[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 194 (Tuesday, November 18, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H4730-H4734]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind all persons in the
gallery that they are here as guests of the House and that any
manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation
of the rules of the House.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, they are here as honored guests of the
House. We are delighted they are here.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel).
Ms. LOIS FRANKEL of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for far too long, the
survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse were failed by a justice system
that minimized their suffering and prosecutors who treated young girls
as if they were criminals. That was wrong.
I am here with my colleagues to promise that we will get to the
bottom of why the Epstein survivors were treated so badly, who made
those decisions, and who they were protecting. There will be no more
secrecy and no more excuses.
Mr. Speaker, we all deserve the truth, and I thank the survivors for
their courage and perseverance. Their voices are being heard.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from the great State of Louisiana (Mr. Johnson), the Speaker
of the United States House of Representatives.
Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for doing
such an extraordinary job on all of this.
Mr. Speaker, for 43 long days, the Democrats held this House and the
entire country hostage. Finally, with the lights back on, this body is
returning to our regular legislative session. We have a lot of work to
do.
My colleagues on this side of the Chamber are ready and eager to get
back to our urgent legislative work we promised the American people we
would do.
Just to name a few of those priorities, we have to continue lowering
the cost of healthcare. We have to bring down prices for American
families. We have to finish the regular appropriations process.
I wish I could say that our first order of business would be to get
to those urgent priorities. However, of course, we are spending time on
the floor about something else. This is something we could have
resolved last week when we brought a unanimous consent to pass this
discharge with the full support of the body.
Mr. Speaker, our friends over here, who are arguing today, stalled
that. They objected to it. They wanted to have this exercise instead.
That is why we say that this is a ``show'' vote. That is what this is.
They are making a show of it, and it really is a shame.
Mr. Speaker, we have some heroic women in the Chamber today. I met
with many of them a while back. They are here in the gallery. They have
come forward. They have shown their faces. They have used their names
to share the unspeakable tragedies that many of them were subjected to,
some of them when they were very young. It is a heroic service to the
country.
They are seeking justice, and justice has been delayed for too long.
The Department of Justice many years ago should have brought these
charges. It took too long to do it.
{time} 1400
Now we are in this process of making sure all the American people get
the information, but we have to do it in the right way.
After 4 years of Democratic control under President Biden, they were
not truthful with us about a lot of things. The Democrats insisted the
border was secure. We knew it wasn't. They insisted that inflation was
transitory. We knew it wouldn't be. They misled the American people
about the obvious mental and physical decline of the previous Commander
in Chief. Now those same Democrats are demanding transparency. Suddenly
transparency is their new word.
Out of nowhere, they have taken a curious concern in the Epstein
investigation, all in the name of transparency.
However, the question has been asked here many times during the
debate on the floor and everybody is questioning why it is that the
Democrats have done this right now. We have to look at the obvious
facts.
The Democrats had all the Epstein files in their possession for 4
long years under the Biden Presidency. The Biden Department of Justice
had these files, and no one on this side, who is breathless today about
the urgency of this release, ever said a word about it. It was the
Democrats who could have urged President Biden's Department of Justice
to go beyond prosecuting just Epstein and Gislaine Maxwell, but they
didn't do it. It is a fair question to ask today: Why now? Why the
sudden urgent interest in Jeffrey Epstein?
We know why. It is because the Democrats were never interested in
transparency or executing justice or protecting the victims of this
unspeakable tragedy before. The simple truth is obvious for everybody
to see. This is a political exercise for Democrats. It pains me to say
it. I wish that was not the truth, but it is, and it is undeniable.
This is as deceitful and dishonest as their pointless stunt was to shut
the government down.
Democrats are using the Epstein tragedy, the unspeakable evils that
this guy committed with his trafficking ring and all of the abuses that
they made these young women go through, they are using that as a
political weapon to try to distract from their failures as a party and
to try their best to try to tie President Trump somehow into this
wretched scandal.
The President had nothing to do with it. He has been very clear. He
has nothing to hide. That is why he endorsed the vote today. I suspect
this vote will be probably unanimous.
Here is the important point that everybody needs to understand: We
have been advocates of maximum transparency, but we have also insisted
that the victims be carefully protected. The Oversight Committee has
been doing extraordinary work. We have got some of the most vigorous
advocates on the Republican and Democrat side on the Oversight
Committee. They have been working in earnest to deliver transparency
for the American people and to do it in a responsible manner.
What do we mean by that?
The bipartisan effort over there is already producing all the results
that the discharge petition seeks and much, much more. Chairman Comer
and all of these advocates over there have been releasing thousands of
documents, for example, from the Epstein estate. By the way, in my
view, that has been the greatest treasure trove of information because
it has yielded for us Epstein's own personal flight logs, his financial
records, his daily calendars, and so much more.
Importantly, none of that was addressed or is addressed in the
legislation that is being voted on today. The estate files wouldn't
even have been encompassed in that. It goes to show that the Oversight
Committee is doing it in the right way.
From the very beginning, we have been insistent that this matter be
handled carefully and with the utmost caution and care for the people
who have been harmed. They should not be made to suffer any longer.
We are talking about real people's lives at stake here and young
victims who don't want to be dragged into this political game who could
get hurt further. However, the Democrats are rushing to release the
thousands of unsubstantiated documents that may be included in this
that may be in the public domain with the passage of this bill.
There are serious deficiencies in the legislation that I have noted
at length,
[[Page H4731]]
and Republicans have to work to address those deficiencies in the
Senate if and when this legislation is advanced.
I stood before the American public today at our press conference, and
I explained in detail the dangers of the discharge petition. We have
posted it at my website, speaker.gov, a summary that the legal counsel,
a small army of lawyers, have put together. I used to be a Federal
Court litigator. Many of my colleagues who have spoken today were. We
understand the dangers of how this was haphazardly drawn up.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a document titled ``How the
Flaws of H.R. 4405 Could Revictimize Epstein's Victims, Create New
Victims, and Damage the Judicial System''.
November 18, 2025.
How the Flaws of H.R. 4405 Could Revictimize Epstein's Victims, Create
New Victims, and Damage the Judicial System
BACKGROUND. On November 12, 2025, a motion to discharge in
relation to H. Res. 581 was filed and assigned to the
Discharge Calendar. Accordingly, the House is poised to
consider H.R. 4405, compelling the Department of Justice
(DOJ) to release its files related to Jeffrey Epstein and
Ghislaine Maxwell. While Republicans fully support
transparency and the release of the names of those who
conspired with and aided Epstein and Maxwell, the bill the
House will consider is flawed.
ANALYSIS. The flaws in H.R. 4405 include the following.
1. Fails to Fully Protect Victim Privacy. While H.R. 4405
permits the Attorney General to withhold ``personally
identifiable information of [Epstein's] victims'' and
``personal and medical files and similar files,'' this
authority is limited to disclosures that ``constitute a
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.''
Protections for Epstein's victims should go further. Congress
should give the Attorney General broader authority to redact
all victim information. This would prevent the release of
information that could be used to unmask victims who have
chosen to remain anonymous. Anything less risks revictimizing
those who were trafficked and exploited. The courts have
recognized this concern. On August 20, 2025, Judge Richard
Berman (SDNY) issued an order denying DOJ's request to
release Epstein grand jury materials, noting ``names and
identifying information [of victims] appear in the subject
materials.'' Judge Berman quoted a letter related to victims'
concerns, which stated: ``[T]ransparency cannot come at the
expense of the very people whom the justice system is sworn
to protect . . .'' and he quoted a letter from a victim, Jane
Doe 2, which stated: ``I beg the court to make sure it is the
upmost [sic] priority that in any sort of release ALL and
EVERY detail that could possibly reveal our identities be
redacted.''
2. Could Create New Victims. H.R. 4405 requires DOJ to
release information, even in cases where DOJ or the FBI has
determined it was false. Congress should avoid mandating this
kind of release. Doing so could ruin the reputations of
innocent persons, such as those who may have known Epstein
but knew nothing of his crimes, or whose names Epstein
exploited and used in order to get close to his intended
victims. Releasing information containing the names of
innocent people would subject the innocents to a guilt by
association, creating a new group of victims who have no
means to clear their names. To avoid this, the Attorney
General should be given additional authority to redact
information the FBI has previously deemed was false or not
credible.
3. Potentially Jeopardizes Grand Jury Secrecy. Rule 6(e) of
the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibits the release
of grand jury materials. An unauthorized release can be
prosecuted as a criminal offense, including obstruction of
justice. This secrecy exists to protect the individual. Grand
juries are not adversarial. There is no opportunity for the
subject of a grand jury inquiry to cross-examine, disprove
testimony, or challenge the evidence. If Congress compels
release of grand jury materials, it raises a risk that the
grand jury process will become politicized in the future.
Imagine how a malicious prosecutor could abuse and weaponize
the grand jury process by inducing testimony about a
political adversary, testimony the prosecutor knows is false
and which could not be contested, with the hopes a future
Congress would later compel disclosure. H.R. 4405 is
ambiguous as to whether it requires DOJ to release grand jury
materials from the Maxwell and Epstein cases. As such, as
written, the current text of H.R. 4405 creates a conflict of
laws. Congress can clear up any ambiguity by requiring the
Attorney General to redact grand jury materials.
4. Fails to Prohibit Release of Child Sexual Abuse
Materials. H.R. 4405 allows the Attorney General to redact
portions of records that ``depicts or contains child sexual
abuse materials (CSAM) as defined under 18 U.S.C. 2256 . . .
.'' It necessarily follows that the redaction authority is
limited by whatever CSAM definition is found in 18 U.S.C.
2256. Unfortunately, Sec. 2256 does not contain any CSAM
definition, which means that H.R. 4405 bestows no real legal
authority on the Attorney General to redact those materials.
The bill should be amended to clearly prohibit release of any
CSAM.
5. Jeopardizes Future Federal Investigations. H.R. 4405
allows the Attorney General to redact ``portions of records
that . . . would jeopardize an active federal investigation
or ongoing prosecution'' but only if ``narrowly tailored and
temporary.'' This standard ignores the impact disclosure
might have on future investigations. Release of this
information could publicly identify individuals who were
promised confidentiality, such as a whistleblower or
confidential informant, in exchange for agreeing to share
information in the Epstein case. Violating confidentiality
would have a chilling effect, deterring future whistleblowers
and informants. Release could also publicly reveal the
identity of undercover law enforcement officers, preventing
them from working in future operations. In order to properly
protect whistleblowers, informants, and undercover officers,
the Attorney General should be given additional authorities
to redact information related to these types of individuals
(if any), provided they were not complicit in Epstein's
crimes.
6. National Security Concerns. H.R. 4405 requires the
Attorney General to complete the release of information
within 30 days, including to declassify ``classified
information to the maximum extent possible.'' This raises two
concerns. First, it may not be feasible to properly undertake
such an extensive review in such a short period of time.
Second, it ignores the principle that declassification should
rest with the agency that originated the intelligence so as
to protect sources and methods. It is incredibly unwise to
demand that DOJ declassify materials originated by other
agencies. H.R. 4405 should be amended to direct relevant
intelligence agencies to work with the Attorney General to
declassify in a reasonable time frame.
CONCLUSION. Republicans support transparency, especially when
it comes to disclosing the names of those who conspired with
and aided Jeffrey Epstein. Before H.R. 4405 becomes law, each
of the above concerns should be addressed, with particular
attention paid to ensuring the highest protection for
victims.
Mr. JOHNSON of Louisiana. It is dated today.
It summarizes just five or six of the major concerns.
Among them, it fails to fully protect victim privacy. It could create
new categories of victims. It potentially jeopardizes grand jury
secrecy.
It fails to prohibit release of child sexual abuse materials that are
not appropriately defined in the legislation. It jeopardizes future
Federal investigations. Moreover, we have national security concerns
regarding classified information.
We will put this in the Record because we need the legislative Record
to reflect what is the legislative intent behind this vote. I used to
litigate cases. We used to litigate Federal statutes and whether or not
they could survive, and legislative intent is important.
We need to state clearly for the record, and as Speaker of the House,
I am saying to you this legislation that will pass today is flawed, and
it must be amended.
The question is: Why didn't we amend it here before we passed it?
It is because the authors won't allow it.
It is because under the rules of the House under a discharge
petition, they have to agree to consent for the legislation to be
amended, and they are not doing that. Now we rely on our partners in
the other Chamber to get that done, and they need to do that.
The victims deserve our utmost respect. In fact, they should be
saluted for their courage. The young women who have not come forward,
and some of them are middle-aged women who have not come forward, also
deserve our respect, and they deserve to be protected.
Republicans support transparency. We want maximum transparency,
especially when it comes to disclosing the names of anybody who had
anything to do with these evils, anybody who conspired with or aided in
any way Jeffrey Epstein must be brought to justice.
We want the bill to be amended so it doesn't at the same time violate
victim privacy, create new victims, disclose the names of any
whistleblower or informant, cause the release of grand jury materials
or child sexual abuse materials, or undermine our national security. If
and when the Senate takes this up, we will work with our colleagues
over there to make sure that these things are corrected.
I will just close with this simple thought.
We have been at this a while, and it has dragged on for a while, but
it is time for this to come to light.
I expect that this will be a unanimous vote, and it will reflect what
I think every Member in this Chamber--
[[Page H4732]]
and I will say this--now, at least in recent days, every Member of the
Chamber, on the Democrat side, didn't say anything for 4 years, but
they are for maximum transparency now, and so is this side. But we want
to do it in a respectful and careful manner so that we don't subject
innocent people to further harm. That has been the whole thing.
I told all my Members today I will be voting ``yes'' on this, and I
suspect almost everyone will. We will send it to the Senate, and I hope
it is corrected.
Parliamentary Inquiry
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California
(Mr. Gomez) for the purpose of making a parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. GOMEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise to ask a point of parliamentary
inquiry.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Flood). The gentleman may state his
parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. GOMEZ. Is this an appropriate time to point out that the
Republicans named children's savings accounts in their so-called One
Big Beautiful Bill Act after Donald Trump, someone connected to--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has not stated a parliamentary
inquiry. The gentleman will suspend. The gentleman is no longer
recognized.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close. I have no more
speakers on my side, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. May I inquire as to the time remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Ohio has 30 seconds
remaining. The gentleman from Maryland has 6\1/4\ minutes remaining.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I take the opportunity of the Speaker's
presence to respond to some of the things that he said. In the very
presence of the victims and the survivors who have come to join us
today, the Speaker said that now would be the time we should be working
on urgent legislative work.
Mr. Speaker, justice is urgent legislative work. The truth is urgent
legislative work.
The Speaker says: Why now? Why now?
Mr. Speaker, you were the one who refused to swear in Adelita
Grijalva for 50 days. We would have done it 50 days ago, but she
provided the 218th signature on the discharge petition.
So why now?
It was because of your dilatory tactics, your delay, your
postponement of it.
Now the gentleman says that there are not sufficient protections.
There are protections in the bill for the victims to make sure that
their names will be redacted. Yet, we hear even the Speaker of the
House of Representatives openly inviting the U.S. Senate to start
finger painting on this bill which we have waited more than 5 months to
bring to the floor.
The Senate should pass the bill exactly as it is written. The
President should sign it exactly as he said he would when he finally
changed his mind, and the Epstein file must be released. Moreover, if
the President is serious about what he is saying, he has got the power
to release the Epstein file right now. Nobody is stopping him. It is
within his possession. It is within his control. He can release the
whole thing, and he can redact the names of the victims and others who
are innocent in this process.
Mr. Speaker, Speaker Johnson said that these are unspeakable evils.
However, because of the bravery and the invincible courage of the women
who joined us today, they are no longer unspeakable.
{time} 1410
They are spoken. They are articulated. The cat is out of the bag. We
know what has been going on for decades. It has been a double standard
of justice going all the way back to Alex Acosta, who got later
rewarded with a Cabinet appointment in the Trump administration.
Alex Acosta had a 60-count Federal indictment ready to go against all
kinds of people for an interstate sex trafficking conspiracy, with
solicitation, child sex abuse, all of it. He traded that 60-count
Federal indictment for 1 count in State court.
Jeffrey Epstein ended up getting the sweetest of sweetheart deals
ever on the plea bargain front. He was free from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. to do
whatever he wanted in continuing to perpetrate his crimes and run his
conspiracy. Then he would come and would watch TV and spend the night
in jail. It was over in about a year. This was after the rape and
sexual abuse of hundreds and hundreds of girls. He kept going, and he
kept at it.
We want the whole truth to come out.
This is the United States of America. Even the British monarchy
wouldn't put up with this. How about the American democracy? How about
we say: No way. We are not going to allow this coverup to go on for 1
day more.
I am glad the President changed his mind after pulling out all the
stops to try to get one of our Republican colleagues to change their
mind, to remove their name from the discharge petition. He gave up.
I want to salute the gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. Boebert) for
having the courage to stand her ground in the Situation Room in the
White House and say, no, she wasn't going to be bullied.
I am glad the President changed his mind, but let's be clear: Mr.
President, you have the power today to release the entire file. That is
what you called for. That is what Pam Bondi called for. That is what
Kash Patel called for. We don't need anybody calling for the Senate to
slow things down for more weeks and more months.
The American people have had it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their
comments to the Chair and not to their colleagues.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Nehls).
Mr. NEHLS. Mr. Speaker, the Democratic Party, with help from the
dishonest media, used the Epstein files not to seek justice for the
victims but to smear President Trump, and it is sickening, quite
sickening.
The Democrats have used the Epstein files to distract the American
people from the wins President Trump and his administration have
delivered for the American people for the last 11 months.
I am proud to work with my Republican colleagues on the House
Oversight Committee, in coordination with the Justice Department. Mr.
Speaker, 65,000 pages of documents related to Epstein have been
released.
What have my Democrat colleagues done? They have selectively leaked
and altered documents to mislead the American people.
As President Trump has stated, we have nothing to hide, nothing to
hide here. I am voting to release the files so that we can move on from
this smear campaign the Democrats have manufactured. God bless Donald
J. Trump.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maryland has 2 minutes
remaining.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I thank all of America for tuning in to this. I thank Representatives
Massie, Khanna, and Greene and all of those who have insisted upon
bringing the truth forward and a reckoning with the reality of one of
the worst international child sex trafficking rings ever to exist in
the United States and the coverup attendant to it.
We have the opportunity today to do justice for the victims, for the
survivors who have come forward to say that the voice of the victims
and the survivors must be put at the very center of our deliberations,
not shunted off to the side, not submerged, not subordinated, but put
at the very center. We must hear from the people who themselves were
victimized by this nightmare.
Now, our colleagues across the aisle seem to want to make this into
some sort of partisan contest. I haven't heard so much talk about the
Democrats since the Democratic National Convention. All that we have
done here is to say we want to bring the truth forward, along with a
bipartisan group. We don't want the Senate monkeying around with this
in order to slow things down. We want it passed in the Senate. We want
it signed.
[[Page H4733]]
Before that, if the President is true to his word, and he wants to
see all of this come to light, he can release it now instead of
fighting, kicking and screaming every step along the way. I am glad he
has changed his mind, and I hope he maintains the momentum he has to
stick with the vast majority of the American people who want to see
that the truth is done here. While he is at it, the administration
could reconsider their terrible policies gutting Federal offices and
programs designed to combat violence against women.
The DOJ terminated hundreds of grants to police departments,
defunding the police when it comes to investigating violent sex crimes
and to support victims. His DOGE destroyed programs to combat
international human trafficking rings. Let's get back on the side of
the women.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, Speaker Johnson said it right: Why now after
4 years of doing nothing? It is because going after President Trump is
an obsession with these guys.
The best example is that John Brennan testified in front of our
committee under oath and said he was not involved with the dossier. The
only problem is, Tulsi Gabbard declassified a report, released that
report, and it said exactly the opposite. She related a story in there
where a CIA official went up to Mr. Brennan and said: We shouldn't
include this in the report. John Brennan's response was: Yeah, but
doesn't it ring true? Forget the facts. Forget the truth. Go after
Trump. Put it in. The same dynamic is at work here.
We are all for protecting innocent victims. We are all for exposing
the bad guys who did bad things, but this is an obsession with the
left. For 10 years, they have been going after President Trump.
Vote ``yes'' to make sure the bad guys are held accountable. We all
want to do that. Speaker Johnson is right. I think it is going to be
unanimous, but understand what they are doing because they had 4 years
and didn't do a darn thing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 4405.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
Announcement By the Speaker Pro Tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-
minute vote on the motion to suspend the rules will be followed by 5-
minutes votes on:
Ordering the previous question on House Resolution 879;
Adoption of House Resolution 879, if ordered; and
Adoption of H. Res. 878.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 427,
noes 1, not voting 5, as follows:
[Roll No. 289]
AYES--427
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Alford
Allen
Amo
Amodei (NV)
Ansari
Arrington
Auchincloss
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Balint
Barr
Barragan
Barrett
Baumgartner
Bean (FL)
Beatty
Begich
Bell
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Bice
Biggs (AZ)
Biggs (SC)
Bilirakis
Bishop
Boebert
Bonamici
Bost
Boyle (PA)
Brecheen
Bresnahan
Brown
Brownley
Buchanan
Budzinski
Burchett
Burlison
Bynum
Calvert
Cammack
Carbajal
Carey
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Carter (TX)
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Ciscomani
Cisneros
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Cline
Cloud
Clyburn
Clyde
Cohen
Cole
Collins
Comer
Conaway
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crane
Crank
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
DesJarlais
Dexter
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Donalds
Downing
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Elfreth
Ellzey
Emmer
Escobar
Espaillat
Estes
Evans (CO)
Evans (PA)
Ezell
Fallon
Fedorchak
Feenstra
Fields
Figures
Fine
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Flood
Fong
Foster
Foushee
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, Scott
Friedman
Frost
Fry
Fulcher
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gill (TX)
Gillen
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Goldman (TX)
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, V.
Gooden
Goodlander
Gosar
Gottheimer
Graves
Gray
Green, Al (TX)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Hamadeh (AZ)
Harder (CA)
Haridopolos
Harrigan
Harris (MD)
Harris (NC)
Harshbarger
Hayes
Hern (OK)
Hill (AR)
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houchin
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Hunt
Hurd (CO)
Issa
Ivey
Jack
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (TX)
Jacobs
James
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (TX)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kean
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kennedy (NY)
Kennedy (UT)
Khanna
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley (CA)
Kim
Knott
Krishnamoorthi
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Landsman
Langworthy
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latimer
Latta
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Letlow
Levin
Liccardo
Lieu
Lofgren
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luna
Luttrell
Lynch
Mace
Mackenzie
Magaziner
Malliotakis
Maloy
Mann
Mannion
Massie
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McBride
McCaul
McClain
McClain Delaney
McClellan
McClintock
McCollum
McCormick
McDonald Rivet
McDowell
McGarvey
McGovern
McGuire
McIver
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Messmer
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Min
Moolenaar
Moore (AL)
Moore (NC)
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Moore (WV)
Moran
Morelle
Morrison
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Murphy
Nadler
Neal
Neguse
Nehls
Newhouse
Norcross
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Ogles
Olszewski
Omar
Onder
Owens
Pallone
Palmer
Panetta
Pappas
Patronis
Pelosi
Perez
Perry
Peters
Pettersen
Pfluger
Pingree
Pocan
Pou
Pressley
Quigley
Ramirez
Randall
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Riley (NY)
Rivas
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Ross
Rouzer
Roy
Ruiz
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Salinas
Sanchez
Scalise
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schmidt
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Self
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Shreve
Simon
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Sorensen
Soto
Spartz
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stevens
Strickland
Strong
Stutzman
Subramanyam
Suozzi
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Taylor
Tenney
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Tran
Turner (OH)
Underwood
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Vindman
Wagner
Walberg
Walkinshaw
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Westerman
Whitesides
Wied
Williams (GA)
Williams (TX)
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Yakym
Zinke
NOES--1
Higgins (LA)
NOT VOTING--5
Beyer
Casar
Rulli
Sherrill
Womack
{time} 1443
Messrs. JACKSON of Texas and DAVIS of Illinois changed their vote
from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and
the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
[[Page H4734]]
____________________