[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5293-5297]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1304, SELF-INSURANCE PROTECTION ACT

  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 241 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 241

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1304) to 
     amend the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 
     the Public Health Service Act, and the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 to exclude from the definition of health insurance 
     coverage certain medical stop-loss insurance obtained by 
     certain plan sponsors of group health plans. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce 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 Education and the 
     Workforce; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 
     instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Alabama is recognized for 
1 hour.
  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, in 2010, then-President Obama said: ``If you 
like your health insurance plan, you can keep it.''
  Unfortunately, at least 4.7 million Americans now know that was 
simply not true. ObamaCare was a takeover of the American healthcare 
system. The law's mandates have been burdensome, destroying 300,000 
small-business jobs and forcing an estimated 10,000 small businesses to 
close. Premiums are skyrocketing, and choices are dwindling.
  House Resolution 241 provides for the consideration of H.R. 1304, the 
Self-Insurance Protection Act, an important part of the Republican 
effort to repair the damage ObamaCare has done to insurance markets. 
More than 150 million Americans--62 percent of workers--receive their 
health insurance from their employer. In fact, almost all firms with at 
least 200 or more employees offer health benefits, and just over half 
of smaller firms with 3 to 199 employees offer health insurance.
  Overwhelmingly, Americans and their employers like this system of 
employer-sponsored health care; and for many years, employer health 
plans have been successfully regulated by the Employee Retirement 
Income Security Act, or ERISA.

                              {time}  1315

  Typically, small and large employers offer healthcare coverage to 
employees either in self-funded arrangements or purchase fully insured 
plans from an insurer.
  Under self-insurance plans, employers cover the costs of their 
employees' medical expenses. Employers can either process claims in-
house or work with a third-party administrator to oversee and implement 
the plans.
  ERISA regulates both fully insured and self-insured plans, but only 
self-insured plans are exempt from the patchwork of mandates imposed 
under State insurance law. Furthermore, employer-sponsored self-insured 
plans are not subject to the same requirements under ObamaCare, as are 
fully insured plans.
  Thus, self-insurance plans are desirable and successful because they 
are free from many government restrictions and regulations and allow 
employers to tailor their plans to meet the unique needs of their 
employees and to innovate.
  For example, these plans do not require employees to purchase 
government-mandated coverage options that their employees do not want 
or need. This helps lower costs for working families while ensuring 
access to high-quality health care.
  In hearings before the Education and the Workforce Committee, on 
which I sit, we heard testimony that today self-insurance is often the 
only way employers can afford coverage, thanks to the burdens of 
ObamaCare.
  Mr. Speaker, in Alabama, we like to say: if it ain't broke, don't fix 
it. Prior to ObamaCare, there were problems in our Nation's healthcare 
system, but the successful model of employer self-insurance wasn't one 
of them. Today, self-insurance remains perhaps the best way for 
employers to provide health care to their workers.
  Unfortunately, the prior administration seemed intent on disrupting 
this successful healthcare model. Rather than leave self-insurance 
plans alone, they repeatedly explored ways to impose new regulations 
that would negatively impact self-insurance. Specifically, the Obama 
administration wanted to disrupt the model by regulating stop-loss 
insurance and treating it as if it were health insurance.
  Employers who self-insure often purchase stop-loss insurance to cover 
large medical claims and to protect against the financial risks such 
claims can pose. Despite decades of Federal regulation on employer 
health plans under ERISA, stop-loss insurance has never been regulated 
by the Federal Government. That is because stop-loss insurance is 
actually a financial risk management tool designed to protect employers 
from catastrophic claim expenses. Remarkably, in a regulatory grab, the 
Obama administration tried to reclassify it as ``group health 
insurance.''
  Mr. Speaker, if the last 7 years have taught us anything, it is that 
more Federal control over health insurance does not make health care 
more affordable for the American people. Stop-loss insurance is not 
health insurance, and it should not be regulated like it is.
  The Self-Insurance Protection Act simply updates the law to make 
clear that Federal bureaucrats cannot redefine stop-loss insurance as 
group health insurance. This is about reaffirming longstanding policies 
and ensuring workers continue to have access to a health insurance 
model that is proven to lower costs and provide flexibility to 
consumers.
  This bill will provide workers and employers alike with the 
regulatory certainty that they have desperately wanted and needed. They 
shouldn't have to worry about unelected Federal bureaucrats stepping in 
and destroying their healthcare system.
  To put it simply, this bill is necessary in order to prevent future 
bureaucratic overreach that would destroy the self-insurance model that 
has been so successful for so many working families.
  I also think this bill is an area where we should have some 
bipartisan cooperation. It passed out of the Education and the 
Workforce Committee earlier this year on a voice vote, and I hope it 
earns bipartisan support here in the full House.
  As we continue our efforts to increase choices, lower costs, and 
provide better healthcare options for working families, let us not 
forget to shore up and protect the health insurance programs that are 
actually working and getting the job done.

[[Page 5294]]

  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 241 and 
the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I thank the gentleman for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for 
debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to debate a rule for a piece of legislation 
that many on this side of the aisle do not necessarily have a serious 
issue with. The attempt here today is to ensure that a thing that is 
already happening continues to happen.
  I suppose that, the next time we meet, we will take up a bill that 
declares that the Moon is not the Sun. Doing so is a complete waste of 
time, but that does not seem to necessarily be dispositive when 
deciding whether we should legislate on an issue these days.
  Look, I get it. My friends across the aisle took one on the chin the 
other week when their Affordable Care Act repeal bill--a bill they 
spent 17 days working on, even though they had 7 long years to prepare 
for it--went down in flames in a most public and spectacular fashion, 
and now they need some time to dust themselves off and become 
reoriented.
  The problem is, while they are doing that, while they are recovering 
from the miserable failure that was their attempt to strip 24 million 
Americans of their health care, they are burning valuable time--time 
that should be used to tackle more pressing issues like addressing the 
debt ceiling and fixing our crumbling infrastructure.
  Let me also take this opportunity to remind my Republican colleagues 
that, while we spend our time here today debating these filler bills, 
there are only 7 legislative days, including today, remaining before 
the government runs out of funding. But are we tackling any of these 
importance issues or ensuring the government remains open? No.
  Instead, we have before us a bill that addresses an issue that is not 
an issue. On top of that, this legislation was actually supposed to be 
the third bucket of their three-bucket strategy to end health care for 
millions of Americans.
  We saw how sturdy the first bucket was a couple of weeks ago. In 
fact, the bucket we are talking about today was actually referred to as 
the ``sucker's bucket'' by Senator Cruz. That is not exactly a glowing 
endorsement.
  Indeed, some, like Senator Cotton, have referred to all this bucket 
talk as simply a bunch of political spin. Whatever it is, it is 
certainly a bucket that has a hole in it.
  In all of the uncertainty facing my Republican friends, one thing 
becomes crystal clear: they have no plan whatsoever to help working 
Americans achieve the American Dream. They are adrift, in general, and 
most particularly when it comes to health care.
  What do they really want? At first, it was repeal, then it was repeal 
and replace, then it was repeal and delay, followed finally by access 
to coverage, and would you believe another one: patient-centered.
  That is repeal, repeal and replace, repeal and delay, access to 
coverage, and patient-centered. We still don't have a plan. Then it 
turned toward a three-bucket strategy that makes little to any sense, 
let alone to the American people but even to powerful elected leaders 
in the Republican Party.
  At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, do you know what all this talk 
was? Exactly what Senator Cotton said: nothing but political spin.
  My fear is that it will all come down to whatever it takes to win in 
the eyes of the other side of the aisle, regardless of the consequences 
to the American people.
  While we were told there was no plan B, we now hear there is a plan 
B. Donald John Trump ``doesn't lose,'' and doesn't like to lose. So I 
guess they are going to pass something, even if it is just this bill 
that does absolutely nothing, just so our Republican friends can say 
they did something. I am sure Donald John Trump will tweet about this 
great victory.
  Mr. Speaker, Republicans must end their secretive plan B option and 
embrace the opportunity to do what is right, which is to pursue a path 
that strengthens and builds upon the strong foundation that has been 
set by the Affordable Care Act.
  Democrats stand ready to work with my friends in the Republican Party 
on this task to continue to provide affordable coverage to millions of 
American citizens.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Florida said that the Moon is not the 
Sun. Well, stop-loss insurance is not health insurance, but the Obama 
administration tried to make it so. Because they tried to make it so, 
we need to put into statutory law what I think we all agree on both 
sides of the aisle not only is the law but should be the law so that 
there is no question about it in the future. It is unfortunate we have 
to do that, but, because of some of the actions of the prior 
administration, it is necessary.
  He talked about the strong foundation of the ACA, ObamaCare. That 
foundation is crumbling beneath the program. We now have more insurers 
jumping out of exchanges. My home State of Alabama is down to one 
carrier on the exchange. Soon enough, we may find that, in Alabama, 
like some other States, there are no carriers. This isn't a foundation. 
It is a foundation made of sand--and the sand is leaking out. Something 
has to be done.
  Today's bill is a step--not the only step--in that direction. I know 
my colleagues on the other side of the aisle agree with what we are 
doing here in substance, and I wish we would just come together and get 
this bill done so that we can assure that the self-insured smaller 
employers and larger employers have the protection that they need for 
the working families that participate in their programs.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, yesterday, Donald John Trump signed into law a measure 
that eliminates Americans' internet privacy. With Trump's signature, 
internet service providers will now be able to sell your personal 
information to the highest bidder.
  Mr. Speaker, we stand here ready to fight for the privacy of the 
American people.
  If we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer an amendment 
to the rule to bring up legislation which would reinstate the Federal 
Communications Commission's internet privacy rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my 
amendment in the Record, along with 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 Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Nevada (Ms. Rosen), a member of the Armed Services and Science, Space, 
and Technology Committees to discuss our proposal.
  Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, if today's vote on the previous question 
fails, we will have the opportunity to vote on my bill, H.R. 1868, 
Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017, which will reverse last night's 
disastrous action by President Trump when he signed a partisan 
congressional resolution allowing internet providers to sell their 
customers' personal information without their knowledge or consent.
  Before my time in Congress, I started my career as a systems analyst. 
I have firsthand experience writing code, and I can tell you that the 
first thing to protect vulnerable and sensitive data is to make sure it 
is kept private.
  S.J. Res. 34, which the House passed last Tuesday, unraveled those 
vital protections for sensitive information belonging to millions of 
Americans nationwide.

                              {time}  1330

  The resolution negating essential protections for private citizens 
was signed by President Trump last night.

[[Page 5295]]

The October 2016 FCC rule was the only rule that required internet 
service providers to obtain consumers' permission before selling their 
private internet browsing history and other sensitive information.
  I am simply shocked that my colleagues across the aisle would vote 
for a measure that violates American privacy by selling your most 
personal and intimate information, including your email content and 
your app usage, all without your consent. Not only is this wrong and a 
blatant violation of policy, but it jeopardizes Americans' personal 
data and puts them at risk of hacking.
  Repealing the FCC rule with S.J. Res. 34 allows broadband providers 
to turn over your info to the highest bidder or anyone else they want, 
including the government, without a warrant, without ever telling you. 
That is right. I will repeat it. Repealing the FCC rule with S.J. Res. 
34 allows broadband providers to turn over your private information to 
the highest bidder or anyone else they want, including the government, 
without a warrant, without ever telling you.
  Even worse, S.J. Res. 34 also tells providers they no longer have to 
use reasonable measures to protect consumers' personal information. 
This is absolutely unacceptable. We are living in a time where identity 
theft and internet hacking has become the new norm. We must provide 
consumers with these protections. No American wants their most personal 
information to be up for grabs.
  Eliminating this rule prevents the FCC from publishing rules that are 
substantially the same absent additional legislation, establishing a 
very dangerous precedent for private citizens. Americans should have 
the right to decide how their internet providers use their personal 
information.
  What this bill does, Mr. Speaker, is simple. This bill makes clear 
that the American people's browser histories are not for sale. The 
American people's health information: not for sale. The American 
people's financial information: not for sale. And the American people's 
location data: not for sale.
  It is a simple concept and one I hope my colleagues across the aisle 
will recognize and support. The American people don't want the 
legislation that was signed last night. In overwhelming numbers, they 
are calling Congress and letting it be known that they want to keep 
their private information private.
  I am proud to stand up for the American people by introducing the 
Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017, which reverses this misguided 
resolution and says, once and for all, that ISPs cannot sell customers' 
personal information without their knowledge, without their permission. 
This bill says that your privacy is not for sale, period.
  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to close.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  It is time for my friends on the other side of the aisle to end their 
self-proclaimed political spin designed to bewilder and confuse average 
Americans, making them believe that their Republican representatives 
are fighting for the future of their health care and the health care of 
their families, when what they are really doing is fighting for 
powerful corporate interests.
  Now is the time for us to face facts and accept truths.
  Fact: House Republicans made an attempt to replace the Affordable 
Care Act with a bill that caused such an outcry from their own 
constituents that they were forced to pull it.
  Truth: There are serious issues in health care that need to be 
addressed for the betterment of all Americans, and it is going to take 
the effort of both parties in both the House and the Senate working 
together to strengthen our healthcare system.
  No more smokescreens, no more political rhetoric, only collaborative 
discourse using only the well-being of the American people as our 
compass. It is this approach that will steer us back onto course for 
the betterment of this and future generations. Unfortunately, this bill 
does not further that effort.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and underlying measure, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BYRNE. I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Florida for his remarks. I 
completely agree with him. Both parties should be working together to 
make sure that we provide what we can reasonably for the health care of 
the people of America, and we should be collaborating, not just in this 
House across the aisle but in the Senate as well. I think it is a good 
place to start right here with this bill because we really don't have a 
substantive disagreement about this bill.
  Both sides understand that stop-loss insurance is not health 
insurance. It is just the Obama administration tried to turn it into 
that. This bill would stop that and bring the certainty we need back to 
these self-insured plans that mainly small employers have and make sure 
that we have in place for working families across America a system that 
is working for them and maintain that.
  I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will join 
with us, will collaborate with us, and that our colleagues in the other 
House, in the Senate, will do as well and pass this legislation because 
it truly is bipartisan in substance and, I hope today, in the vote.
  Mr. Speaker, I again urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 
241 and the underlying bill.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings is as follows:

          An Amendment to H. Res. 241 Offered by Mr. Hastings

       At the end of the resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec. 2. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the 
     Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare 
     the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on 
     the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 
     1868) to provide that providers of broadband Internet access 
     service shall be subject to the privacy rules adopted by the 
     Federal Communications Commission on October 27, 2016. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. 
     General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not 
     exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair 
     and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce. After general debate the bill shall be considered 
     for amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order 
     against provisions in the bill are waived. At the conclusion 
     of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee 
     shall rise and report the bill to the House with such 
     amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question 
     shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
     thereto to final passage without intervening motion except 
     one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the 
     Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to 
     no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day 
     the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of 
     business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the 
     Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill.
       Sec. 3. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 1868.
                                 ______
                                 

        The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

       This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous 
     question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. 
     A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote 
     against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow 
     the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a 
     vote about what the House should be debating.
       Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of 
     Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the 
     previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or 
     control the consideration of the subject before the House 
     being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous 
     question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the 
     subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling 
     of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the 
     House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes 
     the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to 
     offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the 
     majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated 
     the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to 
     a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to 
     recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: 
     ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman 
     from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to 
     yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first 
     recognition.''
       The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous 
     question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an 
     immediate

[[Page 5296]]

     vote on adopting the resolution. . . . [and] has no 
     substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' 
     But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the 
     Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in 
     the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, 
     page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous 
     question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally 
     not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member 
     controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of 
     offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by 
     voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the 
     motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the 
     time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering 
     the previous question. That Member, because he then controls 
     the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for 
     the purpose of amendment.''
       In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. House of 
     Representatives, the subchapter titled ``Amending Special 
     Rules'' states: ``a refusal to order the previous question on 
     such a rule [a special rule reported from the Committee on 
     Rules] opens the resolution to amendment and further 
     debate.'' (Chapter 21, section 21.2) Section 21.3 continues: 
     ``Upon rejection of the motion for the previous question on a 
     resolution reported from the Committee on Rules, control 
     shifts to the Member leading the opposition to the previous 
     question, who may offer a proper amendment or motion and who 
     controls the time for debate thereon.''
       Clearly, the vote on the previous question on a rule does 
     have substantive policy implications. It is one of the only 
     available tools for those who oppose the Republican 
     majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the 
     opportunity to offer an alternative plan.

  Mr. BYRNE. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. 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. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be 
followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of the resolution, if ordered; 
ordering the previous question on House Resolution 240; and adoption of 
House Resolution 240, if ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 232, 
nays 188, not voting 9, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 211]

                               YEAS--232

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--188

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--9

     Bridenstine
     Davis, Danny
     Gallagher
     Grothman
     McEachin
     Murphy (FL)
     Rogers (AL)
     Slaughter
     Visclosky

                              {time}  1403

  Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania, Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire, Messrs. RUSH, 
JOHNSON of Georgia, and Ms. CLARKE of New York changed their vote from 
``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. ISSA changed his 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. Rogers of Kentucky). 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. HASTINGS. 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 234, 
noes 184, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 212]

                               AYES--234

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz

[[Page 5297]]


     Cheney
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comer
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gottheimer
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins (LA)
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Knight
     Kustoff (TN)
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lewis (MN)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (PA)
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney, Francis
     Rooney, Thomas J.
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce (CA)
     Russell
     Rutherford
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smucker
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--184

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capuano
     Carbajal
     Cardenas
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Correa
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crist
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty
     Evans
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hanabusa
     Hastings
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Huffman
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kihuen
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rosen
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Bridenstine
     Davis, Danny
     Gallagher
     Grothman
     Hoyer
     McEachin
     Murphy (FL)
     Pelosi
     Rogers (AL)
     Slaughter
     Visclosky


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1413

  Mr. PETERS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  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.

                          ____________________