[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 11, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H1083-H1093]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.J. RES. 25, PROVIDING FOR 
CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE 
    SERVICE RELATING TO ``GROSS PROCEEDS REPORTING BY BROKERS THAT 
    REGULARLY PROVIDE SERVICES EFFECTUATING DIGITAL ASSET SALES''; 
 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1156, PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT FRAUD 
 ENFORCEMENT ACT; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1968, FULL-YEAR 
   CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS AND EXTENSIONS ACT, 2025; AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, 
I call up House Resolution 211 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 211

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. 
     Res. 25) providing for congressional disapproval under 
     chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule 
     submitted by the Internal Revenue Service relating to ``Gross 
     Proceeds Reporting by Brokers That Regularly Provide Services 
     Effectuating Digital Asset Sales''. All points of order 
     against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. The 
     joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of 
     order against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means 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. 1156) to amend 
     the CARES Act to extend the statute of limitations for fraud 
     under certain unemployment programs, 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 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.
       Sec. 3.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1968) making 
     further continuing appropriations and other extensions for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. 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 Appropriations or their respective 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 4.  Each day for the remainder of the first session of 
     the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day for 
     purposes of section 202 of the National Emergencies Act (50 
     U.S.C. 1622) with respect to a joint resolution terminating a 
     national emergency declared by the President on February 1, 
     2025.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Minnesota is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield 
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
McGovern), 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.

                              {time}  1230


                             General Leave

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members

[[Page H1084]]

may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule providing for 
consideration for H.J. Res. 25, H.R. 1156, and the continuing 
resolution.
  The rule provides for H.J. Res. 25 and H.R. 1156 to be considered 
under a closed rule. One hour of debate for each bill shall be equally 
divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Ways 
and Means Committee, or their designees. The rule provides for a motion 
to recommit for both bills.
  The rule also provides for H.R. 1968 to be considered under a closed 
rule. One hour of debate shall be equally divided and controlled by the 
chair and ranking member of the Appropriations Committee or their 
designees. The rule provides for one motion to recommit for this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, House Republicans want to keep America open for 
business. I would like to believe nobody in this Chamber wants a 
government shutdown, and the bill we are considering today would keep 
the government fully funded through September 30. This will ensure that 
there are no disruptions to veterans' healthcare services and benefits 
or to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid.
  It invests in defense personnel with the largest pay raise for junior 
enlisted troops in over 40 years. It includes funding for the Toxic 
Exposures Fund to treat veterans who have experienced service-related 
exposure to toxic substances. This bill fully funds the program that 
provides key nutrition assistance for mothers, infants, and children 
and increases funding for the WIC program. It increases funding for the 
FAA.
  There are no poison pills in this bill. It is a clean CR that fully 
funds the government. A shutdown would mean small businesses cannot get 
their Federal loans, national parks would close, and assistance 
programs for families would quickly run out.
  There is nothing controversial in here for my Democrat colleagues to 
vote against, but I am certain many of them will. My colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle have taken to fear-mongering. They are okay 
with the chaos of a government shutdown because they cannot see past 
their blind hatred for President Trump.
  We are also here today to discuss legislation to repeal a misguided 
Biden rule that requires decentralized finance platforms to file a Form 
1099-DA. This would include disclosing taxpayer information and 
transaction details these platforms currently do not collect. This rule 
demonstrates a lack of understanding about how decentralized currencies 
and the platforms they are traded on actually work. Misguided policies 
like this need to be repealed, and that is what this CRA will do.
  Finally, we are here to debate the Pandemic Unemployment Fraud 
Enforcement Act, which was introduced by the Ways and Means chairman, 
Mr. Jason Smith, to extend the statute of limitations for prosecuting 
unemployment insurance fraud that took place under the CARES Act. 
Currently, the statute of limitations is 5 years, which means many of 
these would expire at the end of this month. Unfortunately, we saw a 
wide range of fraud and abuse taking place in this federally funded 
unemployment insurance program, and more time is needed to root it all 
out.
  This bill, which extends the statute of limitations to 10 years, is a 
clear example of the House's commitment to removing waste, fraud, and 
abuse from the Federal Government. Anyone who is serious about 
protecting taxpayer dollars should agree that simply giving law 
enforcement the ability to continue to investigate and prosecute 
fraudsters is a commonsense proposal.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach) for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, as we speak, prices are going up, inflation is up, 
groceries are up. I saw eggs for $10 recently. Used car prices are up, 
other than Teslas. Those seem much cheaper these days for some reason.
  Energy prices are up 25 percent in the gentlewoman's home State of 
Minnesota. Energy prices have increased 25 percent for her constituents 
thanks to Trump's tariffs that she is supporting by bringing this rule 
to the floor. Boy, I am just glad she is not my Representative.
  Meanwhile, Elon Musk was on Fox Business this morning. He is not 
talking about food prices or energy prices. He is talking about how he 
wants to eliminate entitlements. This is the guy that called Social 
Security a Ponzi scheme and the guy that is laying off people at Social 
Security offices already. Maybe Elon doesn't know this, but Social 
Security is not an entitlement. It is a program that people have spent 
their entire life paying into. Shame on him.
  Mr. Speaker, maybe Elon needs to watch the news instead of going on 
it because what else is going down is consumer confidence. People are 
waking up to the fact that Trump's trade war is going to hurt them in 
their pocketbooks. The stock market is going down. People in this 
country are starting to panic because their retirement accounts are 
dropping.
  Planes are going down. We have had several major accidents and 
several close calls. We just learned that Elon Musk, the guy whose 
rocket just exploded in midair this weekend, wants to fire air traffic 
controllers. Make that make sense.
  Republicans are doing nothing about any of it. Trump spent 2 minutes 
in his 2-hour lecture last week talking about lowering prices. 
Republicans now bring to the floor this CR, basically a blank check to 
Trump and Musk, that says keep doing what the President and Musk are 
doing. We are all fine with it. No way.
  My Republican friends want to pretend like this is a clean CR. It is 
99 pages, for God's sake. A CR is pretty simple. The government gets 
funded at the same levels. Calling this CR clean is laughable. This 
bill cuts healthcare for veterans. Mr. Speaker, $23 billion is ripped 
away from veterans exposed to burn pits and Agent Orange.

  This bill defunds the police. I guess my Republican friends only care 
about the police when they need their votes because this CR takes money 
away from the police. What is another word for taking money away? It is 
defunding.
  This CR helps fire thousands of Social Security workers, forcing 
seniors to wait longer for their benefits that they have earned. That 
is what House Republicans are trying to jam through on the floor right 
now. The brazenness that Musk and Trump have when going after Social 
Security takes my breath away.
  They tried to close down a Social Security office in Chairman   Tom 
Cole's district in Oklahoma. That is nuts. He is one of the most senior 
Republicans in Congress, a Republican, the chairman of the House 
Committee on Appropriations, and Elon went after his constituents. 
Chairman Cole was able to stop it.
  What about the rest of the country? God help them if their 
Congressman doesn't run a powerful committee because that means there 
is nothing to stop Elon Musk from coming after their Social Security.
  Republicans are really, really hoping I don't bring up this last 
part. Guess what they tucked into this rule, hoping nobody would 
notice? They did this after everyone went home. They slipped in a 
little clause, letting them escape from ever having to debate or vote 
on Trump's tariffs. Isn't that clever?
  Trump's trade war will result in one of the largest, if not the 
largest, tax increase on American families ever. This rule gives him 
the ability to do it without a vote in Congress.
  I get it. They are already hiding from their voters, running away 
from their own townhalls, slipping out the back doors because they are 
afraid of being held accountable for their own's actions.
  Guess what, Mr. Speaker. People don't send us here to hide. They send 
us here to fight for them, and they send us here to vote.
  Democrats are not going to be complicit in voting to screw over 
America's veterans. We are not going

[[Page H1085]]

to be complicit in voting to screw over our senior citizens on Social 
Security. We are not going to be complicit in taking money away from 
first responders. We are sure as hell not going to be silent when it 
comes to this administration's BS and their corruption.
  What we are going to do is we are going to show up in our 
communities. We going to stand up for veterans. We are going to speak 
up for people on Medicaid and Social Security. We are going to put up 
one hell of a fight when it comes to the middle-class families who are 
counting on us to fight for them. I urge a ``no'' vote on this 
disgraceful rule and a ``no'' vote on the underlying legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just like to take a minute to address one thing 
out of that entire rant because it is categorically false.
  The Community Oriented Policing Services, COPS, program maintains a 
consistent level under this CR. The only variation in levels reflects 
the removal of previously enacted FY24 community project funding 
allocations which are separate from the main programming.
  Claims that the COPS program has been defunded to zero are 
categorically false. Unlike the Democrats, Republicans remain committed 
to supporting law enforcement and ensuring public safety. I wanted to 
address that one thing.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Norman), my Rules Committee colleague.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, it is really laughable for the listening 
audience and those watching on TV to hear my good friend, Mr. McGovern, 
talk about defunding the police. They are the party that wanted to 
defund the police. Their Vice Presidential candidate put up money to 
pay the rioters to get out of jail.
  Mr. McGovern talked about the military. We have had 4 years of a 
Biden administration that ran the military off with the wokeness in 
DEI. Enrollments are up at record levels. President Trump has been in 
office now for 49 days. Look what he has done.
  My friend mentioned cutting Social Security. There is nothing about 
Social Security that is in this bill. My friend mentioned or I guess 
will mention cutting Medicaid. There is nothing about cutting Medicaid 
in here.
  What they are doing is using scare tactics, but the American people 
aren't buying it. The Democrats had 4 years to have their way with the 
government and look what it brought. It brought high taxes, high gas 
prices, and high egg prices.
  Why did 77 million people vote them out of office? It was because of 
their policies. President Trump in 49 days is bringing it back.
  If the Democrats get back in control, the main thing they will try to 
get a concession on is to defund--they keep saying ``billionaire Elon 
Musk.'' I am sorry. Elon Musk didn't make it from government. He made 
it from producing a product.
  Guess what he has had the mind and the genius to find. The Democrats 
support these things that he found in the different agencies, mainly 
leading off with USAID.
  Mr. Speaker, I want everybody to listen to see if they agree with 
this. For the taxpayers, what Elon Musk found was $2 billion, which was 
part of a greenhouse gas emission fund. Guess where it went. It went to 
Stacey Abrams. Is that where the taxpayers want their money spent?
  There was $1 million to the Social Security Administration's Gender X 
initiative marker. Is that where the taxpayers want their money to go?
  There was $45 million for a diversity, equity, and inclusion 
scholarship in Burma. How does that work?
  There was $182 million in Health and Human Services contracts 
including $168,000 for an Anthony Fauci exhibit at the NIH.

                              {time}  1245

  Folks, this would be funny if it wasn't so serious, $2.5 million to 
promote inclusion in Vietnam.
  I am not going to waste the time, but this is just a short list of 
how this President under Elon Musk is identifying waste, fraud, and 
abuse.
  All the things that you are saying are just not true. I sat through 
this. You mentioned this was like needles in your eyes. Hearing you say 
these things is worse than that because it is just untrue.
  What this bill does is it extends funding--and I am typically not for 
CRs; it is no way to do business--but it extends funding with fixed 
spending at 2024 levels. It includes anomalies requested by the Trump 
administration to support immigration enforcement efforts to deport 
criminals.
  Their party was the one that opened the gates to America. How is that 
working out? How about the deaths occurring? We had the mothers and 
fathers of victims in this audience for the joint session, and guess 
who didn't stand. Nobody in your party stood. No one had the decency to 
stand up for the little boy with cancer who wanted to be a police 
officer.
  These anomalies increase defense discretionary spending by $6 
billion. It cuts nondefense discretionary spending by $13 billion. It 
reduces the overall Federal spending for fiscal year `25 below the `24 
levels. Guess what. Do you remember the 87,000 IRS agents that were 
going to harass the taxpayers? This bill cuts $20 billion out of it. It 
does away with it.
  This President is just getting started.
  I doubt we will have any support from the Democratic side, which I 
don't expect. This bill is going to pass, and the country is in better 
shape. You had your time 4 years ago, and how did that work out for the 
American people? It didn't work out too good. I fully support this 
bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman wants to talk about grocery 
prices? Read the room, man, or better yet, visit a grocery store. Give 
me a break.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an 
amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 1974, a short-term continuing 
resolution that keeps the government funded through April 11.
  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. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Massachusetts?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, to discuss our proposal, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this full-year CR.
  This bill abdicates our constitutional responsibilities to direct 
funding and it gives it to Elon Musk and Mr. Trump. It undercuts the 
separations of powers in our Constitution.
  This CR cuts $13 billion from domestic priorities that Americans rely 
on. Let's talk specifically about the $2.2 billion reduction to 
healthcare. Here are a few examples: $280 million cut from NIH means 
cuts to research and clinical trials. Fewer lives will be saved.
  The bill removes congressional directions for CDC funding. That is 
how we detect and control health threats at home and abroad.
  There is an $891 million reduction to HHS investments. That will lead 
to more healthcare workforce shortages.
  The ramifications of these cuts will be felt everywhere but 
especially by the most vulnerable Americans who are already hurting 
from the illegal cuts Elon Musk is making to healthcare grants and 
research.
  This CR includes a $17 million reduction to Indian Health Service 
facilities, which are already falling apart.
  The bill shortchanges our veterans by failing to include $22 billion 
in advance funding for the VA Toxic Exposure Fund. That jeopardizes the 
healthcare of our veterans exposed to burn pits and Agent Orange.
  The bill cuts DOD medical research by over $850 million. This will 
obstruct new cures for cancer and infectious diseases. These just 
aren't funding cuts. The Republicans are cutting cures and treatments 
and hopes for healthier American families.

[[Page H1086]]

  This is before we know what Elon Musk has in store for Social 
Security disability, Medicaid, and Medicare. A full-year CR is a 
disaster, and it does not have to be this way.
  The American people deserve better.
  I urge my colleagues to defeat this PQ and bring forward a short-term 
CR, and let's get to work.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Roy), my colleague from the Rules Committee.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  So here we are again. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle, 
who constantly always talk about the need to support a CR to ``keep the 
lights on'' now find themselves in the curious position of not wanting 
to have the lights on because they don't like what is happening. So 
they don't want the lights to be on because you have got people in the 
executive branch who have taken seriously the election mandate that was 
given to the President of the United States to end the absurdity of 
nonstop wasteful spending and the ridiculousness of expenditures like 
$32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru.
  That is the kind of stuff that makes the American people's heads 
explode. There are hundreds of these examples. I can sit here and list 
them. The fact is this stuff is getting exposed in real time. The 
American people are seeing it, and now my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle are trying to run from it.
  That is why they don't like this bill. That is why they want to have 
a shutdown. After all of these years of decrying the possibility of a 
shutdown, you are seeing all over the news today talk about the 
possibility of a Schumer shutdown. What you are talking about there are 
news article after news article such as The Hill, February 11, 
``Democrats step up talk about using shutdown as leverage against 
Donald Trump'': ``A Democratic Senator who requested anonymity . . . 
said . . . the March 14 deadline may be the best `leverage' they 
have,'' and The Guardian, February 15, ``Democrats in Congress see 
potential shutdown as leverage to counter Trump.''

  I can insert into the Record dozens of these stories because the fact 
of the matter is the gig is up. It is much like how the American people 
were able to see the absolute and rampant corruption of our education 
system during COVID. When everything was shut down, they were watching 
their kids and they saw these screens, and they said what on Earth are 
they being taught? Suddenly the American people saw the reality of our 
broken education system. They saw the fraud that was perpetrated by 
Anthony Fauci on the American people in shutting down their way of 
life.
  Now, you have got Democrats who are being exposed for having 
continuously funded this largess and this bureaucracy that is 
completely indefensible. The American people are tired of having their 
tax dollars taken and dollars being borrowed by an endless stream of 
borrowing by this Congress. Now, you have got a Congress that is 
willing to work with the President to stop it, to stand up and say this 
is enough.
  What are we putting in place? We are putting in place, oh, the 
horror, a spending freeze. Oh, can you believe that the Federal 
Government might need to tighten its belt and have a spending freeze? 
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to bring out these 
parades of horribles, that somehow this is a massive number of cuts 
because only in Washington is that a cut. You have got a spending 
freeze and holding basically spending in check for 2024. We have a bill 
that, by the way, pulls out earmarks, which are often replete with 
special wish lists. By the way, that is both sides of the aisle. We 
have got a bill here that is going to hold spending in check to allow 
us to do our job for the fiscal year '26 appropriations cycle between 
now and September.
  By the way, it was Republicans who passed 5 appropriations bills off 
of the House floor last year and 12 appropriations bills out of 
committee last year. The previous year it was Republicans who passed 7 
appropriations bills off the floor and all 12 out of committee. The 
Democrat-led Senate passed zero.
  Do you want to know why we are where we are right now? It is because 
our Democratic colleagues in the Senate passed zero appropriations 
bills, not one.
  So we came in here, and now Republicans have control of the House, 
the Senate, and the White House, and now we are trying to get things 
moving in the right direction, and our Democratic colleagues don't want 
to have any part of it. We are putting forward a commonsense measure. I 
understand why some of my conservative flank fiscal conservatives have 
concerns about a CR. I don't love CRs, but when you can have a CR that 
extends spending at 2024 levels for the next 6 months and empowers the 
President to be able to continue to do what they are doing, shining the 
light on spending restraint, shining the light on waste so that we can 
do our job and implement that--and, by the way, I will say that to both 
sides of the aisle. Both sides of the aisle need to take in that 
information and implement it when we do appropriations this year. We 
will move spending down, eliminate the waste. We will try to do 
something about the fact that in 2019 our entire budget was $4.5 
trillion, and today it is $7 trillion.
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have no answer to that 
besides, oh, magic tax cuts. You could literally confiscate the wealth 
of the wealthiest 1 percent of America and not dent what we have got in 
terms of $36 trillion in debt. You would kill jobs and destroy the 
economy in the process.
  That is the only answer my colleagues have to $7 trillion in 
spending.
  The fact of the matter is, this CR is responsible. It is fiscally 
appropriate. It will leave the lights on so the President and DOGE and 
Elon and Russ Vought of OMB can do their job, and I hope that my 
colleagues on this side of the aisle will support the rule.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, that was an awful lot of words from the 
gentleman to announce that is he is caving and changing his position 
and finally supporting a CR.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Moskowitz).
  Mr. MOSKOWITZ. Mr. Speaker, that is exactly right. It is CR day on 
Capitol Hill, and what is going on with Republicans? I mean, President 
Trump puts out a tweet and says please and all a sudden they just flip-
flop.
  Let me mention some mean tweets about how Republicans feel about CRs 
when they are in the minority only. The first one is actually from the 
gentleman from Texas. It says: ``It is Groundhog Day in the House 
Chamber--all the time, every day. Yet again, spending money we don't 
have'' apparently only when he is in the minority.
  Here is another one from a colleague comparing continuing resolutions 
to attending a P. Diddy party. In any given year, another colleague 
said that if Congress raises the debt ceiling, passes the CR, and rams 
through an omnibus bill, no Member of Congress should receive a 
paycheck. That is awkward for you guys. How many of you are going to 
give back your paycheck?
  Another colleague said: I have never voted for a CR. You sent me to 
Congress to cut wasteful spending, and I am a woman of my word. You can 
guess who that is.
  This is my favorite. What does a CR stand for? It stands for 
capitulating Republicans, caving Republicans. That was said by a 
Republican. You know what? I am going to miss the never CR group. I 
mean, they were great, but they are breaking up. It was great to see 
them live while there were together. They had lots of fans. I am going 
miss them. I mean, they were mostly a boy band. Some of them are going 
solo. It appears it is only   Thomas Massie. Something tells me there 
will be a reunion but only when they are in the minority.

  To quote Representative Massie talking about Republicans: ``I guess 
deficits only matter when we are in the minority.'' So, listen, go home 
to your families, turn in your voting cards, and give Trump the gavel 
because that is what has happened to your entire party. You don't need 
to be here. He tells you to do something, you jump.
  What is going on in the world? Another Representative brought up what 
is going on in the world in the last 30 days. Let's see. Egg prices are 
up. Goods are up. The stock market is down.

[[Page H1087]]

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are again reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Roy), my colleague from the Rules Committee.
  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the sudden religion my colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle have found on spending restraint and the 
need to cut spending. I look forward to all the proposals that my 
colleagues will put forward on reducing significant amounts of spending 
and waste, fraud, and abuse. I will look for that press conference they 
will no doubt have some time this week.
  I would also note that when we talk about continuing resolutions, 
what my colleague just failed to mention was the fact that literally 
every single Democrat voted for the CR that we just had in December, 
like literally every single Democrat except for one who I think maybe 
took a ``present'' vote.
  The fact of the matter is it has nothing to do with that. The fact of 
the matter is for those of us who do not like CRs as a general 
principle, the fact is because Democrats literally wouldn't pass an 
appropriations bill out of the Senate, we are left doing the cleanup 
work of trying to figure out how to move forward while we have an 
administration that isn't at war with its own people when the previous 
administration was blatantly disregarding the well-being of the 
American people to have wide-open borders letting fentanyl and letting 
all manners of evil come into our country leading to the death and 
destruction of the people that I represent, people like Jocelyn 
Nungaray who lost her life to the hands of the Tren de Aragua because 
Joe Biden decided it was more important to let millions of people into 
this country in violation of our laws endangering the people.
  That is why our bill has additional funding for ICE to make sure that 
we have got the beds to undo the damage that the Biden regime has 
carried out on the American people. Those are the actual facts. The 
fact of the matter is, no, you don't want to have a CR to continue the 
funding under Joe Biden because Joe Biden was at war with the American 
people.
  Now, we have a present administration that is trying to do the job 
that they sent him there to do: secure the border of the United States; 
hold back spending; eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse; get this economy 
going again; get the regulations out of the way of the American people; 
and do the job they want us to do.

                              {time}  1300

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Meeks).
  Mr. MEEKS. Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that Donald Trump's 
policies are collapsing our economy. Unemployment is rising. The NASDAQ 
had its worst day since the COVID crash. Millions of dollars in 
retirement savings have been wiped out in just weeks. The reason is 
clear: the Trump administration's reckless tariffs on our allies.
  To impose these tariffs, Trump declared a made-up national emergency 
under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, but 
the law has a safeguard. Any Member can force a vote to terminate the 
emergency.
  What happened? Speaker Johnson doesn't want a vote. Why? It would 
force Republicans to go on the record about Trump's tariffs. Instead, 
Speaker Johnson has rewritten the law in real time.
  Here is what the rule says: ``Each day for the remainder of the first 
session of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day.'' 
What? If you don't think that makes any sense, neither do I.
  House Republicans are declaring that the days are no longer days and 
that time has literally stopped.
  The Speaker is petrified that Members of this House will actually 
have to take a vote on lowering costs for the American people.
  This is what the American people elected us to do, but now, because 
of Donald Trump's tariffs and because Republicans would have to take a 
tough vote, Speaker Johnson is stopping us from voting.
  If Congress can't act to lower prices, protect retirement savings, 
and hold the President accountable, why are we even here? What are we 
doing here?
  A ``yes'' vote on this rule is a vote for Trump's tariffs. A ``yes'' 
vote on this rule is a vote to keep prices high for American families. 
A ``yes'' vote is a vote to block Congress from doing its job to lower 
costs.
  If you actually care about lowering costs, you should vote ``no'' on 
this rule.
  Mrs. Fischbach. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to point out that Democrats love to claim 
foul on Republicans for shutting off national emergencies, but they are 
cherry-picking the facts.
  Let's take a look back at when we were in charge in the 117th 
Congress. They never allowed a vote on terminating the COVID national 
emergency. Mr. Gosar introduced two separate national emergency 
disapproval resolutions, and Democrats, who were in control at the 
time, not only shut off consideration of those resolutions without a 
single vote, but they shut them off for the remaining 18 months of the 
Congress. Even 2 years after the COVID emergency was declared, 
Democrats still silenced the voices of Republicans who wanted to take a 
vote.
  What is that saying again? Rules for thee but not for me.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman just conceded that this 
rule would prevent the House from voting on Trump's tariffs, thereby 
resulting in the biggest tax increase on middle-class families that we 
have ever seen.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from New Mexico 
(Ms. Stansbury).
  Ms. STANSBURY. Mr. Speaker, sometimes when I am standing in this 
Chamber, I literally cannot believe my ears, and I have to say that 
today is one of those days.
  As we stand here on the floor today, I am hearing Members of the 
other side of the aisle who said they would never vote for a continuing 
resolution, that they would never vote to raise the debt, and that they 
would never vote for a bill that extends the debt ceiling say that we 
have to pass this bill.
  I literally cannot believe my ears today because the GOP today is 
here with a great American bait and switch.
  Let me explain what exactly is going on. Donald Trump spent the 
weekend calling our colleagues across the aisle, asking them to keep 
the government open until the end of the fiscal year so that they can 
get on with their real agenda. You all know what the real agenda is. 
The real agenda is that they are dismantling the Federal Government. 
They are firing tens of thousands of Federal workers, teachers, 
firefighters, veterans, military, and members of our community who are 
in crisis right now, and they are illegally impounding funds.
  Meanwhile, my Republican colleagues who said they would never vote 
for anything like this are saying that they are going to vote for it 
because, on the side, Donald Trump is winking at them, and his people 
are telling them not to worry, if you pass this bill, we are going to 
continue to do all of that illegal activity. We can get on to the real 
work, which is dismantling our basic programs that support our 
communities.
  They want to take away your Medicaid. This weekend, Elon Musk said he 
wants to take away your Social Security. They want to dismantle housing 
programs. They want to dismantle food assistance programs. They are 
literally bait and switching the American people and abdicating their 
fundamental responsibility as Representatives of the people.
  The people have spoken, my friends, and there is no number of 
townhalls that you can run away from to know that your people in your 
communities do not support your bait and switch.
  I say to my GOP colleagues: Do your jobs.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. I want to commend the previous speaker on 
setting an excellent example on addressing remarks to the Chair. Thank 
you very much.
  Add to that list now: Members are reminded to refrain from engaging 
in personalities toward the President.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.

[[Page H1088]]

  Mr. Speaker, I want to remind everyone that the people have spoken. 
They spoke in November. The Republicans are the majority in the House. 
The Republicans are the majority in the Senate. They elected President 
Trump. The people have spoken.

  I would like to bring it back to what we are actually talking about 
today, and that is the rule in front of us. We are discussing the rule 
and the continuing resolution.
  As my colleague from Texas mentioned, there was not a single ``no'' 
vote from Democrats for the continuing resolution in December. They are 
standing here today willing to shut down the government not because of 
anything substantive in the bill but because they believe that as long 
as they are acting against the Trump administration, against the 
elected President's and Republicans' agenda, then they must be doing 
the right thing.
  Motivation by blind hatred, that is the Democratic Party that we have 
before us today.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, this rule contains tariffs, and I don't 
understand why the gentlewoman supports these tariffs. She represents a 
district with over 50,000 farmers, the second most of any Member of 
Congress.
  During the last trade war started by Trump, American farmers lost $27 
billion in agricultural exports. It is farmers in the gentlewoman's 
district who are being harmed by these tariffs, so I don't understand 
why she supports them.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Frost).
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I think it is interesting that anytime my 
colleagues want to defend horrible moves by the Trump administration, 
whether they are trying to cut Medicare or cut Medicaid, they keep 
saying the people have spoken, without realizing that the people are 
speaking. That is why they continue to cancel their townhalls. They 
don't want to hear what the people are saying right now.
  Costs are at an all-time high. I came down here to tell people that 
if you are struggling to afford food, can't pay rent, or the medical 
bills are stacking up, this bill will make your life worse. Why? To 
give tax cuts to billionaires and big corporations.
  This bill sets up major cuts to Medicaid, which 60,000 children in my 
district rely on for healthcare. It steals from veterans, ripping away 
benefits. It steals from working people and families. It gives even 
more unchecked power to president Elon Musk and DOGE.
  Recently, Musk said that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme. Every 
vote in favor of this bill endorses those words.
  If my colleagues on the other side vote for this, go to your 
constituents and be loud and proud. Tell them that the program that 
they have paid into and worked on their entire life so they can retire 
with dignity is a Ponzi scheme.
  Republicans have been told by their leadership to stop doing 
townhalls. Why? The people are pissed off. They are scared. Many have 
been sold this BS lie that if we just give all the power to 
billionaires like Elon Musk, we will all be okay.
  I have breaking news: The billionaires have always had immense power 
in this country, and it hasn't worked out for us.
  I am opposing today's rule so we can stop the House from voting on 
the Republican Party spending bill that works to cut Medicaid and 
Medicare, Social Security, veterans benefits, and school lunches, all 
in favor of the ultrarich.
  I know what it is like to not be able to pay for housing, to go into 
debt to just survive. We are not in this because people have lived 
beyond their means but because we have been denied the means to live.
  Vote ``no'' on this rule.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This is just another example of how talking points are written before 
they actually read the bill because this is about a government 
shutdown, plain and simple. We have to have the rule to pass the CR so 
that we can avoid a government shutdown.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez).
  Mrs. RAMIREZ. Mr. Speaker, this is about the rule so that we can get 
to this continuing resolution or so-called continuing resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, let me tell you what continuing resolutions are. They 
give Congress time to negotiate budget bills in the interest of the 
American people.
  Let me be very clear that is not what Republicans want to do here. 
They are proposing we skip budget negotiations and give the Musk-Trump 
administration a slush fund.
  Their actions prove that they have more respect for their billionaire 
bosses than they do for the Constitution. They are more willing to hand 
over their power to Trump and Musk than they are to defend the power of 
the people. They are more committed to enabling a bully than to 
standing up for their constituents.
  That is what Trump and Musk are. They are bullies who use 
intimidation and retribution to get what they want. Trump under Musk, 
as my colleague said, they want it all. They want to disregard the law. 
They want to dismantle the agencies that serve the American people. 
They want to destroy the programs and services that Americans rely on.

                              {time}  1315

  The bottom line is this: Republicans are using a shutdown to bully us 
into giving Trump a blank check, no guardrails, Mr. Speaker, and 6 
months to plunge us into further chaos. Yes, if we are in chaos, it is 
their fault. You control the House, you control the Senate, and you 
have your guy in the White House.
  So let me be honest. I will not be bullied. The full-year slush fund 
CR is the red line.
  I call on my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule and on the 
Republicans' slush fund CR.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, the House Appropriations Committee 
worked in good faith throughout the FY25 process, and it was the 
Democrats who weaponized this process, holding up negotiations on 
demands that were completely unrelated to funding. If my colleagues 
choose a Democrat shutdown simply because they hate Donald Trump and 
his administration, then they are showing they have still learned 
nothing from the results of last year's elections.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are again reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, we are opposed to the tariffs and the tax 
increase on American families.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania 
(Ms. Scanlon), who is a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
  Ms. SCANLON. Mr. Speaker, today House Republicans are trying to avert 
a funding crisis of their own making by passing a partisan Republican 
spending bill they drafted behind closed doors. It cuts $13 billion 
from programs like low-income housing, agricultural inspections, and 
election security.
  This bill would allow President Trump and Elon Musk to supercharge 
their attacks on essential Federal programs and workers, including 
Social Security and the FAA, with no input from Congress.
  I will highlight how this bill impacts our Nation's veterans, 
particularly in light of the administration's recent actions.
  Due to the success of the PACT Act, more veterans than ever before 
have enrolled in VA care, and we should celebrate that success. 
Instead, this bill reneges on a commitment of $23 billion in healthcare 
funding for veterans who were exposed to burn pits and Agent Orange.
  It also fails to guarantee essential programs within the Veterans 
Health Administration. Programs like homelessness assistance, mental 
health care, rural health initiatives, opioid and substance abuse 
treatment, oncology services, and caregiver support are left undefined 
and, therefore, subject to cuts or elimination by DOGE and Trump.
  This is not an oversight. Our Republican colleagues are supporting 
this bill because it allows Musk to eliminate more programs without 
congressional approval.

[[Page H1089]]

  Mr. Speaker, in just 6 weeks, over 6,000 veterans have been fired 
from the VA and other Federal programs. Veterans comprise 30 percent of 
our Federal workforce. They are among the hardest working and most 
patriotic employees in our country. Nonetheless, Trump has allowed Elon 
Musk and DOGE to fire thousands of them without cause, and more jobs 
are on the chopping block; 80,000 at the VA, tens of thousands at the 
IRS, and 7,000 at Social Security. When DOGE destroys Federal programs, 
it is not just cutting essential services for American families. It is 
also firing veterans.
  Between deep VA cuts, eliminating funding for veterans' healthcare, 
and job cuts that disproportionately hit veterans, it appears that the 
Trump White House has declared war on veterans. Our veterans and their 
families deserve better than this.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to reject this travesty of a bill 
and instead pass the clean CR offered by the ranking member on the 
Appropriations Committee.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly oppose this rule and the full-year continuing 
resolution. The CR is an act of fiscal sabotage against D.C. and is an 
abuse of power over a disenfranchised jurisdiction, the consequences be 
damned.
  For the last 20 years, D.C. has been able to operate under the local 
budget enacted by D.C. for the next fiscal year for the duration of 
every CR, including full-year CRs and the first two fiscal year 2025 
CRs. The CR under consideration does not allow D.C. to do so.
  Instead, the CR effectively repeals the fiscal year 2025 local budget 
enacted by D.C., which D.C. has been operating under for the last 6 
months, and it restores the fiscal year 2024 local budget enacted by 
D.C., which D.C. stopped operating under 6 months ago.
  This unprecedented budget substitution will result in an immediate 
cut of more than $1 billion from D.C.'s $21 billion budget. This cut 
will likely force D.C. to immediately terminate programs and to lay off 
or furlough police officers, firefighters, other first responders, and 
teachers. This cut does not save the Federal Government any money 
because D.C.'s local budget consists entirely of locally raised revenue 
such as taxes and fees.
  The CR also fails to exempt D.C. from a Federal Government shutdown 
in fiscal year 2026. Since the 2013 Federal government shutdown, 
Congress has exempted D.C. from Federal Government shutdowns because 
Congress recognized that shutting down a city of more than 700,000 
people was harmful to the operations of both D.C. and the Federal 
Government.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record a 
memorandum from D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser's office detailing the impact 
of this CR on D.C.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia?
  There was no objection.

Request to Congress Regarding District of Columbia Budget and Shutdown 
                               Authority


                                our ask

       We are asking Congress not to reduce the District's 
     spending levels for the District's own locally generated 
     revenues.
       We are asking Congress to include the language that was 
     already included in the prior two prior CRs: authorizing the 
     District to spend its locally generated revenue at the FY25 
     levels that the District adopted in July 2024.


                            background info

       In July 2024, the District Government adopted its Fiscal 
     Year 2025 budget and sent it to Congress for approval
       As part of each previous Continuing Resolution for FY25, 
     Congress authorized the District to spend at the FY 25 
     budgeted level. (See, e.g., section 128 of the first CR.)
       Since October 1, 2024, the District has been operating 
     under and spending at its FY25 approved budget: This is 
     different than federal agencies, which were approved in the 
     CRs at their FY24 budgeted levels and have been spending at 
     those levels since October 1, 2024.
       The federal government saves no money from reducing DC's 
     locally funded expenditures.


          Draft Continuing Resolution & DC Local Budget Facts

       The draft full-year CR would reverse Congress's approval of 
     the District FY25 spending levels and--six months into the 
     current fiscal year--require the District to spend at its 
     FY24 budgeted level.
       This drastic funding change would have devastating impacts 
     on the District.
       The District's FY25 general funds budget (the portion 
     solely supported by locally raised taxes, fees and fines) was 
     almost $1.1 billion dollars higher than its FY24 local 
     budget.
       Nearly 75% of DC's budget is made up of locally generated 
     revenues; 24.3% comes from federal grants that all other 
     states received:
       DC's federal payment represents just 0.8% of our total 
     budget, it is separate from the federal grants. Yet it 
     supports critical functions, including in FY25's approved 
     budget of $47 million for the costs incurred to support the 
     inauguration of President Donald Trump and $50 million to the 
     District's Emergency Security and Planning Fund (EPSF) which 
     supports costs incurred by the District to support federal 
     activities. In FY 24, DC had no funds appropriated to support 
     President Trump's inauguration and less funding for the EPSF.
       As part of its FY26 Budget formulation, DC is already 
     making significant spending cuts. Recently revised revenue 
     estimates from DC's Chief Financial Officer showed a $1 
     billion drop in revenues across our four-year financial plan. 
     The drop in revenues is driven by the significant federal job 
     losses and continued impacts of remote work on commercial 
     office market. DC is preparing to make significant reductions 
     across its budget to ensure we can maintain a balanced four-
     year budget and financial plan.


                 impacts of draft continuing resolution

       The draft CR would force the District to cut almost $1.1 
     billion from its FY25 general fund spending halfway into the 
     fiscal year.
       So far, DC has expended, obligated or encumbered $6.3 
     billion, which is 48% of the total local appropriation:
       If we now had to reduce local spending by $1.1 billion it 
     would require a 16% cut to all remaining funds that are not 
     expended.
       It would decimate critical services DC delivers every day 
     to support its more than 700,000 residents, 26 million 
     tourists, and 782,200 employees that work in the public and 
     private sectors within the District.
       The vast majority of the District's workforce are people 
     who directly interact and serve residents and visitors, there 
     are far less overhead and administrative positions. A cut of 
     this magnitude, by definition, would result in immediate and 
     unanticipated layoffs of direct service workers and reduction 
     or elimination of direct services residents and visitors rely 
     on.
       Enacting the draft CR would have immediate impacts on 
     people, contracts, fixed costs and capital projects:
       People: Many of the most critical agencies in the District 
     have a budget that almost entirely funds people. For example, 
     90% of the Metropolitan Police Department, 87% of the Fire 
     and Emergency Medical Services, and 84% of DC Public Schools 
     budgets are for people. If the District is forced to reduce 
     remaining spending by 16%, it will require reductions in 
     force, furloughs, and hiring freezes across government 
     including for our critical front-line services.
       Contracts: The District enters into contracts during the 
     fiscal year based on appropriated funding levels. If forced 
     to reduce spending by 16%, DC would immediately have to 
     reduce contracts that have already been awarded for a variety 
     of goods and services.
       Fixed costs: The District enters into leases, pays utility 
     bills, and provides security and janitorial services across 
     DC facilities. If forced to reduce spending by 16%, DC would 
     need to immediately look at renegotiating or terminating 
     leases and may not be able to continue to provide the same 
     level of security and janitorial services at our facilities. 
     It would also force deeper cuts elsewhere in the budget to 
     maintain our ability to pay our energy bills.


            Impacts on DC capital projects and bond ratings

       DC has a statutory debt cap limit of 12 percent of our 
     general funds budget spent on debt service:
       If we had to revert to FY 24 spending levels, it would 
     reduce general funds expenditures by $ 1.1 billion dollars 
     and immediately require us to cut approximately $600 million 
     in projects before FY 2029 in our approved 6-year capital 
     improvements plan.
       Moody's has said it is taking another look at DC's current 
     Aaa credit rating because of the significant federal layoffs 
     and impacts on commercial property values:
       If the draft CR is enacted, it will cause DC's bond rating 
     to be downgraded resulting in more expensive borrowing costs:
       This would also lead to immediate cuts from our current 
     CIP.
       DC's CIP is largely for horizontal infrastructure (roads, 
     bridges, sidewalks, alleys, road safety improvements, WMATA 
     support) (37.2%) and school improvements and modernizations 
     (18 percent). Importantly, it also includes a $515 million 
     investment in the modernization of our Capital One Arena 
     across FY 25-FY 27.


    Impacts of Continuing Resolution on Critical Agencies & Services

       Ten agencies make up 70% of DC's local funds budget:
       Metropolitan Police Department
       Fire and Emergency Medical Services
       DC Public Schools
       DC Public Charter Schools
       Debt Service (payments on bonds to support capital 
     projects)

[[Page H1090]]

       Department of Healthcare Finance
       Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)
       Department of Human Services
       Department of General Services
       Department of Behavioral Health
       Making a $1B cut this late in the fiscal year means large 
     cuts in these agencies:
       Being forced to cut police officers, teachers, bus/rail 
     service, and first responders would contravene the Trump 
     Administration's vision of making DC a world class national 
     capital.
       The federal government saves no money from reducing DC's 
     locally funded expenditures.

                   The District's Shutdown Authority

       A second critical ask is to add back the language that 
     provided the District with the ability to spend its local 
     resources in the event of a federal government shutdown.
       The removal of the District shutdown authority provision 
     will create significant legal uncertainty about the 
     District's budget, which in turn will create financial 
     uncertainty--and may create substantial operational issues 
     for the Districts and the services it provides to District 
     residents, visitors, and commuters, including public safety, 
     public education, and clean city services. Since there is no 
     benefit to removing the District shutdown provision, and 
     great risks are created by removing it, we respectfully 
     request that the District shutdown authority be restored in 
     the full-year CR.
       For over a decade, through both Republican and Democratic 
     Congresses and Republican and Democratic administrations, the 
     federal government's annual appropriations act has included a 
     specific and detailed provision authorizing the District of 
     Columbia to remain fully operational, and to spend at its 
     locally approved funding levels, in the event of a federal 
     government shutdown in the next fiscal year. (This has been 
     referred to as the District having ``shutdown authority''.)
       The FY24 Appropriations Act contains the following 
     provision:
       SEC. 816. (a)(1) During fiscal year 2025, during a period 
     in which neither a District of Columbia continuing resolution 
     or a regular District of Columbia appropriation bill is in 
     effect, local funds are appropriated in the amount provided 
     for any project or activity for which local funds are 
     provided in the Act referred to in paragraph (2) (subject to 
     any modifications enacted by the District of Columbia as of 
     the beginning of the period during which this subsection is 
     in effect) at the rate set forth by such Act.
       (2) The Act referred to in this paragraph is the Act of the 
     Council of the District of Columbia pursuant to which a 
     proposed budget is approved for fiscal year 2025 which 
     (subject to the requirements of the District of Columbia Home 
     Rule Act) will constitute the local portion of the annual 
     budget for the District of Columbia government for fiscal 
     year 2025 for purposes of section 446 of the District of 
     Columbia Home Rule Act (sec. 1-204.46, D.C. Official Code).
       (b) Appropriations made by subsection (a) shall cease to be 
     available--
       (1) during any period in which a District of Columbia 
     continuing resolution for fiscal year 2025 is in effect; or
       (2) upon the enactment into law of the regular District of 
     Columbia appropriation bill for fiscal year 2025.
       (c) An appropriation made by subsection (a) is provided 
     under the authority and conditions as provided under this Act 
     and shall be available to the extent and in the manner that 
     would be provided by this Act.
       (d) An appropriation made by subsection (a) shall cover all 
     obligations or expenditures incurred for such project or 
     activity during the portion of fiscal year 2025 for which 
     this section applies to such project or activity.
       (e) This section shall not apply to a project or activity 
     during any period of fiscal year 2025 if any other provision 
     of law (other than an authorization of appropriations)
       (1) makes an appropriation, makes funds available, or 
     grants authority for such project or activity to continue for 
     such period; or
       (2) specifically provides that no appropriation shall be 
     made, no funds shall be made available, or no authority shall 
     be granted for such project or activity to continue for such 
     period.
       (f) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect 
     obligations of the government of the District of Columbia 
     mandated by other law.
       The shutdown authority provision allows local services to 
     continue to be provided to District residents, commuting 
     workers, and visitors: garbage can be picked up, MPD and 
     other public safety agencies are able to operate at full 
     capacity, schools can operate as usual, businesses and 
     homeowners can get building permits, roads can be repaired, 
     etc.
       The current draft of the full-year CR eliminates the 
     shutdown authority provision.
       We have been told by a congressional staff person that the 
     District will continue to have shutdown authority under 
     section 1112 of the draft CR, which reads as follows:
       SEC. 1112. With respect to any discretionary account for 
     which advance appropriations were provided for fiscal year 
     2025 or 2026 in an appropriations Act for fiscal year 2024, 
     in addition to amounts otherwise made available by this 
     division, advance appropriations are provided in the same 
     amount for fiscal year 2026 or 2027, respectively, with a 
     comparable period of availability.
       However, relying on section 1112 for the District's 
     shutdown authority will create significant legal and 
     financial questions and risks.
       Most importantly, it is not at all clear from the language 
     of section 1112 that the intent of that provision is to 
     provide the District with shutdown authority.
       First, it is not clear that the District's budget is a 
     ``discretionary account''--which are the only advance 
     appropriations to which section 1112 applies. The term 
     ``discretionary account'' isn't defined, and there is no 
     obvious reason why the District's budget would be considered 
     a ``discretionary account''.
       Second, even if the District's budget is a ``discretionary 
     account'', it is not clear how the shutdown authority 
     transfers from fiscal year 2025 to fiscal year 2026, since 
     the fiscal year 2025 authority is contingent on there being a 
     shutdown in fiscal year 2025. And it is not clear what year's 
     budget authorization would apply, since the appropriation is 
     not for a specific dollar amount (which is how other advance 
     appropriations are generally structured) but instead is based 
     on the District's own fiscal year 2025 budget act. Would the 
     District's fiscal year 2026 act apply in fiscal year 2026 as 
     the advance appropriation, or would the fiscal year 2025 act 
     still apply?
       It is important to note that the District's shutdown 
     authority provision is much different and much more complex 
     than the typical advance appropriation provision, which would 
     simply state a fiscal year, dollar amount, and purpose (e.g., 
     ``and further, for fiscal year 2026, $XXX million, for 
     continued modernization of information technology 
     resources'')
       In addition, the removal of the District shutdown provision 
     from the CR would itself create legal uncertainty, because 
     the courts, attorneys, and financial staff will likely 
     believe that there was a specific reason why Congress removed 
     it (particularly since it has been included for over a decade 
     in other CRs and appropriations acts).
       A very possible interpretation will be that Congress 
     removed the District shutdown provision because it wanted to 
     remove the District's shutdown authority (not that section 
     1112 is a replacement for that).

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote ``no.''
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Goldman).
  Mr. GOLDMAN of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the Republicans' 
partisan sham of a government funding bill which is nothing more than a 
blank canvas for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to continue their smashing 
and looting of our Federal Government.
  There are too many things that are wrong with this bill to mention in 
just 2 minutes, including cuts to safety net programs for housing, 
food, veterans, and law enforcement, as well as essential community 
projects for every district in the country. What is really shocking is 
that Republicans rejected any and all input from Democrats, even though 
they need Democratic votes to pass this bill in the Senate.
  If the Republicans want to go it alone, then go it alone, but they 
can't blame anyone but themselves when it fails.
  If the government shuts down with a Republican House, Republican 
Senate, and Republican President, then it will be solely because the 
Republicans have moved forward with a terrible and partisan, take-it-
or-leave-it bill.
  In November, the clear number one issue on voters' minds was the 
economy and the cost of living. However, since he has taken over, 
President Trump has increased costs significantly and tanked the 
economy.
  It gets even worse. The President has not only failed to keep his 
promise to help working Americans, but he has enlisted a corrupt, 
unelected billionaire to slash essential programs that hundreds of 
millions of Americans depend on.
  Elon Musk isn't cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. He doesn't even know 
what he is cutting.
  Unlike regular appropriations bills, this bill does not include the 
usual language to fund specific programs. What that means is that Elon 
Musk has unfettered discretion to cut whatever he wants.
  You don't need to take my word for it, Mr. Speaker. The House Freedom 
Caucus issued a press release supporting this bill because of that very 
reality.
  With this bill, Republicans are handing the power of the purse to 
Congress and not working with Democrats. We continue to stand ready to 
work together, but this bill does not do that.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts has 5\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.

[[Page H1091]]

  

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), who is a distinguished member of the 
Rules Committee.
  Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, Americans across the country are 
angry about Elon Musk illegally firing employees and freezing Federal 
funds.
  Rather than stand up to Musk, Republicans are giving him the power to 
shut down the government programs Musk doesn't like. Remember, just 
last night Musk said that he wants to eliminate the big programs like 
Social Security and Medicare. Musk also wants to fire thousands of VA 
employees. This bill cuts $22.8 billion for veterans' care. It cuts 
housing, and it cuts programs that protect our food supply so we can 
bring down the cost of eggs.
  This rule also endorses Trump's tariffs under the guise of a national 
emergency. Yesterday Trump's tariffs caused the markets to plummet, 
taking Americans' retirement savings with them. That is the real 
national emergency. A vote for this rule is a vote for Trump tariffs.
  Is that why Republicans are hiding from their constituents? Is it 
because they are backing unpopular tariffs that will cost the average 
family $2,000 a year?
  Or maybe they are hiding because their funding bill cuts $15 billion 
from community projects. We are losing first responder and water 
infrastructure projects in New Mexico.
  Republicans are also defunding the police in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, 
in Representative Bresnahan's district, and they are eliminating a 
clean water project in Lehigh County in Representative Mackenzie's 
district, just to name a few of the many projects that are being gutted 
in Republican and Democratic districts alike.
  This is not a clean CR. It is as dirty as it gets.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve 
the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), who is the Speaker emerita.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for 
his extraordinary leadership.
  Mr. Speaker, today Republicans will vote to pass a continuing 
resolution that hollows out our Nation's commitment to the health, 
education, and economic security of America's working families. Instead 
of working constructively in a bipartisan way to meet the needs of the 
American people, Republicans are trying to starve the domestic budget 
with a partisan bill--I am going to focus on veterans here--that cuts 
nearly $23 billion in veterans' benefits in addition to slashing even 
more money from healthcare and affordable housing.
  Indeed, the Republican CR is a betrayal of America's veterans with 
devastating cuts to initiatives that care for our veterans exposed to 
burn pits, Agent Orange, and other toxic substances.
  Our Nation's sacred promise is just as the military says: On the 
battlefield we leave no soldier behind, and when they come home we 
leave no veteran behind. With this bill, Republicans have broken that 
promise.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this betrayal of 
our veterans, and I urge my Republican colleagues to join Democrats at 
the negotiating table to get serious about the peoples' business. Vote 
``no.''
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, if you vote for this rule, then you own the tariffs.
  Republicans snuck in a provision that blocks this House from voting 
on resolutions that could end the tariffs. They know these tariffs will 
cost families an extra $1,200 a year, and they are scared to vote for 
them. So instead of letting Congress do its job, they are shutting down 
debate. They are hiding, and they are shielding themselves from any 
accountability.
  Do you know who is going to feel the pain, Mr. Speaker?
  It is working families and small businesses who are already 
struggling with high costs. It is farmers who are already the victim of 
retaliatory tariffs.
  Meanwhile, the stock market was in a free fall yesterday, and today 
it is going down again. Retirement accounts have taken a huge hit. 
Ontario is already hitting us with a 25 percent electricity surcharge 
hurting families in Minnesota.
  In fact, I saw a breaking news story this morning that Trump is now 
escalating his trade war by doubling tariffs on Canadian steel and 
aluminum. He and his enablers are pushing forward full steam ahead into 
a possible recession with no regard for the chaos he is causing in this 
country. That is why House Democrats, led by Representative Meeks, 
introduced resolutions to end Trump's devastating tariffs.
  According to the National Emergencies Act, these resolutions should 
be fast-tracked for a vote on the House floor. Republicans are using 
this rule to shut them down. I would love to hear them explain to their 
constituents why they are standing by while prices are skyrocketing, 
but Republicans are scared of their constituents too, hiding in their 
offices instead of holding townhalls.

                              {time}  1330

  Let me be perfectly clear. If your Representative votes for this 
rule, they are voting to ratify the Trump tariffs. They are hoping you 
won't notice while they let our economy burn.
  That is not leadership. That is cowardice. A vote against this CR is 
not a vote to shut down the government. We have offered a 1-month CR to 
fund the government while appropriators finish the budget process 
instead of giving up on everything and handing the reins back to Trump 
and Musk.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, now that we have finished listening to the Democrats' 
talking points, the same talking points that they use over and over to 
mislead the American people and demonize Republicans and demonize 
President Trump, I will actually focus on what we are talking about 
today and what is actually in front of the body. That is the rule to 
deal with the CR and two other bills.
  Even with the additional funding for veterans and the FAA and 
families in this bill, it will cost less than last year. It won't be by 
gutting programs, as my Democratic colleagues have so wrongfully 
claimed, but by removing projects from the fiscal year 2024 bill so 
that they are not double funding projects that have already received 
funds in fiscal year 2024.
  My Democratic colleagues must be confused because I certainly would 
not want to be accused of calling them liars. This bill upholds the 
responsibility of our veterans and ensures full funding for healthcare 
services and benefits. It includes the largest pay raise for junior 
enlisted troops in over 40 years. It supports Federal wildland 
firefighters. It increases funding for air traffic controller 
priorities.
  It does not cut grants for law enforcement. It does not cut spending 
on family assistance programs. In fact, it increases spending for WIC 
by more than $500 million, and it includes an additional $6 billion for 
the Toxic Exposures Fund to treat veterans who have experienced 
service-related exposure to toxic substances.
  This bill can increase spending on these critical needs by making 
sure that we are not double funding existing programs. It is really 
that simple.
  Avoiding government shutdowns ensures that the administration can 
continue to identify waste, fraud, and abuse. It also allows ICE to 
continue deporting criminal migrants. This clean CR will allow us to 
focus on one big, beautiful reconciliation bill.
  Furthermore, this rule provides a way for us to continue to remove 
waste, fraud, and abuse right now by extending the time to prosecute 
those who committed unemployment insurance fraud during the COVID CARES 
programming.
  I would ask my Democratic colleagues to spare us the speeches about 
President Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency trimming 
some of the bloated bureaucracy from our Federal departments. They are 
about to vote against a continuing resolution in the hopes of shutting 
our

[[Page H1092]]

government down and sending every single Federal employee home without 
a paycheck. Maybe my Democratic colleagues just don't think DOGE is 
going far enough.
  The truth is that there are more than 25,000 Federal employees in the 
State of Massachusetts whose paycheck will be put on an indefinite hold 
if the government shuts down. That is what my Democratic colleagues are 
going to vote for.
  My Democratic colleagues keep complaining about how unfair this CR is 
to the D.C. residents, but there are over 160,000 Federal employees in 
the District of Columbia. Quite frankly, there are more than there 
should be. Yet, Democrats are going to make every one of their 
paychecks go away if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
succeed in shutting the government down.
  I thank my colleagues, Mr. Carey, Mr. Cole, and Mr. Smith from 
Missouri, for introducing these thoughtful pieces of legislation, and I 
encourage every single one of my colleagues to vote for this 
nonpartisan continuing resolution to keep our government fully funded 
and hold fraudsters accountable.
  Mr. Speaker, I will make it very clear: A ``no'' vote on this rule is 
actually a vote to shut down government.
  Mr. Speaker, I support the rule and the underlying legislation.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:

  An Amendment to H. Res. 211 Offered by Mr. McGovern of Massachusetts

       At the end of the resolution, add the following:
       Sec. 5. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the 
     House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the 
     bill (H.R. 1974) making further continuing appropriations for 
     the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025, and for other 
     purposes. All points of order against consideration of the 
     bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All 
     points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. 
     The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 
     bill and on any amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       Sec. 6. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 1974.

  Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and 
I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bost). The question is on ordering the 
previous question.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. McGOVERN. 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, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of adoption of the resolution.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 216, 
nays 212, not voting 4, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 66]

                               YEAS--216

     Aderholt
     Alford
     Allen
     Amodei (NV)
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Barr
     Barrett
     Baumgartner
     Bean (FL)
     Begich
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs (AZ)
     Biggs (SC)
     Bilirakis
     Boebert
     Bost
     Brecheen
     Bresnahan
     Buchanan
     Burchett
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Crane
     Crank
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Davidson
     De La Cruz
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Downing
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Evans (CO)
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Fedorchak
     Feenstra
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Fong
     Foxx
     Franklin, Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Garbarino
     Gill (TX)
     Gimenez
     Goldman (TX)
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Graves
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Hamadeh (AZ)
     Haridopolos
     Harrigan
     Harris (MD)
     Harris (NC)
     Harshbarger
     Hern (OK)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill (AR)
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Hurd (CO)
     Issa
     Jack
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kean
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy (UT)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley (CA)
     Kim
     Knott
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Langworthy
     Latta
     Lawler
     Lee (FL)
     Letlow
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Mackenzie
     Malliotakis
     Maloy
     Mann
     Massie
     Mast
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McDowell
     McGuire
     Messmer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Moolenaar
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (NC)
     Moore (UT)
     Moore (WV)
     Moran
     Murphy
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Onder
     Owens
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Reschenthaler
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rulli
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Shreve
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Strong
     Stutzman
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner (OH)
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Westerman
     Wied
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym
     Zinke

                               NAYS--212

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amo
     Ansari
     Auchincloss
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Bell
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop
     Bonamici
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Budzinski
     Bynum
     Carbajal
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Cisneros
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crockett
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (NC)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     DeSaulnier
     Dexter
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Elfreth
     Escobar
     Espaillat
     Evans (PA)
     Fields
     Figures
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Friedman
     Frost
     Garamendi
     Garcia (CA)
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Gillen
     Golden (ME)
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzalez, V.
     Goodlander
     Gottheimer
     Gray
     Green, Al (TX)
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy (NY)
     Khanna
     Krishnamoorthi
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latimer
     Lee (NV)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin
     Liccardo
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Mannion
     Matsui
     McBath
     McBride
     McClain Delaney
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McDonald Rivet
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     McIver
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Min
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Morrison
     Moskowitz
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Olszewski
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pelosi
     Perez
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Pou
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Randall
     Raskin
     Riley (NY)
     Rivas
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ryan
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schneider
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Simon
     Smith (WA)
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Subramanyam
     Suozzi
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Tran
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Vindman
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Whitesides
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Grijalva
     Mills
     Pressley
     Salazar

                              {time}  1357

  Mr. VICENTE GONZALEZ of Texas changed his vote from ``yea'' to 
``nay.''
  Ms. LETLOW changed her vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bergman). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. McGOVERN. 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 216, 
noes 214, not voting 2, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 67]

                               AYES--216

     Aderholt
     Alford
     Allen
     Amodei (NV)
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Barr
     Barrett
     Baumgartner
     Bean (FL)
     Begich
     Bentz
     Bergman
     Bice
     Biggs (AZ)
     Biggs (SC)
     Bilirakis
     Boebert
     Bost

[[Page H1093]]


     Brecheen
     Bresnahan
     Buchanan
     Burchett
     Burlison
     Calvert
     Cammack
     Carey
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Ciscomani
     Cline
     Cloud
     Clyde
     Cole
     Collins
     Comer
     Crane
     Crank
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Davidson
     De La Cruz
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donalds
     Downing
     Dunn (FL)
     Edwards
     Ellzey
     Emmer
     Estes
     Evans (CO)
     Ezell
     Fallon
     Fedorchak
     Feenstra
     Finstad
     Fischbach
     Fitzgerald
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flood
     Fong
     Foxx
     Franklin, Scott
     Fry
     Fulcher
     Garbarino
     Gill (TX)
     Gimenez
     Goldman (TX)
     Gonzales, Tony
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Graves
     Green (TN)
     Greene (GA)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hageman
     Hamadeh (AZ)
     Haridopolos
     Harrigan
     Harris (MD)
     Harris (NC)
     Harshbarger
     Hern (OK)
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill (AR)
     Hinson
     Houchin
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hunt
     Hurd (CO)
     Issa
     Jack
     Jackson (TX)
     James
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Kean
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy (UT)
     Kiggans (VA)
     Kiley (CA)
     Kim
     Knott
     Kustoff
     LaHood
     LaLota
     LaMalfa
     Langworthy
     Latta
     Lawler
     Lee (FL)
     Letlow
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luna
     Luttrell
     Mace
     Mackenzie
     Malliotakis
     Maloy
     Mann
     Mast
     McCaul
     McClain
     McClintock
     McCormick
     McDowell
     McGuire
     Messmer
     Meuser
     Miller (IL)
     Miller (OH)
     Miller (WV)
     Miller-Meeks
     Mills
     Moolenaar
     Moore (AL)
     Moore (NC)
     Moore (UT)
     Moore (WV)
     Moran
     Murphy
     Nehls
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunn (IA)
     Obernolte
     Ogles
     Onder
     Owens
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pfluger
     Reschenthaler
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rose
     Rouzer
     Roy
     Rulli
     Rutherford
     Salazar
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Self
     Sessions
     Shreve
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spartz
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Steube
     Strong
     Stutzman
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Timmons
     Turner (OH)
     Valadao
     Van Drew
     Van Duyne
     Van Orden
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Westerman
     Wied
     Williams (TX)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yakym
     Zinke

                               NOES--214

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Amo
     Ansari
     Auchincloss
     Balint
     Barragan
     Beatty
     Bell
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop
     Bonamici
     Boyle (PA)
     Brown
     Brownley
     Budzinski
     Bynum
     Carbajal
     Carson
     Carter (LA)
     Casar
     Case
     Casten
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Cherfilus-McCormick
     Chu
     Cisneros
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Craig
     Crockett
     Crow
     Cuellar
     Davids (KS)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (NC)
     Dean (PA)
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Deluzio
     DeSaulnier
     Dexter
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Elfreth
     Escobar
     Espaillat
     Evans (PA)
     Fields
     Figures
     Fletcher
     Foster
     Foushee
     Frankel, Lois
     Friedman
     Frost
     Garamendi
     Garcia (CA)
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Gillen
     Golden (ME)
     Goldman (NY)
     Gomez
     Gonzalez, V.
     Goodlander
     Gottheimer
     Gray
     Green, Al (TX)
     Harder (CA)
     Hayes
     Himes
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Hoyle (OR)
     Huffman
     Ivey
     Jackson (IL)
     Jacobs
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Kamlager-Dove
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy (NY)
     Khanna
     Krishnamoorthi
     Landsman
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latimer
     Lee (NV)
     Lee (PA)
     Leger Fernandez
     Levin
     Liccardo
     Lieu
     Lofgren
     Lynch
     Magaziner
     Mannion
     Massie
     Matsui
     McBath
     McBride
     McClain Delaney
     McClellan
     McCollum
     McDonald Rivet
     McGarvey
     McGovern
     McIver
     Meeks
     Menendez
     Meng
     Mfume
     Min
     Moore (WI)
     Morelle
     Morrison
     Moskowitz
     Moulton
     Mrvan
     Mullin
     Nadler
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Olszewski
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pelosi
     Perez
     Peters
     Pettersen
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Pou
     Pressley
     Quigley
     Ramirez
     Randall
     Raskin
     Riley (NY)
     Rivas
     Ross
     Ruiz
     Ryan
     Salinas
     Sanchez
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schneider
     Scholten
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Simon
     Smith (WA)
     Sorensen
     Soto
     Stansbury
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Strickland
     Subramanyam
     Suozzi
     Swalwell
     Sykes
     Takano
     Thanedar
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tokuda
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres (NY)
     Trahan
     Tran
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Vasquez
     Veasey
     Velazquez
     Vindman
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Whitesides
     Williams (GA)
     Wilson (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Arrington
     Grijalva
       


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining.

                              {time}  1404

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

                          ____________________