[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 37 (Monday, February 27, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H892-H896]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SECURING AND ENABLING COMMERCE USING REMOTE AND ELECTRONIC NOTARIZATION
ACT OF 2023
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1059) to authorize notaries public to perform, and to
establish minimum standards for, electronic notarizations and remote
notarizations that occur in or affect interstate commerce, to require
any Federal court to recognize notarizations performed by a notarial
officer of any State, to require any State to recognize notarizations
performed by a notarial officer of any other State when the
notarization was performed under or relates to a public Act, record, or
judicial proceeding of the notarial officer's State or when the
notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce, and for other
purposes.
[[Page H893]]
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1059
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 ``Securing and Enabling
Commerce Using Remote and Electronic Notarization Act of
2023'' or the ``SECURE Notarization Act of 2023''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Communication technology.--The term ``communication
technology'', with respect to a notarization, means an
electronic device or process that allows the notary public
performing the notarization, a remotely located individual,
and (if applicable) a credible witness to communicate with
each other simultaneously by sight and sound during the
notarization.
(2) Electronic; electronic record; electronic signature;
information; person; record.--The terms ``electronic'',
``electronic record'', ``electronic signature'',
``information'', ``person'', and ``record'' have the meanings
given those terms in section 106 of the Electronic Signatures
in Global and National Commerce Act (15 U.S.C. 7006).
(3) Law.--The term ``law'' includes any statute,
regulation, rule, or rule of law.
(4) Notarial officer.--The term ``notarial officer''
means--
(A) a notary public; or
(B) any other individual authorized to perform a
notarization under the laws of a State without a commission
or appointment as a notary public.
(5) Notarial officer's state; notary public's state.--The
term ``notarial officer's State'' or ``notary public's
State'' means the State in which a notarial officer, or a
notary public, as applicable, is authorized to perform a
notarization.
(6) Notarization.--The term ``notarization''--
(A) means any act that a notarial officer may perform
under--
(i) Federal law, including this Act; or
(ii) the laws of the notarial officer's State; and
(B) includes any act described in subparagraph (A) and
performed by a notarial officer--
(i) with respect to--
(I) a tangible record; or
(II) an electronic record; and
(ii) for--
(I) an individual in the physical presence of the notarial
officer; or
(II) a remotely located individual.
(7) Notary public.--The term ``notary public'' means an
individual commissioned or appointed as a notary public to
perform a notarization under the laws of a State.
(8) Personal knowledge.--The term ``personal knowledge'',
with respect to the identity of an individual, means
knowledge of the identity of the individual through dealings
sufficient to provide reasonable certainty that the
individual has the identity claimed.
(9) Remotely located individual.--The term ``remotely
located individual'', with respect to a notarization, means
an individual who is not in the physical presence of the
notarial officer performing the notarization.
(10) Requirement.--The term ``requirement'' includes a
duty, a standard of care, and a prohibition.
(11) Signature.--The term ``signature'' means--
(A) an electronic signature; or
(B) a tangible symbol executed or adopted by a person and
evidencing the present intent to authenticate or adopt a
record.
(12) Simultaneously.--The term ``simultaneously'', with
respect to a communication between parties--
(A) means that each party communicates substantially
simultaneously and without unreasonable interruption or
disconnection; and
(B) includes any reasonably short delay that is inherent
in, or common with respect to, the method used for the
communication.
(13) State.--The term ``State''--
(A) means--
(i) any State of the United States;
(ii) the District of Columbia;
(iii) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico;
(iv) any territory or possession of the United States; and
(v) any federally recognized Indian Tribe; and
(B) includes any executive, legislative, or judicial
agency, court, department, board, office, clerk, recorder,
register, registrar, commission, authority, institution,
instrumentality, county, municipality, or other political
subdivision of an entity described in any of clauses (i)
through (v) of subparagraph (A).
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION TO PERFORM AND MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
ELECTRONIC NOTARIZATION.
(a) Authorization.--Unless prohibited under section 10, and
subject to subsection (b), a notary public may perform a
notarization that occurs in or affects interstate commerce
with respect to an electronic record.
(b) Requirements of Electronic Notarization.--If a notary
public performs a notarization under subsection (a), the
following requirements shall apply with respect to the
notarization:
(1) The electronic signature of the notary public, and all
other information required to be included under other
applicable law, shall be attached to or logically associated
with the electronic record.
(2) The electronic signature and other information
described in paragraph (1) shall be bound to the electronic
record in a manner that renders any subsequent change or
modification to the electronic record evident.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION TO PERFORM AND MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
REMOTE NOTARIZATION.
(a) Authorization.--Unless prohibited under section 10, and
subject to subsection (b), a notary public may perform a
notarization that occurs in or affects interstate commerce
for a remotely located individual.
(b) Requirements of Remote Notarization.--If a notary
public performs a notarization under subsection (a), the
following requirements shall apply with respect to the
notarization:
(1) The remotely located individual shall appear personally
before the notary public at the time of the notarization by
using communication technology.
(2) The notary public shall--
(A) reasonably identify the remotely located individual--
(i) through personal knowledge of the identity of the
remotely located individual; or
(ii) by obtaining satisfactory evidence of the identity of
the remotely located individual by--
(I) using not fewer than 2 distinct types of processes or
services through which a third person provides a means to
verify the identity of the remotely located individual
through a review of public or private data sources; or
(II) oath or affirmation of a credible witness who--
(aa)(AA) is in the physical presence of the notary public
or the remotely located individual; or
(BB) appears personally before the notary public and the
remotely located individual by using communication
technology;
(bb) has personal knowledge of the identity of the remotely
located individual; and
(cc) has been identified by the notary public in the same
manner as specified for identification of a remotely located
individual under clause (i) or subclause (I) of this clause;
(B) either directly or through an agent--
(i) create an audio and visual recording of the performance
of the notarization; and
(ii) notwithstanding any resignation from, or revocation,
suspension, or termination of, the notary public's commission
or appointment, retain the recording created under clause (i)
as a notarial record--
(I) for a period of not less than--
(aa) if an applicable law of the notary public's State
specifies a period of retention, the greater of--
(AA) that specified period; or
(BB) 5 years after the date on which the recording is
created; or
(bb) if no applicable law of the notary public's State
specifies a period of retention, 10 years after the date on
which the recording is created; and
(II) if any applicable law of the notary public's State
governs the content, manner or place of retention, security,
use, effect, or disclosure of the recording or any
information contained in the recording, in accordance with
that law; and
(C) if the notarization is performed with respect to a
tangible or electronic record, take reasonable steps to
confirm that the record before the notary public is the same
record with respect to which the remotely located individual
made a statement or on which the individual executed a
signature.
(3) If a guardian, conservator, executor, personal
representative, administrator, or similar fiduciary or
successor is appointed for or on behalf of a notary public or
a deceased notary public under applicable law, that person
shall retain the recording under paragraph (2)(B)(ii),
unless--
(A) another person is obligated to retain the recording
under applicable law of the notary public's State; or
(B)(i) under applicable law of the notary public's State,
that person may transmit the recording to an office, archive,
or repository approved or designated by the State; and
(ii) that person transmits the recording to the office,
archive, or repository described in clause (i) in accordance
with applicable law of the notary public's State.
(4) If the remotely located individual is physically
located outside the geographic boundaries of a State, or is
otherwise physically located in a location that is not
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, at the time
of the notarization--
(A) the record shall--
(i) be intended for filing with, or relate to a matter
before, a court, governmental entity, public official, or
other entity that is subject to the jurisdiction of the
United States; or
(ii) involve property located in the territorial
jurisdiction of the United States or a transaction
substantially connected to the United States; and
(B) the act of making the statement or signing the record
may not be prohibited by a law of the jurisdiction in which
the individual is physically located.
(c) Personal Appearance Satisfied.--If a State or Federal
law requires an individual to appear personally before or be
in the physical presence of a notary public at the time of a
notarization, that requirement shall be considered to be
satisfied if--
(1) the individual--
(A) is a remotely located individual; and
(B) appears personally before the notary public at the time
of the notarization by using communication technology; and
[[Page H894]]
(2)(A) the notarization was performed under or relates to a
public act, record, or judicial proceeding of the notary
public's State; or
(B) the notarization occurs in or affects interstate
commerce.
SEC. 5. RECOGNITION OF NOTARIZATIONS IN FEDERAL COURT.
(a) Recognition of Validity.--Each court of the United
States shall recognize as valid under the State or Federal
law applicable in a judicial proceeding before the court any
notarization performed by a notarial officer of any State if
the notarization is valid under the laws of the notarial
officer's State or under this Act.
(b) Legal Effect of Recognized Notarization.--A
notarization recognized under subsection (a) shall have the
same effect under the State or Federal law applicable in the
applicable judicial proceeding as if that notarization was
validly performed--
(1)(A) by a notarial officer of the State, the law of which
is applicable in the proceeding; or
(B) under this Act or other Federal law; and
(2) without regard to whether the notarization was
performed--
(A) with respect to--
(i) a tangible record; or
(ii) an electronic record; or
(B) for--
(i) an individual in the physical presence of the notarial
officer; or
(ii) a remotely located individual.
(c) Presumption of Genuineness.--In a determination of the
validity of a notarization for the purposes of subsection
(a), the signature and title of an individual performing the
notarization shall be prima facie evidence in any court of
the United States that the signature of the individual is
genuine and that the individual holds the designated title.
(d) Conclusive Evidence of Authority.--In a determination
of the validity of a notarization for the purposes of
subsection (a), the signature and title of the following
notarial officers of a State shall conclusively establish the
authority of the officer to perform the notarization:
(1) A notary public of that State.
(2) A judge, clerk, or deputy clerk of a court of that
State.
SEC. 6. RECOGNITION BY STATE OF NOTARIZATIONS PERFORMED UNDER
AUTHORITY OF ANOTHER STATE.
(a) Recognition of Validity.--Each State shall recognize as
valid under the laws of that State any notarization performed
by a notarial officer of any other State if--
(1) the notarization is valid under the laws of the
notarial officer's State or under this Act; and
(2)(A) the notarization was performed under or relates to a
public act, record, or judicial proceeding of the notarial
officer's State; or
(B) the notarization occurs in or affects interstate
commerce.
(b) Legal Effect of Recognized Notarization.--A
notarization recognized under subsection (a) shall have the
same effect under the laws of the recognizing State as if
that notarization was validly performed by a notarial officer
of the recognizing State, without regard to whether the
notarization was performed--
(1) with respect to--
(A) a tangible record; or
(B) an electronic record; or
(2) for--
(A) an individual in the physical presence of the notarial
officer; or
(B) a remotely located individual.
(c) Presumption of Genuineness.--In a determination of the
validity of a notarization for the purposes of subsection
(a), the signature and title of an individual performing a
notarization shall be prima facie evidence in any State court
or judicial proceeding that the signature is genuine and that
the individual holds the designated title.
(d) Conclusive Evidence of Authority.--In a determination
of the validity of a notarization for the purposes of
subsection (a), the signature and title of the following
notarial officers of a State shall conclusively establish the
authority of the officer to perform the notarization:
(1) A notary public of that State.
(2) A judge, clerk, or deputy clerk of a court of that
State.
SEC. 7. ELECTRONIC AND REMOTE NOTARIZATION NOT REQUIRED.
Nothing in this Act may be construed to require a notary
public to perform a notarization--
(1) with respect to an electronic record;
(2) for a remotely located individual; or
(3) using a technology that the notary public has not
selected.
SEC. 8. VALIDITY OF NOTARIZATIONS; RIGHTS OF AGGRIEVED
PERSONS NOT AFFECTED; STATE LAWS ON THE
PRACTICE OF LAW NOT AFFECTED.
(a) Validity Not Affected.--The failure of a notary public
to meet a requirement under section 3 or 4 in the performance
of a notarization, or the failure of a notarization to
conform to a requirement under section 3 or 4, shall not
invalidate or impair the validity or recognition of the
notarization.
(b) Rights of Aggrieved Persons.--The validity and
recognition of a notarization under this Act may not be
construed to prevent an aggrieved person from seeking to
invalidate a record or transaction that is the subject of a
notarization or from seeking other remedies based on State or
Federal law other than this Act for any reason not specified
in this Act, including on the basis--
(1) that a person did not, with present intent to
authenticate or adopt a record, execute a signature on the
record;
(2) that an individual was incompetent, lacked authority or
capacity to authenticate or adopt a record, or did not
knowingly and voluntarily authenticate or adopt a record; or
(3) of fraud, forgery, mistake, misrepresentation,
impersonation, duress, undue influence, or other invalidating
cause.
(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act may be
construed to affect a State law governing, authorizing, or
prohibiting the practice of law.
SEC. 9. EXCEPTION TO PREEMPTION.
(a) In General.--A State law may modify, limit, or
supersede the provisions of section 3, or subsection (a) or
(b) of section 4, with respect to State law only if that
State law--
(1) either--
(A) constitutes an enactment or adoption of the Revised
Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, as approved and recommended for
enactment in all the States by the National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2018 or the Revised
Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, as approved and recommended for
enactment in all the States by the National Conference of
Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in 2021, except that a
modification to such Law enacted or adopted by a State shall
be preempted to the extent such modification--
(i) is inconsistent with a provision of section 3 or
subsection (a) or (b) of section 4, as applicable; or
(ii) would not be permitted under subparagraph (B); or
(B) specifies additional or alternative procedures or
requirements for the performance of notarizations with
respect to electronic records or for remotely located
individuals, if those additional or alternative procedures or
requirements--
(i) are consistent with section 3 and subsections (a) and
(b) of section 4; and
(ii) do not accord greater legal effect to the
implementation or application of a specific technology or
technical specification for performing those notarizations;
and
(2) requires the retention of an audio and visual recording
of the performance of a notarization for a remotely located
individual for a period of not less than 5 years after the
recording is created.
(b) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in section 5 or 6 may be
construed to preclude the recognition of a notarization under
applicable State law, regardless of whether such State law is
consistent with section 5 or 6.
SEC. 10. STANDARD OF CARE; SPECIAL NOTARIAL COMMISSIONS.
(a) State Standards of Care; Authority of State Regulatory
Officials.--Nothing in this Act may be construed to prevent a
State, or a notarial regulatory official of a State, from--
(1) adopting a requirement in this Act as a duty or
standard of care under the laws of that State or sanctioning
a notary public for breach of such a duty or standard of
care;
(2) establishing requirements and qualifications for, or
denying, refusing to renew, revoking, suspending, or imposing
a condition on, a commission or appointment as a notary
public;
(3) creating or designating a class or type of commission
or appointment, or requiring an endorsement or other
authorization to be received by a notary public, as a
condition on the authority to perform notarizations with
respect to electronic records or for remotely located
individuals; or
(4) prohibiting a notary public from performing a
notarization under section 3 or 4 as a sanction for a breach
of duty or standard of care or for official misconduct.
(b) Special Commissions or Authorizations Created by a
State; Sanction for Breach or Official Misconduct.--A notary
public may not perform a notarization under section 3 or 4
if--
(1)(A) the notary public's State has enacted a law that
creates or designates a class or type of commission or
appointment, or requires an endorsement or other
authorization to be received by a notary public, as a
condition on the authority to perform notarizations with
respect to electronic records or for remotely located
individuals; and
(B) the commission or appointment of the notary public is
not of the class or type or the notary public has not
received the endorsement or other authorization; or
(2) the notarial regulatory official of the notary public's
State has prohibited the notary public from performing the
notarization as a sanction for a breach of duty or standard
of care or for official misconduct.
SEC. 11. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid
or unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act and the
application of the provisions thereof to other persons or
circumstances shall not be affected by that holding.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
[[Page H895]]
General Leave
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material in the Record on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill, H.R. 1059. The SECURE
Notarization Act would provide a national standard for notarizing
documents when the signing parties are not physically present.
The process of remote notarization improves the security of
notarizations through the use of multifactor verification of
identification, audiovisual recording of the event, and tamper-
detection technology.
Mr. Speaker, it is actually safer. I did a lot of this work in my
other life when I was in the private sector.
By recording the notarization as it happens, remote notarizations can
provide law enforcement with evidence if a fraud is determined to have
occurred.
This is much more secure, as I said before, than a traditional paper-
only notarization where once the transaction has occurred, there is
very little evidence left behind.
Preventing fraud and abuse is critical to a well-functioning legal
system. And let's face it, it is more practical.
This legislation passed the House last Congress, and I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation once again.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1059, the SECURE Notarization
Act.
Today, thanks to modern technology, we can oftentimes cash a check,
book a flight, and lock and unlock our doors all from the convenience
of our smartphone. But that same convenience does not exist for getting
something notarized in many States.
People are often required to go through the notary process, the
process of authenticating the signatory to a document for wills,
mortgages, and purchasing or transferring valuable assets. Today, many
States will require a person to physically appear before a notary
public in order to complete this process.
Now, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person
notarizations were not only inconvenient, but they also posed a health
risk. In-person notarization requirements forced far too many consumers
to choose between potentially exposing themselves to COVID-19 and
purchasing a house or updating their wills.
To protect consumers and commerce, dozens of States enacted laws or
took emergency actions to permit electronic and remote online
notarizations. These notarizations allowed the consumer and the notary
to execute notarizations through secure audiovisual communications.
As our lives have returned to a new normal, it has become apparent
that electronic and remote online notarizations are a valuable tool for
facilitating commerce and making these services more accessible.
Such tools are particularly important for vulnerable populations like
the elderly, underserved communities, and others with mobility issues
or lacking access to reliable and inexpensive transportation. But State
action alone cannot assure universal access to electronic and remote
online notarizations that meet robust security standards and consumer
protections.
Our Nation lacks the universal standard for electronic and remote
online notarizations. As a result, there is no standard that permits
nationwide use of electronic and remote online notarizations. There is
no standard that creates robust security requirements and there is no
standard that ensures electronic and remote online notarizations are
valid nationwide.
That is why I am proud to support the SECURE Notarization Act. This
legislation will transition notarizations to the 21st century without
sacrificing security, making the process more convenient and safer for
the American public.
Last Congress, this bill was unanimously reported out of the
Committee on Energy and Commerce and passed the House with broad
bipartisan support. I commend Representative Dean for her leadership on
this bipartisan legislation, and I strongly urge my colleagues to
support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Dakota (Mr. Armstrong), the vice chairman of the full Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1059, the SECURE Notarization Act is
a bipartisan bill that would authorize the nationwide use of remote
online notarizations performed in interstate commerce. This is simply
an electronic notarization where the party and the notary are in
different locations.
Society has widely adopted remote meetings, events, and even social
activities. Requirements for a signer to be physically present before a
notary are often impractical and sometimes impossible, such as with
military deployment or travel limitations.
Remote online notarization increases the use of notarization and
allows individuals to conduct crucial business, particularly if both
parties are unable to be physically present with a notary.
This bill would provide businesses and individuals with the ability
to execute documents using two-way audiovisual communications while
protecting consumers with a multifactor authentication and the use of
tamper-evident technology.
The bill would not replace the State laws governing the authorization
and regulation of notaries public, nor would the bill alter State
control over the practice of law or commonly notarized legal papers,
like estate documents.
This bill is limited only to remote online notaries performed in
interstate commerce. It does not alter the regulation of notaries, nor
does it require the use of remote online notaries.
It would simply provide for the recognition of remote notarization
performed in interstate commerce. It would also ensure that the Federal
and State courts recognize such remote notarizations.
This is similar to the Full Faith and Credit Clause implementing
statutes that ensure the recognition of official activities or judicial
proceedings conducted in another State.
In the 117th Congress, this bill passed the House by voice vote after
earning 123 cosponsors and passing the Committee on Energy and Commerce
with a 56-0 vote. It also has the support of 20 organizations, like the
American Land Title Association, the National Association of Federally
Insured Credit Unions, and Mortgage Action Alliance. All of these
groups supporting the bill utilize notaries public on a daily basis.
I say a special thank you to my friend, Representative Madeleine
Dean, for working on this important legislation over the last two
Congresses.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), the Democratic sponsor of
this bill.
Ms. DEAN of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R.
1059, the SECURE Notarization Act, which I have had the pleasure to
work on with Representative Armstrong from North Dakota.
The SECURE Notarization Act would authorize nationwide use of remote
online notarization and would include key consumer protections such as
multifactor authentication and the use of tamper-evident technology.
The bill would also ensure interstate recognition of remote online
notarization.
Importantly, the SECURE Notarization Act sets a floor for the use of
remote online notarization and States will be able to regulate further
protections as they decide.
The pandemic taught us both the necessity and the benefits of new
technologies used to streamline services for consumers across
industries.
Remote online notarization has been and should continue to be a time-
saving, convenient, and safe way for consumers to execute important
documents.
Notarizations are used extensively, as we all know, in real estate
transactions and other key areas, including
[[Page H896]]
affidavits, powers of attorney, and living trusts. Remote online
notarizations allow the consumer, the notary, and other parties to a
transaction to be in different locations using two-way, audiovisual
communication to securely notarize documents.
This process provides consumers and businesses with much-needed
flexibility. This is the key.
Remote online notarization allows flexibility for people who are
chronically ill or immobile, for parents who can't get away from work
or taking care of children, for servicemembers abroad seeking to buy a
home or correct their wills.
I know well the impact this bill could have for notaries public
across the country. When I served as a State representative, most
members of our team were notaries and our office served as a notary hub
for the local community. We learned firsthand how many people struggled
to find time for appointments often because of childcare,
transportation, or because of poor health.
Remote online notarization would have allowed us to streamline our
performance and better provide service to our community.
Last Congress, as has been stated, this bill was cosponsored by more
than 120 Members and passed the House by a vote of 336-90. It is
supported by a coalition of 20 industry partners. Simply, it is a
commonsense piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Chair McMorris Rodgers and Ranking Member
Pallone for their support for this bill and for bringing it to the
floor.
Finally, I thank the lead on this legislation, Congressman Kelly
Armstrong, for all his hard work and good humor as we work to get this
bill across the finish line, as well as the work of his staff in
helping make this a strong piece of bipartisan legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I would urge support for this bill. Once
again, it did pass the last time in Congress. We hope we can get it to
the Senate. It is important to have a nationwide standard for
notarization.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, again, this is commonsense legislation.
I have some experience in this area, as does Mr. Armstrong and Ms.
Dean, as well. It is efficient and safe for the public, and we need a
national standard.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this particular bill,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 1059.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________