[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 163 (2017), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9170-9176]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2581, VERIFY FIRST ACT, AND 
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF S. 1094, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 
        ACCOUNTABILITY AND WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION ACT OF 2017

  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 378 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 378

       Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be 
     in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2581) to 
     amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require the 
     provision of social security numbers as a condition of 
     receiving the health insurance premium tax credit. All points 
     of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
     Committee on Ways and Means now printed in the bill shall be 
     considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be 
     considered as read. All points of order against provisions in 
     the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall 
     be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any 
     further amendment thereto, to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority 
     member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion 
     to recommit with or without instructions.
       Sec. 2.  Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
     order to consider in the House the bill (S. 1094) to amend 
     title 38, United States Code, to improve the accountability 
     of employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for 
     other purposes. All points of order against consideration of 
     the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against provisions in the bill are 
     waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate 
     equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs; and 
     (2) one motion to commit.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to my friend, 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. BUCK. 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 Colorado?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the 
underlying legislation. This rule provides for debate on the final 
negotiated bill between the House and the Senate. This process began 
last Congress and resulted in the House passing H.R. 1259 in March of 
this year.
  The Senate introduced and passed the version of the bill we have 
before us today by voice vote. It mirrors the reforms contained in 
Chairman Roe's bill that the House has already passed by a bipartisan 
vote.
  Mr. Speaker, we often talk about veterans in this country: We thank 
them for their sacrifice; we applaud them at sporting events; we tell 
ourselves that we must take care of them, must repay them for the 
service to our Nation. But in the past few years, we have discovered 
that America's care for our veterans has been wholly inadequate. The 
Department of Veterans Affairs has failed them.
  Shameful misconduct at the VA has been rampant, and it has hurt our 
veterans:
  In 2014, we learned that the Phoenix VA concealed extremely long wait 
lines for patients and that up to 40 vets may have died while waiting 
for care at the facility;
  Just last year, we discovered that a VA Hospital in Colorado Springs 
also falsified wait time records. The majority of patients at that 
hospital faced wait times over 30 days, and 28 patients had an average 
wait time of 76 days. One veteran is even thought to have committed 
suicide because he wasn't referred for mental healthcare, even though 
he had been deemed at risk for suicide.
  That is why Congress needs to act. S. 1094, the Department of 
Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act of 
2017, allows the Secretary of the VA to hold all employees at the 
agency accountable for their conduct.
  We desperately need this legislation, not because all the employees 
at the VA have problems. Quite the opposite. Most VA employees show up 
to work every day because they are passionate about serving our 
Nation's veterans. But there are bad apples, people who put our 
veterans in danger. These people must be held accountable, and, 
frankly, many of them must be fired.
  This bill empowers the Secretary to reprimand, suspend, or remove VA 
employees who have engaged in misconduct. It also permits the Secretary 
to recoup bonuses if an employee performed poorly or conducted 
themselves inappropriately and to recoup relocation expenses for fraud, 
waste, or malfeasance.
  The bill also bolsters protection for whistleblowers, creating an 
office within the VA devoted to protecting those who expose wrongdoing. 
Supervisors will be taught how to protect whistleblowers and will be 
held accountable for how well they do.
  And the bill requires reporting to Congress on the performance of 
senior executives at the VA and on the outcomes of disciplinary actions 
at the agency.
  You may be wondering why Congress has taken such an in-depth interest 
in an executive branch agency, and I will tell you why. It is our job.
  The legislative branch was designed to oversee the executive branch. 
We appropriate the funds used to pay the salaries of everyone working 
at the VA. These funds come from the taxpayer. For the sake of the 
taxpayer, we must ensure that the VA is serving its purpose.
  But this bill also empowers the Secretary of the VA, allowing him or 
her to take immediate action to protect veterans. We can't wait for 
long appeals processes when a bad employee on the front lines of a VA 
hospital is harming our veterans.
  This legislation should not be controversial. Both Democrats and 
Republicans want the best for our veterans. This legislation, the 
legislation we are discussing today, gives the VA Secretary and 
Congress more tools to hold employees accountable because if we are 
holding employees accountable, then we are protecting our veterans from 
abuse.
  This bill is one small way to say thank you to those men and women 
who have served our country. We can never adequately repay them, but we 
can do our best to provide them with sufficient medical care.
  I urge you to support this important legislation, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Colorado, for 
yielding me the necessary and customary 30 minutes for debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I am here today to debate the rule for consideration of 
two separate pieces of legislation: S. 1094, the Department of Veterans 
Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act; and H.R. 2581, 
the Verify First Act.
  I begin with S. 1094, legislation aimed at bringing enhanced 
accountability at the Department of Veterans Affairs and improving the 
care we provide to our Nation's veterans. Among other things, this bill 
codifies in law the Office of Accountability and Whistleblower 
Protection at the VA and streamlines the process to demote, remove, or 
suspend VA employees if evidence proves they engaged in misconduct or 
poor performance.

[[Page 9171]]

  Mr. Speaker, last night at the Rules Committee, we had the 
opportunity to hear from the chairman and ranking member of the 
Veterans' Affairs Committee about this legislation, Dr. Roe and Mr. 
Walz. They discussed the bipartisan nature in which they have worked on 
this issue, along with the bipartisan work done in the Senate, to craft 
legislation that they hope can achieve strong bipartisan support in 
this body.
  It is because of this display of bipartisanship and cooperation and a 
semblance of regular order that I am dismayed that I must now address 
the process and substance by which we are considering the second bill 
encompassed in this rule, H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act.

                              {time}  1230

  Let me connect the dots for you on how we got to this point, and bear 
with me. The Republican majority's path to take healthcare from 23 
million Americans has been as convoluted as it has been chaotic.
  Mr. Speaker, as I am sure you and my colleagues should remember, 
first, the Republican mantra was repeal. Then it was repeal and 
replace. Then it was repeal and delay, followed by access to coverage, 
and then, patient centered.
  Finally, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle settled on a 
three-bucket strategy. The first bucket of this strategy was the 
Republicans' American Health Care Act. The majority brought their first 
iteration of this bill to the floor after working on it for 17 days, 
and, with no hearings, only to have it go down in flames in the most 
public and spectacular fashion.
  So they went back to the drawing board--not to improve the bill, or 
improve healthcare for the American people, mind you, but to garner 
enough Republican votes for a bill that ultimately had 17 percent 
approval ratings. And they added a manager's amendment to get support, 
then they added another manager's amendment, then another, and another.
  Then with a bill patched together with the wants and wishes of 
powerful healthcare lobbyists and tax breaks for the superwealthy, with 
no CBO score, and with no way for the American people, let alone their 
own Members, to actually know what was in the bill, the majority pushed 
the bill through the House of Representatives.
  What did my Republican friends do after passing this inexplicably bad 
bill? They got on a couple of buses from here at the Capitol and went 
to a rose garden ceremony hosted by President Donald John Trump to 
celebrate upending one-sixth of the American economy and taking away 
healthcare from 23 million people.
  That was certainly the Republicans' most recent mission-accomplished 
moment, and it must have been some celebration because it will be 
another 2 weeks before the majority would actually get around to 
sending their healthcare bill to the Senate, due to the fact that they 
were not sure if it complied with the Senate rules or, more 
specifically, the Byrd rule in the U.S. Senate.
  Then there is the second bucket of this plan, which involves the 
Trump administration rolling back regulations. Should the work 
associated with the second bucket proceed as it has with the other two, 
then I am sure it, too, will be a disaster, benefitting the wealthy at 
the expense of hardworking Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, this brings me to the Republicans' third bucket. 
According to Senator Ted Cruz, this bucket is ``a sucker's bucket.'' 
Indeed, some like Senator Tom Cotton have referred to all of this 
bucket talk as simply a bunch of political spin. Whatever it is, it is 
an empty bucket.
  The most recent bill the Republican majority has decided to dump in 
this sucker's bucket is H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act. Under current 
law, premium assistance tax credits are available for eligible 
individuals and families to subsidize the cost of health insurance. 
Individuals are not eligible for these credits unless they are U.S. 
citizens or are living in the country legally.
  Currently, applicants have 90 days to provide documentation or 
otherwise address any issues with citizenship and immigration status, 
and are presumed eligible to enroll in marketplace coverage. If an 
individual is unable to provide the necessary documentation, coverage 
and financial assistance are terminated.
  This provision ensures that individuals are not left in a position of 
having to wait potentially months to be verified before they can afford 
coverage, and it provides the proper guardrails to terminate assistance 
if an individual is deemed ineligible. There is no evidence to support 
the majority's claim that this process is not working.
  H.R. 2581 would repeal this 90-day verification period, setting up an 
unnecessary barrier for eligible individuals to receive the credits 
they need to afford lifesaving healthcare. Republicans themselves 
acknowledge that the verification process could take months, but, 
nevertheless, they are bringing forth today's bill knowing full well 
that it will make it harder for vulnerable people to access healthcare 
when they need it most.
  It would disproportionately hurt low-income Americans, especially 
naturalized Americans from immigrant families since they can have a 
harder time producing documentation needed to verify their citizenship. 
But don't just take my word for it.
  Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter signed by dozens and 
dozens of national, State, and local civil rights and advocacy groups 
strongly opposing this legislation, such groups as the NAACP, the 
Children's Defense Fund, the National Association of County and City 
Health Officials, the American Friends Service Committee, the 
Association of Asian Pacific Community Health Organizations, the League 
of United Latin American Citizens, the Institute of the Sisters of 
Mercy, and I could go on, and on, and on, but in the interest of time, 
I thank the Speaker for allowing it to be made a part of the Record.

                                                    June 12, 2017.
       Dear Member of Congress: As national, state, and local 
     organizations concerned about immigrant rights or access to 
     affordable health care, we are writing to strongly urge you 
     to VOTE NO on H.R. 2581, the ``Verify First'' Act. This bill 
     is an attack on people's ability to see a doctor and on 
     immigrants and people of color. It is not the ``common 
     sense'' taxpayer protection bill that its supporters would 
     have you believe.
       H.R. 2581 is a dangerous bill that puts up roadblocks for 
     both citizens and immigrants to obtain timely, affordable 
     health insurance. It would strip away provisions that provide 
     for a person to obtain subsidies for enrollment in an 
     Affordable Care Act (or the contemplated American Health Care 
     Act) plan while they work with Department of Health and Human 
     Services to verify their U.S. citizenship or immigration 
     status. The people most impacted are U.S. citizens who were 
     born abroad or naturalized. The bill also affects many 
     immigrants, especially those newly arrived or certain victims 
     of domestic violence and trafficking survivors.
       The fact is that when individuals are not able to 
     immediately verify their citizenship or immigration status on 
     an Affordable Care Act Marketplace, it begins an often months 
     long, strenuous process of sending in documents that must be 
     physically inspected. Health care assisters routinely say 
     these clients are the hardest cases they work on because the 
     process for verifying citizenship and immigration status is a 
     time-consuming exercise in dealing with inefficient 
     government processes.
       Rather than protect American taxpayers, H.R. 2581 would 
     strip from American taxpayers important protections that are 
     needed to overcome deficiencies in federal government 
     databases. Immigrants who are not lawfully present are 
     categorically barred from enrollment in health insurance on 
     the Affordable Care Act marketplaces, and for the subsidies 
     that make that insurance affordable. Moreover, safeguards 
     protecting taxpayers are already built into the ACA; 
     individuals whose citizenship or immigration status cannot be 
     verified already are required to pay back all of their 
     subsidies when they file their taxes and ``reconcile'' their 
     premium tax credits.
       Supporters of this bill cite a sloppy Senate Homeland 
     Security and Governmental Affairs Committee report that 
     arrived at a made-up number of supposed ``fraud.'' It's just 
     not true. The committee assumed that every person who lost 
     coverage for failure to verify their citizenship and 
     immigration status was undocumented. In the experience of our 
     organizations and organizations we work with, this is false. 
     These reports describe the first year of the marketplaces, 
     and it is well documented that system outages and 
     understaffing, among other technical problems,

[[Page 9172]]

     contributed to the federal Marketplace's failure to verify 
     consumers' status promptly. The Department of Health and 
     Human Services Inspector General reported in 2014 that a 
     cause of the delay in verification was the agency's lack of 
     prioritization of this issue.
       Despite huge gains since then, problems still persist. The 
     Social Security database holding many citizens' information 
     may not reflect common changes, such as when a person marries 
     and changes their last name, or when someone naturalizes and 
     gains U.S. citizenship. People lose their coverage because 
     they receive notices in languages they cannot read. 
     Immigrants are required to submit documents multiple times, 
     or wait while the Department of Homeland Security finds paper 
     files, a result of deficiencies in their databases affecting 
     groups like asylum applicants and some survivors of domestic 
     violence. These are among the many issues consumers face.
       Congress has already deprived undocumented immigrants from 
     the ability to buy coverage, even at full price, so they can 
     see a doctor when they are sick, but this bill would go a 
     step further to delay or put out of reach affordable health 
     insurance for many citizens and lawfully present immigrants. 
     Our organizations firmly believe that this would be 
     detrimental to the people we represent and to all of our 
     communities as a whole. We have seen that when health 
     insurance is unaffordable, people are effectively prevented 
     from obtaining access to the care they need to be healthy.
       This bill is not just an attack on our health care system, 
     it is also an attack on immigrants and people of color, which 
     our organizations stand firmly against. In his statements 
     when introducing this bill, Rep. Lou Barletta focused the 
     bill as part of his effort to ``stop illegal immigration.'' 
     Rep. Barletta has a long history of anti-immigrant rhetoric, 
     from trying to prevent immigrants from leasing a residence to 
     stating that they should be denied life-saving services in 
     hospital emergency rooms. This bill is simply a vehicle for 
     scapegoating immigrants and people of color and will keep 
     eligible people from accessing health care.
       We the undersigned organizations urge you to vote NO on 
     H.R. 2581 and the continued assault on immigrants and the 
     health of our communities.
           Sincerely,


                                National

       Advocates for Youth; African American Ministers in Action; 
     American Federation of Teachers (AFT); American Friends 
     Service Committee; American Intercession; American Society on 
     Aging; Asian & Pacific Islander American Health Forum; Asian 
     Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC; Asian Pacific Institute 
     on Gender-Based Violence; Asian Pacific Partners for 
     Empowerment, Advocacy & Leadership (APPEAL); Association of 
     Asian Pacific Community Health Organizations (AAPCHO); 
     Autistic Self Advocacy Network; Black Alliance for Just 
     Immigration; Breast Cancer Action; Center for Law and Social 
     Policy (CLASP); Center for Medicare Advocacy, Inc.; Child 
     Welfare League of America; Children's Advocacy Institute; 
     Children's Defense Fund; Church World Service (CWS).
       Coalition on Human Needs; Columbian Center for Advocacy and 
     Outreach; Congregation of Our Lady of Charity of the Good 
     Shepherd, US Provinces; Conscious Talk Radio; Detention Watch 
     Network; Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund; 
     Dominican Sisters; Dominicans of Sinsinawa; Family Equality 
     Council; Farmworker Justice; First Focus Campaign for 
     Children; Food Research & Action Center; Franciscan Sisters 
     of the Poor IJPC; Friends Committee on National Legislation; 
     Generations Inc.; GLMA: Health Professionals Advancing LGBT 
     Equality; Immigrant Legal Resource Center; Indivisible; 
     Institute of the Sisters of Mercy of the Americas; Interfaith 
     Worker Justice.
       Irish Apostolate USA; Jobs With Justice; Justice in Aging; 
     Justice, Peace and Reconciliation Commission, Priests of the 
     Sacred Heart, US Province; Lambda Legal; Leadership Team of 
     the Felician Sisters of North America; League of United Latin 
     American Citizens (LULAC); Medical Mission Sisters; Mi 
     Familia Vota; MomsRising; NAACP; NAPAFASA; National Advocacy 
     Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd; National Asian 
     Pacific American Women's Forum; National Association of 
     County and City Health Officials; National Association of 
     Social Workers; National Black Justice Coalition; National 
     Center for Transgender Equality; National Council of Asian 
     Pacific Americans (NCAPA); National Council of Churches.
       National Council of La Raza (NCLR); National Education 
     Association; National Employment Law Project; National Health 
     Law Program; National Hispanic Medical Association; National 
     Immigrant Justice Center; National Immigration Law Center; 
     National Justice for Our Neighbors; National Latina Institute 
     for Reproductive Health; National Network of Abortion Funds; 
     National Organization for Women; National Women's Health 
     Network; Network for Environmental & Economic Responsibility 
     of United Church of Christ; NETWORK Lobby for Catholic Social 
     Justice; NMAC; OCA--Asian Pacific American Advocates; Our 
     Revolution; Peace and Justice Office of the Congregation of 
     Notre Dame; Physicians for Reproductive Health; PICO 
     National.
       Planned Parenthood Federation of America; Poor People's 
     Economic Human Rights Campaign; Prevention Institute; Project 
     Inform; Racine Dominicans; Raising Women's Voices for the 
     Health Care We Need; Refuge Ministries; Sargent Shriver 
     National Center on Poverty Law; Service Employees 
     International Union; Sisters of Charity; Sisters of Charity 
     of Nazareth; Sisters of Mercy of the Americas--Institute 
     Justice Team; Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC); 
     The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; United 
     Sikhs; United We Dream; Ursuline Sisters of Tildonk, U.S. 
     Province; We Belong Together; API Wellness.


                            State and Local

       Academy of Medical & Public Health Services; Advocates for 
     Children and Youth; AgeOptions; Almost Home, Inc.; Anti-
     Hunger & Nutrition Coalition; Arkansas Advocates for Children 
     and Families; Arlington Partnership for Affordable Housing; 
     Asian Americans Advancing Justice--Los Angeles; Asian 
     Community Alliance--Cincinnati OH; Asian Law Alliance; Asian 
     Services In Action, Inc.; Baltimore Jewish Council; 
     California Health Professional Student Alliance; California 
     Immigrant Policy Center; California Latinas for Reproductive 
     Justice (CLRJ); California OneCare; California Pan-Ethnic 
     Health Network; California Partnership; California Physicians 
     Alliance; CASA.
       Center for Southeast Asians; Chicago Hispanic Health 
     Coalition; Child Care Resources of Rockland; Children Now; 
     Children's Defense Fund--CA; Chinatown Service Center; 
     Chinese-American Planning Council; Coalition for Humane 
     Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); Collaborative Center for Justice; 
     Colorado Center on Law and Policy; Colorado Center on Law and 
     Policy; Columbia Legal Services; Community Health Councils; 
     D.C. Hunger Solutions; DuPage Federation on Human Services 
     Reform; Empower Missouri; Ensuring Opportunity Campaign to 
     End Poverty in Contra Costa; Erie Benedictines for Peace; 
     Esperanza Health Centers; EverThrive Illinois; Farmworker 
     Association of Florida.
       Florida Immigrant Coalition (FLIC); Give for a Smile; 
     Greater Kansas City Coalition to End Homelessness; Having Our 
     Say Coalition; Health Access California; Health Care for 
     All--WA; Health Law Advocates; Healthy House Within A MATCH 
     Coalition; Hmong Ohio of Tomorrow; Hunger Action Los Angeles; 
     IHM Sisters, Immaculata, PA; IL Hunger Coalition; Illinois 
     Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights; Indivisible 
     Mountain Home, Idaho; Interfaith Movement for Human 
     Integrity; IRIS--Integrated Refugee & Immigrant Services; 
     Islamic Civic Engagement Project; Jewish Family & Children's 
     Service; Kansas Appleseed; Kentucky Equal Justice Center; 
     Korean Community Services of Metropolitan NY; La Fe Policy 
     Research and Education Center.
       La Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program; Legal Council for 
     Health Justice; Legal Services of Southern Piedmont; Maine 
     Consumers for Affordable Health Care; Make the Road New York; 
     Maryland CASH Campaign; Maryland Hunger Solutions; 
     Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition 
     (MIRA); Massachusetts Law Reform Institute; Maternal and 
     Child Health Access; Maternity Care Coalition; National 
     Association of Social Workers, CT Chapter; National Tongan 
     American Society; Nationalities Service Center; NC Child; New 
     Mexico Center on Law and Poverty; New York Immigration 
     Coalition; New York Legal Assistance Group; NICOS Chinese 
     Health Coalition; NJ State Industrial Union Council; NOELA 
     Community Health Center; Northern NJ Chapter, National 
     Organization for Women.
       Northwest Health Law Advocates; Northwest Immigrant Rights 
     Project; Office of the Health Care Advocate at Vermont Legal 
     Aid; OneAmerica; Pacific Islander Health Partnership; Pitkin 
     County Human Services; Public Justice Center; Puget Sound 
     Advocates for Retirement Action (PSARA); Rainbow Center; 
     Reformed Church of Highland Park; RESULTS--Santa Fe (NM); 
     Salaam Cleveland; Services, Immigrant Rights, and Education 
     Network (SIREN); Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word, 
     Houston; Sisters of St. Dominic of Blauvelt, NY; Sisters of 
     the Most Precious Blood; Social Justice Committee St. Patrick 
     Church; South Asian Network; Southwest Women's Law Center; 
     St. Francis St Vincent de Paul Society; Tennessee Justice 
     Center; Thai Health And Information Service.
       The Children's Partnership; The Latino Health Insurance 
     Program, Inc.; Turning Points; United Way Bay Area; URI 
     Feinstein Center for a Hunger Free America; Vermont 
     Affordable Housing Coalition; Virginia Poverty Law Center; 
     Voices for Vermont's Children; Voz Hispana Cambia 
     Comunitario; Washington Community Action Network; Washington 
     Healthcare Access Alliance; Washington State Labor Council, 
     AFL-CIO; West Chester Food Cupboard; West Side Campaign 
     Against Hunger; Westlake Chinese Culture Association; 
     Wisconsin Council of Churches; Wisconsin Faith Voices for 
     Justice; Women's Action Movement Washtenaw County, MI; 
     Worksite Wellness LA; Xaverian Brothers; Young Women United.

  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, ``This bill,'' that letter says, ``is an 
attack on

[[Page 9173]]

people's ability to see a doctor and on immigrants and people of 
color.''
  ``H.R. 2581 is a dangerous bill that puts up roadblocks for both 
citizens and immigrants to obtain timely, affordable health 
insurance.''
  If this is what we are in store for with the Republican's third 
bucket, then it is even worse than a sucker's bucket. It is callous, 
and it is cruel, and someone described the Vice Presidency once many 
years ago as a warm bucket of spit.
  As my colleague, Congressman Richard Neal, said last night at the 
Rules Committee, bad process leads to bad product. I agree with Mr. 
Neal, and this bill is a perfect example of his salient insight. The 
provisions in this legislation are contingent upon enactment of the 
American Health Care Act.
  If the American Health Care Act is enacted, this bill would not go 
into effect. That means we are now considering legislation amending a 
bill that we have already sent to the Senate, and that the Senate has 
made clear it has no intention of taking up.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. McCaul), chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.
  Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado 
as well.
  I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act. I 
helped introduce this legislation with my good friend and colleague, 
Mr. Barletta from Pennsylvania, to ensure illegal immigrants are not 
able to use healthcare tax credits to purchase health insurance.
  Under ObamaCare, the Federal Government paid these tax credits up 
front on a temporary basis to people before verifying their immigration 
status. This created a pay-and-chase system where the Federal 
Government would seek repayment only after it found it had paid out 
benefits to an illegal immigrant.
  This bill puts an end to this taxpayer abuse by requiring the Social 
Security Administration, or the Department of Homeland Security, to 
verify the immigration status of every tax credit applicant before the 
Treasury Department issues a credit.
  Texans and hardworking taxpayers around the country already struggle 
to pay for their healthcare. Their hard-earned dollars should not be 
used to foot the bill for those who broke the law to come here. My 
constituents in Texas and American taxpayers deserve better.
  I want to thank Congressman Barletta for his dedication and continued 
leadership on this issue, and, Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to 
join me in supporting this legislation.
  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Raskin).
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  I rise only to express my real disappointment in the way that this 
bill has been brought to the floor. Had the majority not insisted on a 
closed rule, preventing the House from voting on any and all amendments 
to repair and improve S. 1094, I would have offered an amendment to 
ensure that it applies in a way that respects the due process rights of 
Federal workers, and that it would apply only to collective bargaining 
agreements ratified on or after enactment.
  I support the goal of improving accountability at the VA, but I want 
to make sure it is not done in a way that prejudices and undermines the 
collective bargaining rights and the due process rights of the 
workforce.
  There are real problems at the VA now, we know. There are 45- to 
49,000 vacancies there. There is bureaucratic dysfunction in a lot of 
places, and all that this bill would do is to change the evidentiary 
standard of proof from the preponderance of the evidence to substantial 
evidence in leveling sanctions and discipline against employees.
  That is a tiny detail. It is an irrelevant distraction from the 
massive problems that actually are facing the VA today. So we should be 
filling these vacancies. We should be improving the function of the VA, 
but we should not use this or that problem as an excuse to undermine 
the due process rights of the workforce. That sets a terrible example 
for the Federal workforce, generally, and it does nothing to repair the 
underlying problems and inadequacies that are taking place at the VA.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In response to my friend from Florida's statement about the second 
piece of legislation that we are dealing with in this rule, I believe 
it is our responsibility to the American taxpayer, and we are 
fulfilling that responsibility. We are expected to be good stewards of 
taxpayer dollars. This bill ensures that the government only disburses 
premium tax credits under the Affordable Care Act, or under the 
American Health Care Act, to those individuals who are eligible for 
those tax credits.
  Under the ACA, an individual who is not lawfully present in the 
United States is ineligible from receiving a premium credit. 
Unfortunately, the ACA also allows the government to hand out the tax 
credit first and verify later.
  This pay-and-chase scheme means taxpayer money is flowing out the 
door to people who don't meet the requirements for premium tax credits, 
and much of these funds may not be recouped. In fact, under the ACA, 
over half a million people who were ineligible for coverage and tax 
credits received credits.
  H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act, requires the Secretary of the 
Treasury to ensure that any department disbursing payments have first 
verified the recipient's legal presence with information like Social 
Security numbers. By requiring this verification, we can confirm that, 
under both the ACA and AHCA, those who receive credits deserve credits.
  With that confirmation, we will ensure that these laws are used as 
they were intended; that the wishes of the American taxpayer are 
followed. I urge Members to support this important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, Donald John Trump issued an executive 
order placing a hiring freeze on Federal civilian employees across the 
executive branch. This executive order, like many of the executive 
orders this President has issued, failed to take into account the 
effects it could have on our most vulnerable communities.
  Veterans make up one-third of all Federal workers. I am very pleased 
that one is in my office. She is probably smiling because sometimes 
Charity probably doesn't think I even know that she is in the office. 
But she is there and does incredible work.
  The Department of Veterans Affairs--a severely understaffed agency 
serving those veterans--cannot afford a hiring freeze.
  This week, Republicans are bringing to the floor bills they claim 
would improve veterans' lives. If the President and my Republican 
colleagues are truly committed to our veterans, then they should ensure 
that reckless hiring freezes do not harm them in the future.
  Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I am going to offer 
an amendment to the rule to bring up Representative Schrader's bill, 
H.R. 696, which would prohibit any hiring freeze from affecting the 
Department of Veterans Affairs.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Record the text 
of my amendment, 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, what we have here today is a rule with one 
bill that really was worked on in a bipartisan manner--sort of like 
regular order like we were promised by the Speaker at the outset of 
this session of Congress--and another bill, which is just more of the 
same from this majority: creating problems where none existed before.

[[Page 9174]]

  The fact remains that the Republicans' healthcare bill and overall 
bucket strategy is a disaster for the American people, and no amount of 
Rose Garden backslapping is going to change that fact.
  Under the Republican plan, 23 million Americans will be kicked off of 
their health insurance and $800 billion will be cut from Medicaid. 
Footnote right there, we hear that the Senate is taking up something. 
We don't know where and who is doing the taking up, but what I read 
today is that they are considering a glide path of some kind to cut 
Medicaid.
  Mr. Speaker, cutting Medicaid hurts poor people. Whether you glide it 
or run it over them, either way you look at it, it hurts them, and we 
need to pay attention to that, particularly if we are doing it to 
provide for those of us that are better off in our society.
  Seventy-five billion dollars will be cut from Medicare, insurance 
premiums would increase for people ages 60 to 64 by more than $3,000 a 
year, and protections for those with preexisting conditions will be 
eliminated.
  I read about a 63-year-old lady who said that all of her conditions 
are preexisting and she can't afford insurance. H.R. 2581 only adds to 
this pain by setting up an unnecessary barrier for eligible individuals 
to get access to healthcare.
  But not to worry, under the Republican plan, the 400 highest income 
families would ultimately get tax cuts averaging around $7 million a 
year, and that information comes from the Ways and Means Committee's 
fact sheet.
  Mr. Speaker, I and others here very frequently have pointed out that 
what the Republicans want to do is to cut benefits for poor people--the 
most vulnerable in our society--and to provide for the better-off tax 
cuts--those people in our society who least need them.
  It occurs to me that if we were to have an opportunity to ask the 400 
wealthiest families in this country whether or not they really need a 
tax cut, my belief, based on the four billionaires that I have known 
personally--two are deceased now--but in my conversations with all of 
them, their position was that they didn't need a cut. To the man, each 
one of them said that, if they were to receive tax cuts, they would 
prefer that they go to education, particularly education for 
kindergartners and prekindergartners.
  If my Republican colleagues can move past throwing red meat to their 
base--a group of people, mind you, who are most certainly 
disadvantaged--one day they are going to wake up and recognize that 
much of what we are doing here, even though they support it, many of 
the persons who are doing it, they, too, are caught up in this downward 
spiral that is involving healthcare in this country, the game that we 
are playing.
  If we are willing to work in a serious manner to address the issues 
in our healthcare system, then I know that Democrats are ready to work 
with Republicans. But whatever is going on in the other body, I assure 
you, no Democrats in the other body are involved in.
  Last night I asked the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee 
whether or not he knew what this bill looked like, and his answer was 
that he did not.
  I also said what I repeat here, that people are hurting in this 
country. Whether it is ObamaCare that the Republicans, I believe, are 
going to find that it is going to be hard to fix, or whether it is the 
Affordable Care Act that is in some phantom hole over in the other 
body, somehow or another, my friends on the other side are going to be 
held accountable for all of what is necessary to be done. The only way 
that is sensible--and I believe that every American is imploring us to 
undertake--is to sit down together.
  I cannot believe that the 435 people plus 6 here in the House of 
Representatives and the 100 United States Senators do not have the 
ability to do all of the things that are necessary in order for 
Americans to receive adequate healthcare and to lead with protecting 
the most vulnerable in our society.
  It is ridiculous to talk about cutting Medicaid when more than 60 
percent of the people on Medicaid are seniors that are in nursing 
homes.
  What are we going to say to those families? How are we going to 
address them when it comes to the reality that they are confronted with 
while we are up here jaw jacking back and forth about whether or not it 
is ObamaCare or whether or not it is the Affordable Care Act that we 
can't seem to find.
  Somewhere along the lines, we need to sit down and work together. 
Failure to do so is to our own peril and to the peril of the citizens 
of this great country of ours.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we are here discussing two important bills. One of them 
fulfills the congressional duty to steward taxpayer dollars well. We 
shouldn't be handing out tax credits to people without first checking 
their eligibility for their tax credits. This is common sense.
  H.R. 2581, the Verify First Act, will require verification of legal 
presence in this country before someone can receive a tax credit. It is 
only fair to the American people that we pass this legislation.
  The other bill in this rule, S. 1094, protects our veterans from 
harm. We all have a commitment to repaying the men and women who have 
served this Nation in the military. These brave individuals have put 
much on the line and sacrificed so much time and opportunity. They 
deserve the best healthcare.
  This legislation holds the VA accountable. We need to empower the VA 
Secretary to quickly fire employees who put our veterans in danger. We 
also need the VA to report to Congress so that the legislative branch 
can fulfill its oversight duties.
  I thank the sponsors of these important bills--Senator Rubio for S. 
1094 and Representative Barletta for H.R. 2581.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the resolution, and I urge a 
``yes'' vote on the underlying bills.
  The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings is as follows:

          An Amendment to H. Res. 378 Offered by Mr. Hastings

       At the end of the resolution, add the following new 
     sections:
       Sec. 3. 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. 
     696) to prohibit any hiring freeze from affecting the 
     Department of Veterans Affairs. 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 Oversight and Government Reform. 
     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. 4. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the 
     consideration of H.R. 696.
                                  ____


        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

[[Page 9175]]

     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 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. BUCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Yoder). 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 adopting the resolution, if ordered, and 
agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 229, 
nays 189, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 302]

                               YEAS--229

     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
     Bridenstine
     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
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     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 (AL)
     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
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--189

     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
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     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.
     Jones
     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
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham, M.
     Lujan, Ben Ray
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     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
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Brooks (AL)
     Cummings
     Granger
     Griffith
     Higgins (LA)
     Johnson, Sam
     Lowenthal
     McGovern
     Napolitano
     Pelosi
     Taylor
     Weber (TX)

                              {time}  1321

  Mses. JAYAPAL and WILSON of Florida changed their vote from ``yea'' 
to ``nay.''
  So the previous question was ordered.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the 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 will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 229, 
noes 190, not voting 11, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 303]

                               AYES--229

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Banks (IN)
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black

[[Page 9176]]


     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     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
     Estes (KS)
     Farenthold
     Faso
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Flores
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (LA)
     Johnson (OH)
     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 (AL)
     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
     Tenney
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Zeldin

                               NOES--190

     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
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Esty (CT)
     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
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     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
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Brooks (AL)
     Cummings
     Granger
     Griffith
     Higgins (LA)
     Huizenga
     Johnson, Sam
     Napolitano
     Pelosi
     Taylor
     Weber (TX)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

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

                              {time}  1327

  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.
  Stated for:
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 303.
  Mr. HUIZENGA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today regarding a missed vote due 
to a meeting with constituents on the House steps. Had I been present 
for rollcall vote No. 303, H. Res. 378, The Rule providing for 
consideration of the bill H.R. 2581--Verify First Act and S. 1094--
Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower 
Protection Act, I would have voted ``yea.''


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, I was absent during rollcall votes No. 
302 and No. 303 due to my spouse's health situation in California. Had 
I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on the Motion on Ordering 
the Previous Question on the Rule providing for consideration of both 
H.R. 2581 and S. 1094. I would have also voted ``nay'' on H. Res. 378--
Rule providing for consideration of both H.R. 2581--Verify First Act 
and S. 1094--Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and 
Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I wanted to report my absence 
on the vote of the H. Res. 378, the combined rule providing for 
consideration of H.R. 2581 and S. 1094, as well as the vote on the 
previous question. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on 
rollcall No. 302 (Previous Question on H. Res. 378), and ``yea'' on 
rollcall No. 303 (Adoption of H. Res. 378).

                          ____________________