to cool off; and victims need the
opportunity to get out of the house.
These bills do nothing to do any of those things. These bills will
make communities more dangerous from one end of the country to the
other.
This bill sounds really good. Cooperation, coordination, all of those
words sound fantastic. I will be the first one championing mental
health and addiction services to anybody in lieu of custody, in lieu of
prison, in lieu of jail time, but I want to do it after the scene is
secure and we know there is no weapon onsite and nobody is in danger,
when we know the victim is not in danger, the community is not in
danger, and the person who is experiencing addiction, mental health,
whatever crisis it is, is not in danger.
This bill doesn't do that. This bill does the opposite of that. We
should reject it and get back to work on the hard work of passing
reasonable, real, strong criminal justice reform.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Porter)
for constantly coming up with innovative approaches to the mental
health and the opioid crises. I see this over and over again on her
part.
Look, the bottom line is local governments need support for these
types of specialized mental health response units that she has put
together as part of this bill with grant funding. This isn't going to
happen unless the Federal Government provides this kind of funding and
authorization for these programs. I know locally in New Jersey, it will
not happen unless we do something and provide these types of grants.
It does disturb me that the Republicans keep trying to politicize
this because I know that on our committee, the Energy and Commerce
Committee--and most of the speakers on the other side are on our
committee--we have worked hard to come together in a bipartisan way to
try to come up with innovative approaches to the behavioral health
crisis.
We did a bill that passed the House 404-20 just a few months ago that
provides help for mental health and well-being that has ways of trying
to deal with this crisis. I think that Katie Porter should be commended
for coming up with another creative and innovative approach for trying
to deal with this.
Every day, we know that the crisis is there, and we have to, at a
Federal level, respond to it. This bill will go very far, in my
opinion, toward responding to that crisis.
Mr. Speaker, I urge everyone to support this bill on both sides of
the aisle, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1377, the previous question is ordered
on the bill.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
[[Page H8085]]
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________