[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 193 (Monday, November 17, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H4685-H4688]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   PROTECTING INFORMATION BY LOCAL LEADERS FOR AGENCY RESILIENCE ACT

  Mr. GARBARINO. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 5078) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to 
reauthorize the State and local cybersecurity grant program of the 
Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of the Department of 
Homeland Security, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 5078

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting Information by 
     Local Leaders for Agency Resilience Act'' or the ``PILLAR 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF CISA STATE AND LOCAL CYBERSECURITY 
                   GRANT PROGRAM.

       Section 2220A of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 
     U.S.C. 665g) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 
     (6), and (7) as paragraphs (3), (4), (6), (8), (9), (10), and 
     (11), respectively;
       (B) by inserting before paragraph (3), as so redesignated, 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(1) Artificial intelligence.--The term `artificial 
     intelligence' has the meaning given such term in section 
     5002(3) of the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative 
     Act of 2020 (enacted as division E of the William M. (Mac) 
     Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 
     2021 (15 U.S.C. 9401(3))).
       ``(2) Artificial intelligence system.--The term `artificial 
     intelligence system' means any data system, software, 
     hardware, application tool, or utility that operates in whole 
     or in part using artificial intelligence.'';
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (4), as so redesignated, 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Foreign entity of concern.--The term `foreign entity 
     of concern' has the meaning given such term in section 10634 
     of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 19237; Public Law 117-167; popularly referred 
     to as the `CHIPS and Science Act').''; and
       (D) by inserting after paragraph (6), as so redesignated, 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Multi-factor authentication.--The term `multi factor 
     authentication' means an authentication system that requires 
     more than one distinct type of authentication factor for 
     successful authentication of a user, including by using a 
     multi-factor authenticator or by combining single-factor 
     authenticators that provide different types of factors.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``information systems 
     owned'' and inserting ``information systems or operational 
     technology systems, including either or both of such systems 
     using artificial intelligence, maintained, owned,'';
       (3) in subsection (d)(4), by striking ``to the information 
     systems owned'' and inserting ``to the information systems or 
     operational technology systems, including either or both of 
     such systems using artificial intelligence, maintained, 
     owned,'';
       (4) in subsection (e)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A)(i), by striking ``information 
     systems owned'' and inserting ``information systems or 
     operational technology systems, including either or both of 
     such systems using artificial intelligence, maintained, 
     owned,'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (B)--

       (I) by amending clauses (i) through (v) to read as follows:

       ``(i) manage, monitor, and track applications, user 
     accounts, and information systems and operational technology 
     systems, including either or both of such systems using 
     artificial intelligence, that are maintained, owned, or 
     operated by, or on behalf of, the eligible entity, or, if the 
     eligible entity is a State, local governments within the 
     jurisdiction of the eligible entity, and the information 
     technology deployed on such information systems or 
     operational technology systems (as the case may be), 
     including legacy information systems, operational technology 
     systems, and information technology that are no longer 
     supported by the manufacturer of the systems or technology at 
     issue;
       ``(ii) monitor, audit, and track network traffic and 
     activity transiting or traveling to or from applications, 
     user accounts, and information systems and operational 
     technology systems, including either or both of such systems 
     using artificial intelligence, maintained, owned, or operated 
     by, or on behalf of, the eligible entity or, if the eligible

[[Page H4686]]

     entity is a State, local governments within the jurisdiction 
     of the eligible entity;
       ``(iii) enhance the preparation, response, and resiliency 
     of applications, user accounts, and information systems and 
     operational technology systems, including either or both of 
     such systems using artificial intelligence, maintained, 
     owned, or operated by, or on behalf of, the eligible entity 
     or, if the eligible entity is a State, local governments 
     within the jurisdiction of the eligible entity, against 
     cybersecurity risks and cybersecurity threats;
       ``(iv) implement a process of continuous cybersecurity 
     vulnerability assessments and threat mitigation practices 
     prioritized by degree of risk to address cybersecurity risks 
     and cybersecurity threats on applications, user accounts, and 
     information systems and operational technology systems, 
     including either or both of such systems using artificial 
     intelligence, maintained, owned, or operated by, or on behalf 
     of, the eligible entity or, if the eligible entity is a 
     State, local governments within the jurisdiction of the 
     eligible entity;
       ``(v) ensure that the eligible entity and, if the eligible 
     entity is a State, local governments within the jurisdiction 
     of the eligible entity, adopt and use best practices and 
     methodologies to enhance cybersecurity, particularly identity 
     and access management solutions such as multi-factor 
     authentication, which may include--

       ``(I) the practices set forth in a cybersecurity framework 
     developed by the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology or the Agency;
       ``(II) cyber chain supply chain risk management best 
     practices identified by the National Institute of Standards 
     and Technology or the Agency;
       ``(III) knowledge bases of adversary tools and tactics;
       ``(IV) technologies such as artificial intelligence; and
       ``(V) improving cyber incident response capabilities 
     through adoption of automated cybersecurity practices;'';
       (II) in clause (x), by inserting ``or operational 
     technology systems, including either or both of such systems 
     using artificial intelligence,'' after ``information 
     systems'';
       (III) in clause (xi)(I), by inserting ``, including through 
     Department of Homeland Security State, Local, and Regional 
     Fusion Center Initiative under section 210(A)'' before the 
     semicolon;
       (IV) in clause (xii), by inserting ``, including for 
     bolstering the resilience of outdated or vulnerable 
     information systems or operational technology systems, 
     including either or both of such systems using artificial 
     intelligence'' before the semicolon;
       (V) by amending clause (xiii) to read as follows:

       ``(xiii) implement an information technology or operational 
     technology, including either or both of such systems using 
     artificial intelligence, modernization cybersecurity review 
     process that ensures alignment between information 
     technology, operational technology, and artificial 
     intelligence cybersecurity objectives;'';

       (VI) in clause (xiv)(II)--

       (aa) in item (aa), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (bb) in item (bb), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (cc) by adding at the end the following new item:
       ``(cc) academic and nonprofit entities, including 
     cybersecurity clinics and other nonprofit technical 
     assistance programs;''; and

       (VII) by amending clause (xv) to read as follows:

       ``(xv) ensure adequate access to, and participation in, the 
     services and programs described in this subparagraph by rural 
     areas and other local governments with small populations 
     within the jurisdiction of the eligible entity, including by 
     direct outreach to such rural areas and local governments 
     with small populations; and''; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (F)--

       (I) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (II) by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:

       ``(ii) reducing cybersecurity risks to, and identifying, 
     responding to, and recovering from cybersecurity threats to, 
     information systems or operational technology systems, 
     including either or both of such systems using artificial 
     intelligence, maintained, owned or operated by, or on behalf 
     of, the eligible entity or, if the eligible entity is a 
     State, local governments within the jurisdiction of the 
     eligible entity; and''; and

       (III) by adding at the end the following new clause:

       ``(iii) assuming the cost or partial cost of cybersecurity 
     investments made as a result of the plan.''; and
       (B) in paragraph (3)(A), by striking ``the Multi-State 
     Information Sharing and Analysis Center'' and inserting 
     ``Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations'';
       (5) in subsection (g)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)(A)(ii), by inserting ``including, as 
     appropriate, representatives of rural, suburban, and high-
     population jurisdictions (including such jurisdictions with 
     low or otherwise limited operating budgets)'' before the 
     semicolon; and
       (B) by amending paragraph (5) to read as follows:
       ``(5) Rule of construction regarding control of certain 
     information systems or operational technology systems of 
     eligible entities.--Nothing in this subsection may be 
     construed to permit a cybersecurity planning committee of an 
     eligible entity that meets the requirements of this 
     subsection to make decisions relating to information systems 
     or operational technology systems, including either or both 
     of such systems using artificial intelligence, maintained, 
     owned, or operated by, or on behalf of, the eligible 
     entity.'';
       (6) in subsection (i)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``2-year period'' and 
     inserting ``3-year period'';
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``2023'' and inserting ``2027''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``2023'' and 
     inserting ``2027''; and
       (C) in paragraph (4)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``shall'' and inserting ``may''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``information systems 
     owned'' and inserting ``information systems or operational 
     technology systems, including either or both of such systems 
     using artificial intelligence, maintained, owned,'';
       (7) in subsection (j)(1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (E)--
       (i) by striking ``information systems owned'' and inserting 
     ``information systems or operational technology systems, 
     including either or both of such systems using artificial 
     intelligence, maintained, owned,''; and
       (ii) by striking the period and inserting a semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
       ``(F) to purchase software or hardware, or products or 
     services of such software or hardware, as the case may be, 
     that do not align with guidance relevant to such software or 
     hardware, or products or services, as the case may be, 
     provided by the Agency, including Secure by Design or 
     successor guidance; or
       ``(G) to purchase software or hardware, or products or 
     services of such software or hardware, as the case may be, 
     that are designed, developed, operated, maintained, 
     manufactured, or sold by a foreign entity of concern and do 
     not align with guidance provided by the Agency.'';
       (8) in subsection (l), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``2022'' and inserting ``2026'';
       (9) in subsection (m), by amending paragraph (1) to read as 
     follows:
       ``(1) In general.--The Federal share of activities carried 
     out using funds made available pursuant to the award of a 
     grant under this section may not exceed--
       ``(A) in the case of a grant to an eligible entity, 60 
     percent for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2033; and
       ``(B) in the case of a grant to a multi-entity group, 70 
     percent for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2033.
     Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), the Federal share 
     of the cost for an eligible entity or multi-entity group 
     shall be 65 percent for an entity and 75 percent for a multi-
     group entity for each fiscal year beginning with fiscal year 
     2028 through fiscal year 2033 if such entity or multi-entity 
     group entity, as the case may be, implements or enables, by 
     not later than October 1, 2027, multi-factor authentication 
     and identity and access management tools that support multi-
     factor authentication with respect to critical 
     infrastructure, including the information systems and 
     operational technology systems, including either or both of 
     such systems using artificial intelligence, of such critical 
     infrastructure, that is within the jurisdiction of such 
     entity or multi-entity group is responsible.'';
       (10) in subsection (n)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A)--

       (I) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking ``a 
     grant'' and inserting ``a grant on or after January 1, 2026, 
     or changes the allocation of funding as permissible within 
     the allowances''; and
       (II) by amending clauses (ii) and (iii) to read as follows:

       ``(ii) with the consent of the local governments, items, 
     in-kind services, capabilities, or activities, or a 
     combination of funding and other services, having a value of 
     not less than 80 percent of the amount of the grant; or
       ``(iii) with the consent of the local governments, grant 
     funds combined with other items, in-kind services, 
     capabilities, or activities, or a combination of funding and 
     other services, having the total value of not less than 80 
     percent of the amount of the grant.''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by amending clauses (ii) and 
     (iii) to read as follows:
       ``(ii) items, in kind services, capabilities, or 
     activities, or a combination of funding and other services, 
     having a value of not less than 25 percent of the amount of 
     the grant awarded to the eligible entity; or
       ``(iii) grant funds combined with other items, in kind 
     services, capabilities, or activities, or a combination of 
     funding and other services, having the total value of not 
     less than 25 percent of the grant awarded to the eligible 
     entity.''; and
       (B) by amending paragraph (5) to read as follows:
       ``(5) Direct funding.--If an eligible entity does not make 
     a distribution to a local government required under paragraph 
     (2) within

[[Page H4687]]

     60 days of the anticipated grant disbursement date, such 
     local government may petition the Secretary to request the 
     Secretary to provide funds directly to such local 
     government.'';
       (11) in subsection (o), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by inserting ``and representatives from rural areas and 
     other local governments with small populations'' after 
     ``governments'';
       (12) by redesignating subsections (p) through (s) as 
     subsections (q) through (t), respectively;
       (13) by inserting after subsection (o) the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(p) Outreach to Local Governments.--The Secretary, acting 
     through the Director, shall implement an outreach plan to 
     inform local governments, including those in rural areas or 
     with small populations, about no-cost cybersecurity service 
     offerings available from the Agency.'';
       (14) in subsection (r), as so redesignated--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(A)--
       (i) in clause (i), by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (ii) in clause (ii)--

       (I) by striking ``information systems owned'' and inserting 
     ``information systems or operational technology systems, 
     including either or both of such systems using artificial 
     intelligence, maintained, owned,''; and
       (II) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and

       (iii) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) assuming the costs associated with continuing the 
     programs specified in the Cybersecurity Plan by including 
     such programs in State and local government budgets upon full 
     expenditure of grant funds by the eligible entity.'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(E)(ii), by striking ``information 
     systems owned'' and inserting ``information systems or 
     operational technology systems, including either or both of 
     such systems using artificial intelligence, maintained, 
     owned''; and
       (C) by amending paragraph (6) to read as follows:
       ``(6) GAO review.--Not later than three years after the 
     date of the enactment of this paragraph and every three years 
     thereafter until the termination of the State and Local 
     Cybersecurity Grant Program, the Comptroller General of the 
     United States shall conduct a review of the Program, 
     including relating to the following:
       ``(A) The grant selection process of the Secretary.
       ``(B) A sample of grants awarded under this section.
       ``(C) A review of artificial intelligence adoption across 
     the sample of grants reviewed.'';
       (15) in subsection (s), as so redesignated, by amending 
     paragraph (1) to read as follows:
       ``(1) In general.--The activities under this section are 
     subject to the availability of appropriations.''; and
       (16) in subsection (t), as so redesignated, in paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``2025'' and inserting ``2033''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Garbarino) and the gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Hernandez) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. GARBARINO. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 5078.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GARBARINO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 5078, the Protecting 
Information by Local Leaders for Agency Resilience Act, also known as 
the PILLAR Act.
  Madam Speaker, I first thank Congressman Ogles for his leadership in 
bringing forward this bipartisan bill.
  Cybersecurity is often discussed in the context of national systems, 
but the truth is that many of the most disruptive incidents occur in 
our own communities.
  In recent years, local governments across the country have 
experienced attacks that shut down city services, delayed school 
operations, locked police and court records, and forced jurisdictions 
of all sizes to spend significant funds on recovery. These events may 
not always make national headlines, but they have real consequences for 
families, businesses, and public safety.
  Some of these attacks come from criminal ransomware groups, while 
others originate from foreign adversaries that seek to test the 
resilience of American communities. The Committee on Homeland Security 
has monitored these trends closely.
  A recent cyber-threat snapshot shows that the majority of States have 
experienced significant cyber incidents at the local level this year, 
and many of those incidents targeted smaller jurisdictions that have 
limited staff, outdated systems, and fewer resources to defend 
themselves.
  Finally, this bill is the product of bipartisan work. It passed 
through the Committee on Homeland Security with support from Members 
across the political spectrum. I especially thank Representatives 
Swalwell and Evans for their work alongside myself and Congressman 
Ogles to advance this important legislation. That cooperation reflects 
a shared recognition that cybersecurity cannot be approached through a 
partisan lens.
  By passing the PILLAR Act, the House can reaffirm its commitment to 
our State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners. When our 
communities are more secure, our entire Nation is more secure.
  I thank Congressman Ogles, again, for his leadership in bringing 
forward this bipartisan bill.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5078, and I 
reserve the balance of my time
  Mr. HERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5078, which reauthorizes the 
State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program until 2033.
  First established 4 years ago in the bipartisan infrastructure law 
based on legislation authored by Representative Yvette Clarke, the 
State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program has provided $1 billion in 
funding for State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments so that 
they can strengthen their cyber defenses.
  Earlier this year, the Cybersecurity Subcommittee held a hearing to 
evaluate the program and receive testimony from the National League of 
Cities, the National Association of State Chief Information Officers, 
and one of the Nation's top cybersecurity firms. Their assessment was 
clear: The State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program has worked.
  From Connecticut to Kentucky to Utah, the State and Local 
Cybersecurity Grant Program has forged partnerships that have helped 
detect and thwart attacks, built resilience, and stretched dollars 
further.
  From municipal services to our school systems, the services that our 
constituents rely on every day are more secure today than they were 4 
years ago, but our work is not done. Despite the impressive progress 
that State and local governments have made to improve their 
cybersecurity posture, many jurisdictions across the country, 
particularly rural areas, remain unacceptably vulnerable to 
cyberattacks.
  Every day, State and local governments must defend against cyber 
intrusions from transnational criminal gangs and nation-state 
adversaries. The Federal Government has an obligation to leverage its 
resources, expertise, and intelligence to defend our State and local 
governments from these sophisticated threats.
  There are no other circumstances under which we would expect a State 
or local government to defend itself from an attack from a state actor, 
particularly from China, Russia, or Iran. With this essential program's 
authorization set to expire on January 30, enacting a long-term 
reauthorization will help provide stability to the program and, 
importantly, build a case for appropriating more funding for it.
  At a time when the Trump administration has been cutting vital 
cybersecurity resources for State and local governments, such as the 
Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center, it is more 
important than ever that Congress step up to provide more funding for 
State and local cybersecurity.
  Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARBARINO. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Ogles).
  Mr. OGLES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, H.R. 5078, the 
Protecting Information by Local Leaders for Agency Resilience Act, 
known as the PILLAR Act.

[[Page H4688]]

  This legislation is about strengthening the first line of defense in 
our Nation's cybersecurity. While we often focus on Federal networks 
and high-profile national systems, the reality is that many of the 
services Americans depend on every single day are run by State and 
local governments.

  When a resident pays a utility bill online, when a police department 
dispatches an officer, or when a hospital connects to a county network, 
all of those activities rely on State and local systems that are now 
squarely in the sights of foreign adversaries and criminal groups.
  As a former county executive in Tennessee, I saw firsthand how 
limited budgets, aging systems, and staffing constraints can leave 
local governments struggling to keep up with modern cyber threats.
  Many smaller jurisdictions only operate with a handful of IT staff 
and, in some cases, with none at all. Yet, they are expected to defend 
against the same nation-state actors that target major corporations and 
Federal agencies. That is not a fair fight, and it is not a sustainable 
model for national security.
  The State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program at the Department of 
Homeland Security was created to help close that gap by providing 
targeted assistance to those States, territories, and local governments 
so that they can assess the risk, modernize outdated systems, and build 
real cyber resilience.
  The PILLAR Act reauthorizes and strengthens this program so that it 
reflects the threat environment we face today and the technological 
landscape that State and local partners are actually operating in.
  This bill makes several important updates. It ensures that the 
program covers not only traditional information technology systems but 
also operational technology and systems that incorporate artificial 
intelligence. That means that we are recognizing the reality that cyber 
risk now extends to everything from industrial control systems at water 
treatment plants to connected devices at public safety networks to AI-
enabled tools used by local agencies.
  The bill encourages the adoption of basic but powerful best 
practices, such as multifactor authentication and stronger identity and 
access management tools across State and local networks.
  It promotes continuous vulnerability assessment and monitoring so 
that jurisdictions can detect and mitigate threats before those threats 
turn into major incidents. It also emphasizes the importance of good 
cyber hygiene, modern configuration management, and alignment with 
frameworks developed by CISA and the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology.
  Importantly, the PILLAR Act recognizes that not all communities start 
from the same place. It directs outreach and support to rural areas and 
jurisdictions with small populations, which are often the least 
resourced but still operate critical services.
  It encourages partnerships with academic and nonprofit organizations, 
including cybersecurity clinics and other technical assistance 
providers that can help these communities develop and implement their 
cyber plans. This bill also guards against the use of Federal grant 
dollars on technology that introduces additional risk.

                              {time}  1710

  It prohibits the use of funds to purchase software or hardware from 
foreign entities of concern when those products do not align with CISA 
guidance, and it directs grantees to follow secure-by-design 
recommendations so that public money is not spent on tools that 
undermine security.
  We also provide more predictability around cost share requirements so 
that States and local governments can plan over the long term.
  The legislation maintains a strong Federal commitment while 
encouraging jurisdictions to invest in sustaining the improvements they 
make.
  For those that implement multifactor authentication and related 
protections by a certain date, the bill provides additional flexibility 
in the Federal cost share to reward that proactive work.
  This is a bipartisan bill. I am proud to have worked closely with 
Chairman Garbarino and Representatives Swalwell and Evans on this 
critical legislation, and appreciate the support it has received from 
Members on both sides of the aisle.
  We share the same goal, which is to help our communities defend 
themselves against increasingly sophisticated cyber threats and to 
ensure continuity of essential services for the American people.
  Supporting the PILLAR Act is about more than technology. It is about 
public trust. When a local government falls victim to ransomware and 
emergency services are delayed, when a school district loses student 
records, or when basic services are interrupted, citizens lose 
confidence in those institutions.
  This bill helps prevent those outcomes by equipping State and local 
leaders with the resources and tools they need to prepare.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5078 and to stand 
with the State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners who are on the 
front lines of our cyber defense every day.
  Mr. HERNANDEZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5078, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GARBARINO. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, I, again, urge my colleagues to support H.R. 5078, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Garbarino) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5078, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________