[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 79 (Wednesday, May 10, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H2183-H2194]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2, SECURE THE BORDER ACT OF 2023; 
  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1163, PROTECTING TAXPAYERS AND 
                   VICTIMS OF UNEMPLOYMENT FRAUD ACT

  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 383 and ask for its immediate consideration.

[[Page H2184]]

  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 383

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2) to secure 
     the borders of the United States, and for other purposes. All 
     points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on 
     any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 
     motion except: (1) five hours of debate, with two hours 
     equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security or 
     their respective designees, two hours equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees, and 
     one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
     or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1163) to 
     provide incentives for States to recover fraudulently paid 
     Federal and State unemployment compensation, 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 Ways and Means now printed in 
     the bill, modified by the amendment printed in the report of 
     the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 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 Ways and Means or their respective 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 1 
hour.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. 
Scanlon), 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. ROY. 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. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Texas?
  There was no objection.

                              {time}  1615

  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, we have a crisis at our southern border that 
has captured the attention of the American people but has fallen on 
deaf ears among my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and, much 
more importantly, the President and the administration at the other end 
of Pennsylvania Avenue.
  Just yesterday, I received a text from multiple law enforcement 
officers along the southern border, whether it is with the Department 
of Public Safety from Texas or whether it is with Border Patrol. For 
example, this is a quote:

       As of last night, the radios went crazy for west and south 
     Laredo, waves of folks, literally just group after group, 
     bum-rushing the border. The agents were spread thin as hell.
       In my precinct, we are literally all doubled up because our 
     units are breaking down every other day. Ranchers are calling 
     every other day, stating there are folks on their property, 
     but we can't get there fast enough.
       I hate to say this, but we are getting our rear-ends handed 
     to us. I used to have patterns, trends, and knew the dropoff, 
     pickup areas, but now it is an ``expletive'' free-for-all.
       Approximately 600 bodies at the gate just half a mile east 
     from Yarbrough happening right now in El Paso.

  I have hundreds of these texts right now flooding into my phone, like 
every other Member of Congress, because what is happening is an abject 
failure at the border. It is a humanitarian crisis for Americans and 
for migrants.
  Mr. Speaker, 5 million have been encountered at the southern border, 
and 2 million have been released into the United States, incentivizing 
more to come.
  Over 1.5 million have evaded apprehension--i.e., got-aways evading 
detection from Border Patrol since the beginning of this 
administration.
  Fentanyl is pouring into our communities. Border Patrol has seized 
over 35,000 pounds of fentanyl. Just last Thursday morning, I met with 
three fentanyl moms out of dozens of moms that I met with because their 
children have died from fentanyl.
  Eight children in the school district in the county in which I reside 
southwest of Austin have died of fentanyl poisoning since last August. 
Over 10 have had to be resuscitated, revived with Narcan.
  Just last summer, 53 migrants were effectively cooked in a tractor-
trailer in the hot Texas heat in San Antonio, Texas.
  Mr. Speaker, 856 dead migrant bodies were found along the Rio Grande, 
in south Texas, and on ranches. Little girls are sold into the sex 
trafficking trade, held in stash houses in Laredo, Brownsville, El 
Paso, San Antonio, Houston, and throughout this country.
  We know this to be true. It is documented to be true. Now, the 
administration can't even keep up with the children that we have, with 
85,000, according to The New York Times, not able to be contacted.
  My colleagues just blindly wipe that away, saying: That is not true. 
It was a phone call. They didn't get them. They must be with a family 
member.
  What Member of this body would treat their child that way? Oh, I 
called and didn't get ahold of them. Oh, well.
  We do that with 85,000 children. I guess that is not nearly as 
effective as a photo op in white pantsuits sitting next to kids in 
cages, allegedly, despite that those cages were created by the previous 
administration specifically for the protection of children. Oh, no. It 
doesn't look as good to have a photo op when you have 85,000 missing 
children.
  Tomorrow, title 42 expires. Now, for the average American, title 42, 
they don't know what that is. What it is, is a part of our health code 
that allows us to say that we are going to turn people away in the 
middle of a pandemic.
  Yet, the administration has been using that as effectively their only 
means of managing the border, to the extent you can call it managing 
the border.
  In March, for example, there were approximately 200,000 
apprehensions. We are going to blow right through that right now 
because we are at 10,000, 11,000, 12,000 apprehensions a day.
  When you add those 200,000 apprehensions, not even counting all the 
parole, half of those are being turned away under title 42.
  When title 42 expires tomorrow, more will come. There is an explosion 
at the border. None will be turned away because this administration has 
specifically chosen to ignore the law. This administration is refusing 
to do their job to defend the border of the United States.
  The least compassionate, the least Christian, the least empathetic 
thing that a country could do is to allow human beings to be used as 
political pawns by cartels for profit while Americans die by the 
thousands, while migrants get raped, abused, and put in stash houses by 
cartels for profit by the thousands, while migrants die along the 
southern border by the hundreds, if not the thousands now, while our 
own people get overrun on their own ranches.
  I sat and met with ranch owners in south Texas who had run across the 
dead body of a young woman, a mother with a baby, on their ranch.
  Imagine the most powerful Nation in the history of the world thinking 
it is compassionate to have a system that allows that. Yet, that is 
precisely what we do.
  Unfortunately, what my colleagues' response will be is, oh, we are 
going to have to do something about our immigration system and future 
flow in, figuring out what we are going to do to make sure that we 
reform immigration.
  Don't you know that if we had comprehensive immigration reform, this 
would all just magically evaporate? That is completely not true.
  The fact of the matter is, the starting point for any sensible border 
and immigration plan is a secure border in which you actually enforce 
the laws of the United States. Why? So people know what the rules are. 
We allow 600,000 to 1 million, 1.2 million, depending on the year, 
people to come into this country legally, as we should.

  Yes, we need to reform our immigration system, but none of it matters 
if

[[Page H2185]]

we are going to embrace lawlessness and wide-open borders and ignore 
the rule of law to the detriment of people and to the detriment of the 
very system that attracts people from around the world.
  We should be exporting the rule of law rather than importing 
lawlessness, fentanyl, death, and destruction. The legislation we have 
before us would be a giant step toward ensuring that we can hold this 
administration accountable to make sure that we secure our border, 
protect our citizens, and protect migrants who seek to come here.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for 
yielding the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is now after 4 o'clock in the afternoon. We were 
scheduled to be on the floor today around noon, but when I came to the 
floor prepared to debate this rule, we were told first to wait and then 
that the House would recess so the Republicans could go back behind 
closed doors to negotiate among themselves.
  This is becoming a pattern in this Congress. For the second session 
week in a row, the Rules Committee met far into the night and reported 
out completely closed rules that allow no amendments on the floor.
  Now, after Speaker McCarthy realized that he couldn't pass his own 
bill, he spent all day negotiating in secret to twist people's arms to 
get enough votes from his own party to get this bill or the rule passed 
on the floor.
  No one has seen what is coming out of the backroom deal today and 
allegedly moving to the floor under this very rule.
  This isn't how you run the people's House, although it is apparently 
how the new House majority runs the people's House--backroom deals that 
prioritize politics or policy over people.
  Turning to the matters at hand, this rule moves two bills to the 
floor. The first bill is H.R. 2, although, as mentioned, we still don't 
know what the final version of that bill will be.
  We should all be able to agree that immigration and border security 
present vast and complex issues. Despite my colleagues' pronouncements 
to the contrary, we all want a secure border that protects our national 
security, but we also need to address the realities of migration, the 
forces that are driving families, even young children, to flee their 
homes, and the serious workforce shortages confronting businesses in 
our country and elsewhere.
  Given the complexities of these issues, they require comprehensive 
and nuanced solutions. H.R. 2 is neither. It is a great example of the 
old adage: For every complex problem, there is a solution that is 
simple, clear, and wrong.
  During my legal career, I spent decades working on immigration cases 
and within our immigration system. I know it is underfunded and 
dysfunctional and has been for many years. We also know that American 
businesses, small and large, are asking for immigration reform so that 
they can hire the healthcare, agricultural, research, and food service 
workers they need.
  Solving these issues is not simple, but I am extremely disappointed 
that my Republican colleagues want to create more chaos by bringing an 
extremist, cruel, and completely unworkable bill to the floor today.
  The truth is, this isn't responsible or serious governance. Without 
any real proposal, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle resort 
to conspiracy theories, fact-free rhetoric, and political theater 
designed to stoke fear and chaos to distract from their lack of real 
solutions.
  We have seen how the failed and inhumane immigration policies of the 
prior administration weakened our economy, undermined our moral 
standing in the world, inflicted unimaginable cruelty upon defenseless 
migrant children, and did not make us any safer.
  However, Republican extremists want to take us back there again. Once 
more, they would rather fixate and waste American taxpayer dollars to 
build a wall that the experts, including Customs and Border Patrol, 
agree will not solve the issue.
  I must call out the dishonesty of claiming that families seeking 
legal asylum are a source of the very real scourge of fentanyl and 
other dangerous drug trafficking. We know from Customs and Border 
Patrol data that over 90 percent of fentanyl seizures occur at U.S. 
ports of entry in trucks or cargo ships, not in areas that a border 
wall might cover.
  Despite this fact, the bill fails to provide needed resources at 
ports of entry to fight fentanyl smuggling where it is actually 
happening.
  Just last month, House Republicans voted to cap nondefense 
discretionary funding, which, according to DHS, would result in the 
cutting of 2,400 Customs and Border Patrol officers and agents that do 
this work fighting the scourge of fentanyl.
  How can we begin to craft measures to address either the fentanyl 
crisis or humanitarian issues at our border if our Republican 
colleagues insist on starting from a place of misplaced blame and 
misguided policies?
  Additionally, this bill, or at least the most recent version of it 
that we have seen, enacts a nationwide E-Verify system without 
providing other reforms that give meaningful pathways for undocumented 
workers to legalize their status, which employers across this country 
are screaming for.
  In doing so, this provision has the potential to wipe out half of our 
agricultural workforce, cause huge disruptions in our Nation's food 
system, allow a mass offshoring of jobs, and sink American farms from 
California to Pennsylvania and throughout States across the Nation.
  This isn't the first Congress in which Republicans have tried to move 
forward on this E-Verify proposal. In every Congress, it faces 
opposition from the small business community, civil liberties groups, 
religious organizations, agricultural organizations and growers, 
privacy advocates, libertarian think tanks, and immigration reform 
groups because it fails to address our broken immigration system in a 
meaningful way. This time around is no different.

  H.R. 2 also bans Department of Homeland Security funding for critical 
nonprofit and religious partners that provide shelter, food, legal 
assistance, and other aid to vulnerable immigrants.
  That means a faith-based NGO that helps an Afghan refugee to find 
housing or gives support to a woman here on a U visa, a special status 
set aside for victims of crimes, will no longer get assistance to do 
that important work.
  How can our Republican colleagues say this bill is only about border 
security when it clearly and cruelly rips resources away from those in 
the country legally, too?
  When it comes to this bill, the immoral policies do not stop there. 
This legislation puts children in harm's way--the very ones the other 
side of the aisle claims they want to protect.
  Children come or are brought to the U.S. because the conditions in 
their home countries are so horrific, whether due to poverty, violence, 
corruption, or climate change and how it is destroying their way of 
life.
  This is a situation that has been building for decades, and H.R. 2 
does nothing to address it.
  During my legal career, I represented many of those children, those 
who were orphaned, those who were fleeing gang violence, starvation, or 
abuse.
  If we really want to protect child victims of trafficking or children 
separated from their parents who arrive at our border, we don't limit 
their access to representation, as this bill does. We give them the 
tools to make the case that they are eligible to stay in this country, 
which a child simply cannot do unless they have a qualified attorney 
with them.

                              {time}  1630

  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I have seen up close how important 
representation is to anyone trying to navigate our immigration system, 
but especially kids.
  When our colleagues say they want to send unaccompanied children home 
to safety, they are turning a blind eye to reality. The reality for 
most of these kids is there is no safe home. Their parents are dead or 
otherwise unavailable, and country conditions are so dangerous that the 
journey to our border is a safer alternative.
  This bill would expose children to the very harms and exploitation my 
Republican colleagues hollowly insist they want to prevent. In addition 
to

[[Page H2186]]

limiting children's access to counsel, the bill allows them to be 
jailed. It guts the protections of the Flores settlement agreement, 
which has governed the conditions of children held in government 
custody for 26 years.
  In doing so, the bill upends a carefully crafted system to minimize 
the detention of children due to the grave impact that it has on their 
physical and mental health. The evidence is clear: No amount of 
detention is safe for kids. Even a short period can cause long-term 
harm like psychological trauma and mental health risks.
  Despite knowing this, my Republican colleagues wrote a bill that 
allows the long-term detention of minors who arrive in the U.S. and 
that jails kids and their families indefinitely.
  I want to describe for a moment a tragic situation this bill creates. 
A mother and her child fleeing violence or starvation at home come to 
America in search of safety and legal asylum. When she finds the ports 
of entry are closed, which this bill would do, that mother takes her 
child and crosses between them. She then follows the rules and applies 
for asylum.
  To be clear, she is not a risk for flight or violence. Even so, this 
bill requires that she and her young child could be jailed for what 
could be years if she is prosecuted for the misdemeanor of unlawful 
entry, a result that is prohibited by current law and the Flores 
litigation.
  This legislation falsely states it is consistent with the Flores 
decision; although, it is clear that it is not, and that the Court has 
already ruled on that precise point.
  If my colleagues want to come together and meaningfully work on 
immigration reform, it can't start from a place of cruelty against the 
most vulnerable. Instead, we need to recognize both the horrific 
conditions that cause migrants to flee their homes and the meaningful 
contributions that immigrants make to our country and, critically, we 
must provide functioning pathways for people to enter the U.S. 
lawfully.
  Mr. Speaker, the second bill here is H.R. 1163. In addition to their 
misguided immigration plan, today House Republicans are bringing up a 
harmful bill that hinders antifraud programs, opens up new pathways to 
fraud in unemployment insurance programs, and opens workers up to 
surprise bills through no fault of their own.
  My colleagues want to attack unemployment insurance, a benefit that 
helped millions of Americans stay afloat during the depths of the 
pandemic. Of course, it is important that we prevent fraud in our 
public programs and instances of fraud in unemployment insurance 
absolutely should be addressed and prosecuted.
  In fact, just this morning, we learned that a Republican Member of 
this Chamber was indicted in New York on charges that, among other 
things, he allegedly stole public funds by fraudulently collecting 
pandemic unemployment benefits.
  I hope all my colleagues agree that stealing public funds, especially 
during a global pandemic when so many working people lost their jobs 
and needed the support to keep their families healthy and fed, is 
unacceptable and absolutely should disqualify someone from serving in 
the United States Congress.
  However, although my colleagues across the aisle claim that they want 
to fight fraud in unemployment insurance, their leadership continues to 
welcome the votes of this alleged fraudster in order to push a deeply 
unpopular and extremist agenda and they want to pass a bill that makes 
it harder to catch the kind of cross-State fraud that their colleague 
has allegedly committed by slashing $400 million in critical funding 
for Department of Labor antifraud programs.
  It opens up opportunities for fraud in UI programs by halting the 
roll out of new identification verification systems and the legislation 
allows States to send surprise bills to workers for accidental 
overpayments of unemployment insurance benefits made during the 
pandemic.
  These overpayments were made to workers who did nothing wrong and did 
not know they had been overpaid. These people spent their unemployment 
insurance on necessities like food for themselves and their children. 
They returned to work as soon as they could, but now Republicans, with 
this bill, want to send these working people a bill and punish them for 
an error that they didn't commit.
  Ultimately, both of these proposals from my Republican colleagues are 
unserious and unworkable. They will wreak harm on America's economy, 
especially businesses unable to find workers to grow or even survive. 
They will wreak harm on working families, law-abiding immigrants, and 
terrified refugees who have the right to seek asylum at our borders.
  These bills are political stunts to stir up extremist supporters, not 
serious solutions to complex problems, problems that require 
comprehensive and nuanced solutions. We are eager to work with 
responsible legislators from any party on an immigration bill that 
truly secures the border, protects Dreamers, and solves the workforce 
challenges we are seeing from farms to pharmacies. Such a bill would 
grow our economy, help our communities combat crime, and stem the flow 
of illegal drugs into our country.
  We firmly believe that we can reach an agreement that secures our 
border and reforms our immigration system in a way that reflects 
fundamental American values, and we are ready to work on that now. We 
welcome assistance in that from the House majority.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, just a couple of points.
  First of all, this tired talking point of 90 percent of narcotics 
being captured at the ports of entry; well, of course, that is the only 
place where we have Border Patrol. Because they are overwhelmed doing 
processing, we don't have anybody patrolling the border between the 
ports of entry. So, of course, you are collecting and finding a higher 
percentage of narcotics at the ports of entry.
  The second point, is this idea that this is treating kids inhumanely. 
Let's be very clear that what we do in this policy is treat children 
from other countries exactly as we treat them from Mexico and Canada 
under current law.
  More importantly, President Obama, that radical, MAGA extremist, 
President Barack Obama asked for this fix in his bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the 
underlying bill, H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023.
  For over 2 years, the Biden administration has continued to ignore 
crisis after crisis. Just 2 weeks ago, the American people saw that 
President Biden and the Democratic Party were just fine ignoring our 
looming debt crisis.
  Mr. Speaker, 2 weeks ago, House Republicans kept their promise. They 
kept their promise to the American people and passed a responsible 
solution to raising the country's debt ceiling.
  Now this week, House Republicans are having to once again clean up 
after this administration and their reckless policies that are hurting 
the lives of Americans around the country, but especially in my home 
State of Texas.
  Our southern border is not secure. This administration does not have 
operational control, and their claim that they have decreased 
immigration by 90 percent is simply laughable.
  President Biden's destructive policies and continued lies to the 
American people have only worsened this deepening crisis.
  My fellow Members and I have heard from law enforcement on the ground 
that this country has gone from one of the safest and most secure 
borders under the Trump administration, to an unsustainable 
humanitarian crisis of epic proportions, and it is getting worse by the 
hour.
  With the expiration of title 42 tomorrow, it will be unfathomable of 
what will be facing our friends on the Texas border.
  This all happened within the first 24 hours of this administration. 
President Biden sits in the White House and threatens to veto our bill, 
calling for comprehensive immigration reform, while vulnerable migrants 
crossing our southern border are raped, killed, or trafficked every 
single day.
  Along with all my fellow Republican Members, I want to see 
comprehensive

[[Page H2187]]

immigration reform, but that cannot be done until this crisis on our 
southern border is under control. H.R. 2 will do exactly that.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill will finish the border wall, will provide 
adequate funding for our Border Patrol agents, and ensure that the 
migrants most vulnerable, the unaccompanied alien children, are taken 
care of once they become this country's responsibility.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is just common sense. I urge my fellow Members 
to support the underlying bill, and I urge support for the rule.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I do find it a little hard to credit the 
expressions of concern for the migrants who are crossing our border 
when yet again, today, the Governor of Texas sent a busload of migrants 
from the border after announcing he was providing free transportation 
to them.
  He refuses to tell the cities where they are headed, but the migrants 
are on their way. So as has occurred multiple times over the last year, 
people were dumped in Philadelphia at 6 o'clock in the morning. Thank 
God that the weather has turned because when they were dumping them on 
New Year's Eve, it was pretty darn cold. So please spare me the 
crocodile tears for the humanitarian concerns when you are not willing 
to help ease that process.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico 
(Ms. Leger Fernandez), a very distinguished member of the Rules 
Committee.
  Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, I have been at the border. I have 
seen the sadness and faint hope in the faces of the children seeking 
asylum. Imagine the desperation a mother must feel sending a child 
across a treacherous path to seek asylum in the United States.
  It reminds me of another refugee, a mother who knew that if she did 
not send her child away, he would surely be killed. She placed her baby 
in a raft and sent him across the river.
  It was the Nile River. The baby was Moses.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill we are taking up today would take away 
important asylum paths for children. I call upon my colleagues to 
remember the story of Moses, to remember the humanity that must be a 
guiding principle for the United States in our asylum laws.
  Our immigration system is surely broken. H.R. 2, though, does not fix 
it. Republicans, instead, are creating more chaos. Republicans are 
creating more chaos at the border. Chaos, not humanity, appears to be 
their guiding principle.
  This bill destroys the asylum seekers, wrecks our agricultural 
economy, and fails to address the flow of fentanyl into our 
communities. H.R. 2 even punishes those heroic nonprofits who work to 
serve the vulnerable asylum seekers.
  Mr. Speaker, in the Rules Committee early this morning, I presented 
amendments from members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus that would 
increase security, keep fentanyl and other deadly drugs off our 
streets, and protect military families.

  Republicans voted against funding our fight against fentanyl. They 
refused any amendments to be heard on the floor today that we would 
have discussed last night.
  Mr. Speaker, we do not have enough farmworkers to harvest our crops 
or in New Mexico to grow our world-renowned green chile. The provisions 
in this bill are bad for farmers, ranchers, and for our agricultural 
economy.
  Instead of destroying our agricultural economy, let's pass the Farm 
Workforce Modernization Act. Instead of denying our students what they 
need, let's pass the American Dream and Promise Act.
  These bipartisan bills would grow our economy. Let's work together to 
fix our immigration system.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I have to address, at least for a minute, this 
disparaging commentary about the Governor of Texas busing migrants.
  Well, I guess my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like 
to ignore the fact that the Democrat mayor of El Paso was teaming up 
with Governor Abbott to do that. The Democrat mayor of El Paso was 
teaming up with the Governor of Texas, Governor Abbott, to do just 
that. Walk a mile in our shoes in the State of Texas where we have 
hundreds of thousands of people pouring into our communities throughout 
the State of Texas. Welcome to the party.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina 
(Mr. Norman).

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, hearing my friends on the other side of the 
aisle talk, you know, we really are in two different universes. We live 
in two different universes.
  The invasion that is happening at the border has not happened to this 
country, nor any other country that has survived. For you to make the 
claim of compassion, where is the compassion for the rapes that are 
occurring along the border?
  Where is your compassion for the farmers?
  It took your Vice President--I don't think she has been to the 
border. It took the President--I don't think he has been to the border 
where the crossings were really occurring. He went for a photo op.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a crisis that no country that has ever had this 
type of invasion has been able to survive. America is at a crossroads, 
and this administration is guilty of opening up the borders.
  There is no point of entry. That is where most of the illegals are 
coming that they can't track.
  As my good friend from Texas, Congressman Roy, said last night at an 
8-hour Rules Committee meeting, the fact is, you don't want border 
security. You want everybody from every country to come into America. 
It is not fair for the police. It is not fair for our farmers.
  What about our schools that are being flooded? What about The 
Salvation Army that is being flooded--will be flooded?
  What about our hospitals? For anybody and everybody coming into this 
country, it is not right.
  Let's look at some of the figures. By the way, this is the strongest 
immigration bill that has ever been put forward.
  Just over last weekend, there were 26,000 apprehensions; over 7,000 
got-aways; over 164 pounds of marijuana; 84 pounds of cocaine; 11 
pounds of fentanyl; and three sex offenders. This is just what was 
caught. What was missed?
  We are on track to have over 6 to 10 million illegals in this country 
that are taking advantage of our citizens, taking advantage of our 
police force, and taking advantage of those who have lived in this 
country.
  Get the wall built, which this bill does, and at least have some type 
of knowledge of who is coming.
  I have been to the border, and it is a sad sight to see. I have seen 
what is happening when they load the buses and distribute people all 
over the country. What about those who have done it legally?
  Last August, Biden formally ended President Trump's successful Remain 
in Mexico program, and within Biden's first 100 days in office, he took 
94 executive actions on immigration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the 
gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I will just end by saying this is un-
American. It is not fair. I don't know how we walk this back, but this 
bill is something that will protect this country. It will help this 
country, and it will stop what this President is implementing.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I just have to push back a little bit on 
this idea that somehow immigrants coming to this country are taking 
advantage of our police and different parts of our society. I mean, the 
Cato Institute, of all places, has recently published a study that 
shows there is a net economic benefit for several generations when we 
have immigrants come to this country.
  Of course, there is also the continuing inaccurate characterization 
of these folks coming here illegally when they are applying for asylum.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the distinguished

[[Page H2188]]

ranking member of the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, we are about to debate H.R. 2, a horrible 
immigration bill that betrays our values, hurts our farmers, and makes 
it easier to put fentanyl on our streets.
  We are told it was rewritten in a back room in the Speaker's office. 
I have yet to see the rewrite. In fact, I haven't even heard a 
description of what was changed. I will say, for the record, from a 
process standpoint, this is as bad as it gets. My friends should be 
ashamed of themselves.
  But wait. There is even more. I wasn't planning to speak today, but I 
have to point out the ridiculous hypocrisy of what is going on.
  Republicans are here on the floor with straight faces acting like 
unemployment insurance fraud is one of the top problems in America. 
They ignore billionaires who pay no taxes, but they want us to believe 
there is an unemployment insurance crime spree, and so here we are.
  They are going after farmers and veterans. They are going after 
workers and families that needed help during the pandemic while, at the 
same time, a sitting member of the House Republican Conference was 
indicted in Federal court this morning for unemployment fraud.
  Let me repeat that. We have a Member of this body, a member of this 
Republican Conference, a key swing vote on their debt ceiling bill, a 
key swing vote to secure Kevin McCarthy's speakership who, this 
morning, was in Federal custody for--let me quote this from the 
indictment: ``Falsely claimed to have been unemployed'' while he was 
making $120,000 a year.
  I mean, is this a joke? George Santos allegedly stole almost $25,000 
in unemployment benefits.
  Here is the part that you can't make up. This is too absurd to be 
true, but it is. Their bill defunds the program that catches people who 
commit this kind of fraud.
  I have a letter in front of me from the Department of Labor, which I 
will insert into the Record, that says, their bill defunds the program 
that helps them catch fraud.
  Now, maybe that is why George Santos cosponsored it. Of course he 
did. If this becomes law, maybe he would have gotten away with it. I 
think we should rename this the George Anthony Devolder Santos 
fraudster protection act.

  What is that old horror movie saying? The call is coming from inside 
the house. You are going after fraud, but the fraud is coming from 
inside the Republican Conference. Deal with that.
  Here is the bottom line: The modern GOP has become the party of 
corruption and crime. It is all about power for them. They put their 
own power above the people we represent.
  Their frontrunner for President is a sexual abuser and has been 
indicted for his illegal hush money payments to cover up his affair. 
They won't denounce it.
  Their key swing vote was in Federal custody for allegedly stealing 
unemployment benefits and lying to Congress, and they won't kick him 
out.
  They want to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics, and they want to 
make it easier for rich people to cheat on their taxes. Now they want 
to pass a bill that would make it easier for George Santos to get away 
with fraud.
  Forget honor. Forget principles. Forget integrity. All they care 
about is power at any cost. It is disgraceful, it is shameful, it is 
wrong, and I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule and the underlying bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. McGovern raised a few good points, but one in particular: We 
haven't seen the bill that we are allegedly supposed to be considering 
with this rule.
  Last night, Mr. Norman, who just spoke, correctly criticized this 
closed process. He said, ``That's a problem going forward, a huge 
problem because that is not the process we think is fair to everyone.''
  I would simply say to the gentleman that the process has only gotten 
worse. Reportedly, there will be an amendment offered to this rule that 
we haven't even seen yet. Although, I guess the fact is we may know why 
we had to delay the hearing until this point; so that your Member could 
return from New York.
  I wonder when we are going to see the open and transparent process 
that some of our Rules Committee colleagues have spoken so much about.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I would just remind my colleagues that it was 
in December when we got a $1.7 trillion omnibus spending bill that was 
4,000 pages long around 1 a.m., and then we voted on it the next day. 
In that bill there was specific language that prohibited the Department 
of Homeland Security from actually securing the homeland by securing 
the border.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. 
Alford).
  Mr. ALFORD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support 
for the rules package of H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act.
  One year ago today I was on the border with Mexico to see firsthand 
the deadly, chaotic crisis that this administration has created.
  With a wink and a nod, this President has welcomed more than 6 
million illegal aliens into our sovereign Nation. This is a human 
trafficking nightmare with some 85,000 children unaccounted for 
tonight, more than 100,000 of our fellow citizens have been murdered 
from fentanyl. Drugs are manufactured in Communist China and smuggled 
across our southern border, an open border that has opened business for 
the Mexican cartels that are now operating on our side of the border.
  All we hear from this administration is lies; lies that their 
immigration policy is based on compassion. It is exploitation, not 
compassion.
  We hear lies that the border is not open and that it is secure.
  We hear lies that the Border Patrol uses whips on illegals. Look, I 
have been on a horse. I know the difference between a whip and a rein.
  Just this past Monday, the White House came out with the biggest lie 
of all: that illegal immigration is down more than 90 percent under 
Biden.
  At this very moment, there are more than 1 million people amassed 
near our southern border ready for title 42 to expire and stream across 
our border largely unchecked. This administration's solution is to send 
1,500 troops, not to push them back, but to push pencils.
  If this President and his Secretary of Homeland Security cannot find 
the grit to secure the border, we must do it in this Chamber.
  Ronald Reagan once said: ``A nation that cannot control its border is 
not a nation.''
  Today, like Colonel William Barrett Travis, we draw the line in the 
sand. We will not lose our Nation. We will not surrender to the drug 
cartels. We will not surrender to the lies of this administration, and 
we will not surrender America.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I apologize to my colleagues across the 
aisle. I didn't realize that I needed to delay my remarks until the 
next round.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert into the Record a 
letter from the Department of Labor, which states that H.R. 1163 would 
hinder efforts to tackle unemployment insurance fraud, delay payments, 
and undermine State efforts to modernize and protect the system from 
fraud.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.

         U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training 
           Administration,
                                Washington, DC, February 27, 2023.
     Hon. Richard Neal,
     Ranking Member, House Committee on Ways & Means, Washington 
         DC.
       Dear Ranking Member Neal: Thank you for your questions 
     about proposed legislation coming before the Committee 
     regarding Unemployment Insurance (UI) fraud and overpayments.
       The Biden-Harris Administration and the Committee have 
     shared goals of holding criminals accountable and combatting 
     fraud in the UI program, and the Department of Labor 
     (Department) will continue to both devote resources and take 
     additional actions in pursuit of taxpayer funds. Under the 
     Biden-Harris Administration, the Department has worked 
     diligently to maintain the integrity of the UI program and to 
     guard vital relief

[[Page H2189]]

     dollars from fraud through varied efforts to direct, guide, 
     and support state agency efforts.
       Specific to your request, Congress provided $2 billion to 
     the Department under Section 2118 of the CARES Act through 
     enactment of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) for the 
     goals of ``fraud prevention, equitable access, and timely 
     payment to eligible workers''. The Department continues to 
     invest the $2 billion in ARPA funds to detect and prevent 
     future fraud in state UI programs, modernize state IT 
     systems, and improve efficiency and accuracy of payments to 
     increase the overall integrity of the program. By June 2023, 
     at least $1.6 billion of these ARPA funds will have been made 
     available to states through prior and new grant opportunities 
     in service of these goals. These funds are vital to the 
     Department's efforts to pursue transformative improvements to 
     the UI program to help workers and combat fraud.
       This ARPA funding is critical to helping all 50 states and 
     their governors (as well as the territories) address the 
     fraud and backlogs that emerged at the onset of the pandemic. 
     One fundamental reason that all states and territories were 
     so unprepared to handle the extraordinary crush of 
     unemployment claims that spiked at the onset of the pandemic 
     was record-low resources--in 2020, administrative funding 
     which supports core operations for the UI program was at its 
     lowest level in at least 30 years. This lack of long-term 
     investment in modernizing our 53 state and territory 
     unemployment systems was a major contributor to the degree of 
     fraud and crisis our unemployment system experienced in 2020. 
     The $2 billion ARPA investment in modernizing our state 
     unemployment systems to encourage fraud prevention, equity, 
     and timely payments is a critical step toward addressing what 
     went wrong and ensuring our nation's unemployment system is 
     better prepared going forward.


 The Loss of Funding will Hinder Efforts to Tackle UI Fraud and Ensure 
that Workers are Paid their Earned Unemployment Benefits On-Time and in 
                           the Right Amounts

       The proposed bill before the Committee includes a provision 
     which would repeal Section 2118 of the CARES Act, ending the 
     availability of funds Congress provided to the Department in 
     ARPA to fight fraud and promote equitable access. The 
     Department is deeply concerned that a move to repeal this 
     section will throttle essential, ongoing efforts to 
     strengthen and protect the UI program from fraud. The repeal 
     of Section 2118 will force the Department and our state 
     partners to halt work on critical technology modernization 
     projects geared towards program integrity now and in response 
     to future crises. All but three of 53 state and territorial 
     UI jurisdictions are currently participating in one or more 
     of the ARPA-funded initiatives. The Department will be 
     stopped from delivering hundreds of millions of dollars set 
     aside for Governors to step up the fight against unemployment 
     fraud and implement upgrades to the delivery of UI:
       Tiger Teams: ARPA funding that supports teams of multi-
     disciplinary experts, referred to as Tiger Teams, is helping 
     states assess challenges and make state-specific 
     recommendations for fraud prevention and detection, improving 
     customer experiences, access and equity, and operational 
     processes resulting in more timely delivery of benefits and 
     reductions in backlogs. Should the proposed legislation 
     proceed, the Department would be prevented from providing 
     continued consultative services to the 30 states already 
     participating in the project, or any additional states who 
     have expressed interest in participating in the project but 
     who have not yet begun their engagement. If funds are 
     rescinded, states would no longer be able to apply for and 
     receive Tiger Teams implementation grant funding to implement 
     actions related to their state-tailored recommendations. This 
     funding is projected to support critical Tiger Teams' 
     recommendations aimed at improving state UI program 
     integrity, including fraud prevention tools like identity 
     authentication, identity proofing, claim risk scoring, and 
     investigative case management.
       Identity Verification: Next month DOL will announce another 
     $200 million to assist states with recovery of funds and the 
     implementation of required and recommended identity 
     verification standards to improve fraud prevention. The 
     Department is also investing ARPA funds to bring the General 
     Service Administration's Login.gov identity verification 
     services to state UI programs as a scalable solution to 
     protect against the growing challenge of identity fraud. If 
     these ARPA funds were repealed, the Department would have 
     little choice other than to halt the existing pilot of 
     Login.gov with the State of Arkansas and stop its expansion 
     to two additional states this spring who are already making 
     financial and operational commitments of state resources to 
     engage with the Department. Our plan to launch a new 
     nationwide in-person identity verification option with the 
     U.S. Postal Service would also face cancellation.
       Fraud Prevention Grants: ARPA fraud prevention grants to 
     states are building effective identity verification systems 
     to fill the gaps in states' use of systems to prevent multi-
     state fraud actors, like cross-matching through the National 
     UI Integrity Center's Integrity Data Hub (IDH), which is 
     operated by the National Association of State Workforce 
     Agencies (NASWA) and sponsored by the Department. States need 
     this grant funding to implement and enhance data analytics 
     tools that can flag suspicious claims, and to increase their 
     staff capacity to investigate and recover incorrect payments 
     made during the pandemic. If ARPA modernization funding is 
     repealed, Governors could lose unexpended funds from already 
     awarded grants.
       Technology Modernization: By the end of June, the 
     Department is planning to announce $600 million in ARPA-
     funded grants to states to modernize vulnerable state IT 
     systems that led to chronically high levels of improper 
     payments in the UI program before and after the COVID-19 
     pandemic. Such grants would help states upgrade their IT 
     systems, the majority of which, going into the pandemic, were 
     based on decades-old computer languages like COBOL. These 
     outdated state systems were quickly overwhelmed by the surge 
     of claims during the pandemic and unable to adjust to new 
     fraud threats. If Section 2118 is repealed, the Department 
     will not be able to fund states to implement new technologies 
     and workflows to screen out potentially fraudulent claims, 
     and to make needed improvements to customer experience like 
     programming websites for easy use on mobile phones. The 
     repeal would also end, or severely curtail, collaborative 
     projects between the Department, states, and other 
     stakeholders to create seamless solutions to reduce common 
     mistakes and improper payments, such as the conversion of 
     websites into plain language to assist workers in submitting 
     applications without errors.
       Equity Grants: ARPA Equity grants are funding states' 
     efforts to improve equitable access to the UI system for 
     workers, including people in rural areas, with disabilities, 
     with low levels of literacy, and with language access 
     barriers. Forty-eight states have applied for this project 
     and awarded projects to date have included translating 
     documents into different languages, hiring community 
     navigators to explain UI benefits to vulnerable communities, 
     making websites accessible to people with disabilities, 
     addressing access barriers facing rural communities, and 
     placing in-person staff in American Job Centers to help clear 
     backlogs. These critical grant-funded projects which provide 
     enhancements for equitable access that improve payment 
     accuracy may not be able to be completed if the repeal of 
     Section 2118 leads to DOL having to claw back unexpended 
     funds; additionally, several states with pending 
     applications for funding won't access equity funding.
       Department of Labor Modernization Capacity: Federal 
     staffing for the Employment and Training Administration and 
     technology modernization experts in the Office of 
     Unemployment Insurance Modernization, hired to implement 
     cross cutting projects and provide expert assistance to 
     states, would be severely curtailed. Data analysis and 
     research, including state gap analyses and cross-cutting IT 
     investments--like the State Equity Data Partnerships--may 
     also be curtailed or cancelled. Other cross-cutting supports 
     currently furnished to states, including fraud prevention and 
     equity training would similarly be at risk.
       The Department appreciates the intent of this legislation 
     to accelerate the collection of fraudulent unemployment 
     payments and strengthen fraud prevention. For example, the 
     legislation would require a series of data cross-matches to 
     prevent fraud, including with the Integrity Data Hub and 
     Social Security Administration's prisoner databases that the 
     Department has actively promoted over the last two years. 
     Yet, the repeal of ARPA funding would directly undermine the 
     intent of this proposed legislation. The Department and 
     states must continue to have access to the funds Congress has 
     made available through Section 2118 of the CARES Act to 
     modernize, prepare, and strengthen state UI systems so the 
     program will not be left so vulnerable to fraud during the 
     next economic crisis. These problems developed over decades, 
     and additional time and resources are needed for change to 
     filter through the federal-state system.


   Dwindling Administrative Funding Has Undermined State Efforts to 
              Modernize and Protect the System from Fraud

       The need for ARPA funding is acute because Congress has 
     repeatedly underfunded the UI program. Before the pandemic, 
     the unemployment system was hamstrung by historically low 
     levels of administrative funding and the absence of any 
     dedicated funding stream for maintaining and enhancing the 
     information technology of systems that underpin state UI 
     operations. Indeed, administrative funding in 2020 was at its 
     lowest inflation adjusted level in at least 30 years. As the 
     onset of the pandemic caused tens of millions of people to 
     lose their jobs in a matter of weeks, state agencies were 
     unprepared for the extraordinary spike in the number of 
     claims to be processed and for the new fraudulent actors. As 
     claims volumes have returned to pre-pandemic levels, state 
     administrative funding for regular, non-pandemic UI 
     operations declined by more than 20 percent from FY 2021 to 
     FY 2022. As a result, states continue to struggle with 
     hiring, training, and retaining new staff responsible for 
     accurately adjudicating claims and ensuring only proper 
     payments are made. The Biden-Harris Administration FY23 
     budget requested a $209 million increase in grants to states 
     and an update to a decades' old funding formula that 
     underfunded states, and Congress appropriated $159 million of 
     this request for FY 2023.

[[Page H2190]]

       These changes are a first step to addressing long-standing 
     weaknesses in the UI system by providing states with needed 
     resources to protect against fraud and to ensure equitable 
     access to benefits. However, even with this much needed yet 
     modest increase in funding, it only provides help in funding 
     the regular day-to-day operations. It does not provide 
     funding for investment in modernization of the UI system or 
     in fraud prevention solutions and services. The Department 
     has relied on the ARPA funds for these types of investments, 
     and they will be jeopardized with repeal of Section 2118.


           Other Concerns of Note in the Proposed Legislation

       Of concern is the draft provision to extend the time for 
     benefit offsets for overpayment collection for CARES Act 
     programs to 10 years. Current statutes allow states to pursue 
     a wide variety of overpayment collection activities in 
     addition to benefit offsets, such as wage garnishments and 
     tax return offsets. Extending benefit offsets to 10 years 
     would block access to unemployment benefits for Americans 
     during future national emergencies, including for individuals 
     whose CARES Act overpayment arose due to state agency errors. 
     This provision would undermine the stabilizing effect UI 
     benefits have on the U.S. economy during high unemployment 
     and would significantly worsen any economic downturn for the 
     next decade.
       Also of concern is the proposal to allow states to retain 
     25 percent of any fraudulent overpayment recovered under 
     pandemic UI programs to use for further recovery efforts and 
     other administrative costs. We have concerns that retention 
     of one quarter of funds recovered is excessive and runs 
     contrary to the proposed legislation's intent to restore 
     misspent federal funds.
       Similarly of concern is the proposal to allow states to 
     retain five percent of non-fraud overpayments in the regular 
     UI program to use for further recovery efforts and other 
     administrative costs. We have concerns that this provision 
     extended to non-fraud overpayments may incentivize states to 
     recover overpayments that are not the fault of individual 
     workers, and would otherwise have been eligible for waivers 
     out of concerns for equity and financial hardship.


 End of ARPA Investments in UI Reform Would Squander Chance to Fix the 
                               UI Systems

       Since inheriting a system in crisis, the Department under 
     the Biden-Harris Administration has moved aggressively to 
     thwart fraudsters and recover fraudulently paid dollars--yet 
     there is still more to do. The Department has worked quickly 
     to allocate the $2 billion provided under Section 2118 of the 
     CARES Act to strengthen the UI system to ensure timeliness, 
     equity, and accuracy, including by preventing and detecting 
     fraud. The Department continues to work in close partnership 
     with all state workforce agencies to ensure these 
     improvements are effective and sustainable as part of a full 
     spending plan for the $2 billion that will produce the 
     greatest long-term positive impact. Taking away these funds 
     would deny governors around the country and the UI program a 
     once-in-a-generation chance to learn the lessons of the past 
     and take concerted action to fix systemic problems and 
     prevent fraud in the future.
       In closing, we look forward to working with you and members 
     of the Committee on policies that support the Department's 
     ARPA investments to tackle UI fraud, while improving 
     timeliness and equitable access to benefits.
       If you have additional questions, please contact the Office 
     of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Brent Parton,
                                       Acting Assistant Secretary.

  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), the distinguished ranking member of the 
Committee on Homeland Security.
  Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition 
to the closed rule and the underlying bill.
  H.R. 2, the child deportation act, was developed in an extreme MAGA 
echo chamber. Homeland Security Committee Republicans defeated all 43 
amendments offered by Democrats to fix the bill's many flaws.
  This closed rule goes a step further and blocks House consideration 
of amendments like the one I filed adding 1,700 CBP officers at ports 
of entry to process migrants, facilitate trade and tourism, and 
interdict fentanyl.
  More than 90 percent--as you have already heard--of hard drugs are 
interdicted at ports of entry--this is information passed to us by 
CBP--but Republicans refuse to make investments in the many ports of 
entry workforce or technology.
  Worse yet, the bill does nothing to address cartels and fentanyl 
trafficking.
  The rule doubles down on Donald Trump's border wall by blocking 
consideration of an amendment filed by Representative Troy Carter to 
protect landowners from eminent domain.
  With new border wall segments likely to cost about $46 million per 
mile, building 900 miles of wall could total billions.
  Finally, this closed ruled blocks consideration of Representative  
Robert Garcia's amendment to strike language that villainizes community 
and religious organizations which provide basic necessities to 
migrants.
  H.R. 2 is written so poorly that it could force the American Red 
Cross to verify each person's immigration status before offering help. 
Can you imagine if groups have to say, ``Show us your papers''? That is 
just cruel.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and the underlying bill.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Good).
  Mr. GOOD of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Texas for 
his leadership on this initiative and on this bill.
  It is sad that we find ourselves today having to force the 
administration to enforce the security of the United States border, 
that we have to force the Department of Homeland Security to secure the 
border.
  What this bill will do is codify into law the effective policies 
under the previous administration that left this President with a 
secure border. What did this President have to do to maintain a secure 
border? He did nothing but keep the policies in place that he 
inherited.
  We are currently averaging some 10,000 illegals per day invading the 
country. What is the response from the Democrats on the other side in 
this administration? We can do better.
  We are having some 300,000 illegals invade the country on a monthly 
basis. Think of the three largest football stadiums in the country, 
that equivalency invading our border every day, invading our country.
  Yet, we cannot get one Democrat vote, I predict, to vote to secure 
our border, to protect our country's national security, our health 
security, our economic security.

                              {time}  1700

  This bill will build the wall. It will hire more border agents. It 
will enhance technology to assist them. It will require transparency 
and accountability from this derelict Department of Homeland Security. 
It will enhance compensation for our Border Patrol. It will support 
local law enforcement in their efforts to help secure the border.
  The fact is, no country in the history of the world has been more 
welcoming to migrants from all over the world, from all races, all 
nationalities, all ethnicities, than the United States of America. We 
support legal, lawful immigration, and that is why this country permits 
a million legal migrants every year. But we must stand united against 
illegal immigration, and this bill does just that.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to provide for consideration of a resolution 
which states that it is the House's responsibility to protect and 
preserve Social Security and Medicare for our future generations and 
reject any cuts to these essential programs.
  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. Weber of Texas). Is there objection to 
the request of the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, Social Security and Medicare are vital to 
many of our constituents' economic and health security. Many of my 
Republican friends across the aisle were calling for major cuts to 
these critical programs but recently some have changed their tune.
  If they truly believe in a new position, I am offering my friends the 
opportunity to back it up with a vote in the people's House. This vote 
will give Members the opportunity to reassure Americans that the House 
won't eviscerate these foundational programs that our constituents rely 
upon.

[[Page H2191]]

  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Magaziner) to discuss our proposal.
  Mr. MAGAZINER. Mr. Speaker, Americans are counting on us to pass 
real, comprehensive immigration reform. The bill being put forward by 
our Republicans colleagues is a cruel and counterproductive measure 
that will only make our immigration problems worse by restricting legal 
immigration, criminalizing nonprofit organizations, putting children's 
lives at risk, and increasing the workload of Border Patrol officers 
without the support they need to do their jobs.
  Let's send this flawed bill back to committee for further work and 
instead pass H. Res. 178 to declare our sense that we are committed to 
protecting Social Security and Medicare.
  During the President's State of the Union Address, the American 
people saw in real time as President Biden shamed our Republican 
colleagues into backing off their plans to cut Social Security and 
Medicare for now, but we know that there are many in their caucus that 
are still scheming to cut these essential programs.
  Last year, Democrats and President Biden passed a measure to allow 
Medicare to negotiate with the drug companies to lower drug prices. We 
should expand this program. Social Security and Medicare are vital 
lifelines. We must protect them.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this crisis has taken an unimaginable toll on the State 
of Texas, my home State, and the citizens there as well as the migrants 
seeking to come into this country. I get contacted every single day, 
like my colleagues from Texas.
  In 2022, more than 2,000 Texans died from fentanyl poisoning, a 500 
percent increase from 2019. I have already talked about the 53 migrants 
killed in a tractor-trailer in the Texas heat.
  Texas has been forced to deal with it on their own, spending $4 
billion of their own budget, $3 billion last cycle because we are 
having to deal with a job the Federal Government is supposed to do. El 
Paso, state of emergency; Laredo, state of emergency; Brownsville, 
state of emergency; San Antonio, beefing up to try to deal with the 
surge. We are dealing with it every single day in Texas.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas 
(Ms. Van Duyne).
  Ms. VAN DUYNE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill. 
President's Biden's policies have caused a massive surge of 370,000 
unaccompanied children to come to our southwest border since he took 
office. Where is the outrage? Where are the tears?
  According to an HHS whistleblower, the U.S. Government has become a 
middleman in a large scale, multibillion-dollar child trafficking 
operation run by bad actors seeking to profit off the lives of 
children. Where is the outrage? Where are the tears?
  We have seen from Members on the other side of the aisle that they 
are claiming that this bill is going to somehow hurt children. Are they 
reading the reports of minors as young as 9 who are being brought over 
illegally and are working the midnight shift, the graveyard shift, in 
meatpacking plants? Again, where are the tears? Where is the outrage?
  H.R. 2 stops future surges and protects children by treating 
unaccompanied children from Mexico and the rest of the world in the 
same manner, enabling their safe return home to their families after 
they are screened for indications of trafficking or a credible fear of 
persecution.
  I was on the city council for 6 years, and I was mayor for 6 years of 
a city of about 250,000 people. I saw the cost of illegal immigration 
firsthand at the local level. I saw the toll that it put on our local 
cities and communities in housing, in schools, in crime, in resources.
  I was lucky enough to be able to partner with Immigrations and 
Customs Enforcement, and we saw at that time more illegal criminal 
aliens that were deported from our city per capita from any other city 
in the country. What did we see from that? Our crime dropped, and 
people who lived in low-income areas, minority areas, were the ones who 
benefited the most, because they were being targeted by that crime.
  The American people did not vote for this chaos. They voted to have 
control over our borders. What we have seen from this administration is 
they continue to take every single tool out of the toolbox that is able 
to actually secure our borders.
  The American people sent us to D.C. to secure our borders and put an 
end to the worst humanitarian crisis our Nation has ever seen. It is 
absurd that we are even here today having to pass a bill to force this 
administration to enforce the laws and do its most basic job, which is 
to enforce our laws, secure our border, and protect our Nation.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Correa).
  Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, to my colleague from Texas, I say that this 
bill, this set of bills, criminalizes California's and the United 
States' private sector.
  Why do you make small businesses and large businesses criminals? We 
have a 3.6 percent unemployment rate in this country. Every time I have 
businesses in my office, they say: We need workers. We need more 
immigrants. This is not what this set of bills is doing.
  Let's start out by recognizing the reality that we are living in the 
greatest country in the world, the strongest economy in the world. We 
need workers, and these bills fail to recognize that reality.
  Let's go back and work across the aisle. I say to my colleagues on 
the other side, let's come up with comprehensive immigration reform and 
a way to keep America as the greatest economy in the world. These bills 
do not do that.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).
  Mr. BRECHEEN. Mr. Speaker, title 42 expires tomorrow. As Republicans 
are advancing the most conservative border bill ever, this 
administration is going to usher in more chaos on the southern border. 
It is going to be quite the contrast for the American people to 
witness.
  Border Patrol agents are already seeing a surge, 26,000 illegals 
apprehended in a 72-hour period. This is on top of 5 million illegal 
immigrants that have come into this Nation within a 2-year period. That 
is more than the entire population of the State of Oklahoma, the State 
which I represent.
  House Republicans have a plan, and it is the bill before us, the 
Secure the Border Act of 2023, which would resume wall construction. 
That includes the 200-plus miles of wall that was fully funded by 
Congress but shut down when President Biden, in contrast with the 
Constitution, with his pen said: ``Not another foot.''
  This bill is going to deploy more technology. It is going to increase 
Border Patrol agents. It is going to end catch and release. Notice to 
appear in front of a judge has become notice to disappear under this 
administration.
  Securing the border used to be a bipartisan issue. In fact, President 
Biden supported the Secure Fence Act of 2006 when he was a United 
States Senator. That bill included physical barriers; 150 miles of wall 
built under the Obama administration. Here is what then-Senator Biden, 
in his own words, said: ``Why I believe the fence is needed does not 
have anything to do with immigration as much as drugs.''
  Biden continued: ``And let me tell you something, folks, people are 
driving across that border with tons, hear me, tons of everything from 
byproducts for methamphetamine to cocaine to heroin and it is coming up 
from corrupt Mexico.'' That was then-Senator Biden.
  This statement is long before the fentanyl crisis, where 70,000 
people from the United States died last year because of fentanyl 
poisoning, the leading cause of death between ages 18 and 45. Biden's 
own Border Patrol agents disagree with this administration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for 
closing.
  Mr. Speaker, since the aftermath of World War II, the United States 
has championed its duty to uphold the international right to seek 
asylum by providing those fleeing persecution with safe haven here in 
America.

[[Page H2192]]

  However, the Republican immigration plan in H.R. 2 and the rhetoric 
we have heard about it today does nothing more than sow chaos, anger, 
and fear about this important humanitarian system.
  It puts the blame for our broken immigration system on the backs of 
families and children fleeing poverty and violence, instead of 
recognizing the complexity of the issues involving immigration and 
border security and blaming Congress for failing to address our broken 
system for decades.
  It is clear that jailing families indefinitely or sending 
unaccompanied children back to dangerous and exploitive situations and 
refusing to provide working legal pathways to residents will not make 
us any safer; neither will wasting American taxpayer dollars to build a 
discredited and ineffective border wall, decimating our agricultural 
sector, or defunding trusted nonprofit organizations that provide 
support to immigrants.
  These are not the comprehensive, multiprong solutions we need, the 
kind of solutions that Democrats have been imploring our Republican 
colleagues to come to the table on, solutions that secure our ports of 
entry, expand legal pathways, and address the root causes of migration.
  A long and impactful history of immigration is at the heart of our 
American story. As such, we should meaningfully fix our immigration 
system so it works better and can continue making our county stronger. 
We shouldn't gut it or attempt to destroy it altogether. I want a 
better future than that for the United States and all of those who call 
it home.

  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question and 
the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  What we offer today through this rule will be legislation that will 
strengthen our southern border, secure this country, protect Americans, 
protect migrants, and ensure that our communities can be safe, 
particularly along our southern border in States like Texas where the 
Speaker pro tempore and I and many of our colleagues reside and other 
friends of ours in Arizona, New Mexico, and California, that are 
dealing with this every single day.
  This bill is pretty simple. It strengthens and requires the 
administration to enforce existing law and closes the asylum and 
detention loopholes that have been exploited for years. It curbs 
release into the interior, a massive pull factor, by requiring DHS to 
detain, remove, or place in a safe third country, but in doing so 
allows a path for migrants to be able to pursue asylum claims and just 
simply follows current law to not be released into the United States. 
Again, it is pretty straightforward.
  It reimplements the asylum deals that were working and ends the bogus 
asylum claims. It keeps families together while asylum claims are being 
processed.
  It protects unaccompanied children by reforming TVPRA, a request from 
the Obama administration. It requires DHS to immediately resume border 
wall construction, which President Biden has halted.
  The fact is the American people are very well aware of the crisis at 
the border that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle seem to 
ignore.
  I had some friends send me, while I was speaking here, the comment 
section from The New York Times. I am not talking about Breitbart or 
something. I am talking about The New York Times. Page after page after 
page of citizens saying, for example: Though I have always voted 
Democrat, my vote in the next Presidential election will go to 
whichever candidate has the best, most seemingly effective plan for 
securing our border. It is the most pressing issue for our country.
  If only the President and my Democratic colleagues would agree.

                              {time}  1715

  The fact of the matter is we have a devastating crisis that is 
killing Americans and killing migrants. Right now, to be very clear, 
our Border Patrol agents and law enforcement community along the 
southern border are overwhelmed. They are crying out for help.
  I had a man text me just a minute ago that works with Border Patrol 
and DPS. He said:

       We are in a Broken Arrow moment. We are overrun. We have no 
     place to go. We have a crisis.

  This body needs to respond, and we need to take action as we speak.
  Mr. Speaker, shortly, I will be offering an amendment to the rule. 
The amendment is a very short, one-page modification that makes clear 
that Congress will address, within 60 days, the dangerous cartels 
confronting our country. It will add a sense of Congress to clarify 
certain language involving agricultural issues relating to E-Verify.


                      amendment offered by mr. roy

  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment to the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Strike the first section after the resolving clause and 
     insert the following:
       ``That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2) to secure 
     the borders of the United States, and for other purposes. All 
     points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     The amendment specified in section 3 of this resolution 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) five hours of debate, with two 
     hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Homeland Security or 
     their respective designees, two hours equally divided and 
     controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees, and 
     one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs 
     or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit.''
       Add at the end the following:
       ``Sec. 3. The amendment referred to in the first section of 
     this resolution is as follows:
       Amend section 123 of division A to read as follows:

     SEC. 123. REPORT ON MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS.

       Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act, Congress shall commission a report that contains 
     the following:
       (1) A national strategy to address Mexican drug cartels, 
     and a determination regarding whether there should be a 
     designation established to address such cartels.
       (2) Information relating to actions by such cartels that 
     causes harm to the United States.
       In title VIII of division B, redesignate section 815 as 
     section 816.
       In title VIII of division B, insert after section 814 the 
     following:

     SEC. 815. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION.

       It is the sense of Congress that in implementing the E-
     Verify Program, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     ensure any adverse impact on the Nation's agricultural 
     workforce, operations, and food security are considered and 
     addressed.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the resolution, as amended.
  The material previously referred to by Ms. Scanlon is as follows:

   An Amendment to H. Res. 383 Offered By Ms. Scanlon of Pennsylvania

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 3. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     resolution (H. Res. 178) affirming the House of 
     Representatives' commitment to protect and strengthen Social 
     Security and Medicare. The resolution shall be considered as 
     read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on 
     the resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening 
     motion or demand for division of the question except one hour 
     of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or 
     their respective designees.
       Sec. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H. Res. 178.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move 
the previous question on the amendment and on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous 
question on the amendment and on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. SCANLON. 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

[[Page H2193]]

question will be followed by 5-minute votes on:
  Adoption of the amendment to the resolution, if ordered; and
  Adoption of the resolution, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 215, 
nays 211, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 205]

                               YEAS--215

     Aderholt
     Alford
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bean (FL)
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brecheen
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chavez-DeRemer
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Crane
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     D'Esposito
     Davidson
     De La Cruz
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duarte
     Duncan
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia, Mike
     Gimenez
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hern
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Issa
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kean (NJ)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley
     Kim (CA)
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Langworthy
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lee (FL)
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McHenry
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Mills
     Molinaro
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Moran
     Murphy
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Owens
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Strong
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams (NY)
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym
     Zinke

                               NAYS--211

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bowman
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Budzinski
     Bush
     Caraveo
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Correa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crockett
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (NC)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     DeSaulnier
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Frost
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Garcia, Robert
     Golden (ME)
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson (NC)
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Nickel
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peltola
     Perez
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Raskin
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Wexton
     Wild
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Auchincloss
     Costa
     Greene (GA)
     Lawler
     Massie
     Moskowitz
     Pence
     Salazar
     Santos

                              {time}  1750

  Messrs. TAKANO, CUELLAR, Ms. STRICKLAND, Messrs. DAVIS of Illinois, 
CLYBURN, Mses. PELOSI, JACKSON LEE, and Mr. LARSEN of Washington 
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 236, 
noes 190, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 206]

                               AYES--236

     Aderholt
     Alford
     Allen
     Amodei
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bean (FL)
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brecheen
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carl
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chavez-DeRemer
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Craig
     Crane
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     D'Esposito
     Davidson
     Davis (NC)
     De La Cruz
     Deluzio
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Duarte
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Feenstra
     Ferguson
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Foxx
     Franklin, C. Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garbarino
     Garcia, Mike
     Gimenez
     Good (VA)
     Gooden (TX)
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Harder (CA)
     Harris
     Harshbarger
     Hern
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Houlahan
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Issa
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kaptur
     Kean (NJ)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley
     Kim (CA)
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Langworthy
     Latta
     LaTurner
     Lee (FL)
     Lee (NV)
     Lesko
     Letlow
     Levin
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Magaziner
     Malliotakis
     Mann
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McHenry
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Mills
     Molinaro
     Moolenaar
     Mooney
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (UT)
     Moran
     Murphy
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Owens
     Palmer
     Panetta
     Peltola
     Perez
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rodgers (WA)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rosendale
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rutherford
     Ryan
     Salazar
     Salinas
     Scalise
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Sherrill
     Simpson
     Slotkin
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Sorensen
     Spanberger
     Stauber
     Steel
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Stewart
     Strong
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Waltz
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Wild
     Williams (NY)
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym
     Zinke

                               NOES--190

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bowman
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Budzinski
     Bush
     Caraveo
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Cartwright
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Cicilline

[[Page H2194]]


     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Correa
     Courtney
     Crockett
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (IL)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Frost
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Garcia, Robert
     Golden (ME)
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gonzalez, Vicente
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Hayes
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horsford
     Hoyer
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson (NC)
     Jackson Lee
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim (NJ)
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Manning
     Matsui
     McBath
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Nickel
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Raskin
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spartz
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Wexton
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Auchincloss
     Costa
     Dunn (FL)
     Greene (GA)
     Lawler
     Massie
     Moskowitz
     Pence
     Santos

                          ____________________