The publication is reproduced in full below:
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4, JOHN R. LEWIS VOTING RIGHTS
ADVANCEMENT ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF SENATE
AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3684, INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF S. CON. RES. 14, CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE
BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 601 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 601
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4) to amend the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to revise the criteria for determining which States and political subdivisions are subject to section 4 of the Act, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except:
(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 2. The chair of the Committee on the Judiciary may insert in the Congressional Record not later than August 24, 2021, such material as he may deem explanatory of H.R. 4.
Sec. 3. (a) Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 3684) to authorize funds for Federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure or his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure or their respective designees. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion.
(b) On the legislative day of September 27, 2021, the House shall consider in the House the motion referred to in subsection (a) if not offered prior to such legislative day. A motion considered pursuant to this subsection shall be considered as though offered pursuant to subsection (a).
Sec. 4. Senate Concurrent Resolution 14 is hereby adopted.
Sec. 5. Rule XXVIII shall not apply with respect to the adoption by the House of a concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2022.
Sec. 6. House Resolution 594 and House Resolution 600 are laid on the table.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), 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. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 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. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, earlier today, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 601, providing for consideration of three measures.
First, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their designee. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Nadler, provides one motion to recommit, and provides the Judiciary Committee with the authority to insert in the Congressional Record explanatory material related to H.R. 4 no later than August 24.
The rule also provides for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 3684. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that the House concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 3684. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure or their designees.
Finally, the rule provides that S. Con. Res. 14 is adopted under adoption of the rule.
Madam Speaker, today is an important day. The underlying bills before us today are critical pieces of legislation to enact President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. This plan will create good-paying jobs, put money in the pockets of American families, lower healthcare and childcare costs, and invest in our Nation's infrastructure paid for by ensuring that the wealthiest Americans are paying their fair share in taxes. We also take important critical steps today to secure the right to vote and safeguard our democracy.
S. Con. Res. 14 begins the process to enact this important legislative agenda. In short, the resolution sets out President Biden's Build Back Better plan, which includes critical investments that we can and must make now to provide a better future for our country.
This is a plan to create jobs, to cut taxes, and to lower costs for working families.
Our plan will make things affordable for the middle class and working families and reduce healthcare costs.
The Build Back Better plan will help prepare our Nation for the impacts of climate change: Through historic investments in a reimagined Climate Conservation Corps, investments that will put people to work to protect and conserve our public lands and open spaces, invest in the electrification of our infrastructure, and ensure that we can prepare for and mitigate the impacts of climate change.
We will provide for wildfire prevention and mitigation, resources that are desperately needed, Madam Speaker, across the western United States as we continue to experience devastating wildfires year after year. My State of Colorado, along with many other western States, are in the midst of a terrible drought which, combined with extreme heat, is continuing to wreak havoc on our communities.
As a father of a 3-year-old daughter who will be starting preschool just next week, we will invest in our children through the Build Back Better plan by ensuring universal pre-K for every 3-year-old and 4-
year-old in our country, provide tuition-free community college, childcare for working families, upgrading school infrastructure, and strengthening our education workforce.
We will fund investments in child nutrition programs, expand Medicare, Madam Speaker, for the first time in its 55-year history to include dental benefits, vision benefits, hearing coverage, critical coverage that will help our seniors access the care that they need.
The Build Back Better plan will be transformational for the American people, reaching every aspect of their lives and making investments in resources that they can rely on. Madam Speaker, we will lower costs for the American people, we will cut taxes, and we will create jobs. This resolution is a first step toward making those critical investments a reality.
I now turn to a bill that I know, Madam Speaker, you care deeply about, as you are the sponsor of the legislation, and that is the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, H.R. 4. Voting is a sacred right foundational to our democracy and to our Republic. It is a right that many have fought and died to secure and that the late civil rights hero, our dear friend and colleague, John Lewis, fought to protect, despite being harassed, jailed, and beaten. Madam Speaker, as you know, Mr. Lewis often told us that the vote is the most powerful nonviolent tool that we have.
Unfortunately, it is a right that is once again under attack, and we see it, Madam Speaker, in the laws that are being passed in Georgia and in Florida and in Iowa. In State after State after State, and in the glaring absence of Federal standards and enforcement, partisan legislatures are making it harder for those who are legally eligible to vote to do so.
We cannot stand by, Madam Speaker, as discriminatory measures run rampant, blocking Americans from participating in our democracy.
Voting is a constitutional right. It is ingrained at the very core of who we are as Americans, Madam Speaker. As a Congress, protecting that right is foundational; it really is the heart of our duty.
The vote can only truly represent the people's voice if they have the ability to execute it freely and easily. That is why Congress needs to take clear, decisive action today to protect voting rights by passing the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. This bill would strengthen the VRA and respond to recent Supreme Court cases striking critical provisions of the bill, while making clear that Congress has the power to create a new formula.
The VRA has been reauthorized, Madam Speaker, as you know, on a bipartisan basis for decades, most recently in 2006 when the reauthorization on the VRA passed this Chamber 390-33, and in the Senate 98 votes for it, zero votes against it. This should not be a partisan issue.
Our democracy is safeguarded only when every eligible voter has the opportunity to participate, and that is what we will ensure today by passing this bill out of the House.
Finally, Madam Speaker, as you know, the rule provides for consideration of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This bipartisan bill is an important down payment toward meeting the critical infrastructure needs of our communities. We all know that our Nation's infrastructure is in desperate need of repair, and this bipartisan bill seeks to make those much-needed investments.
The bill invests in our roads, our highways, our bridges, focusing on making infrastructure resilient to the impacts of climate change and natural disasters.
It has become particularly clear over the course of this last year that access to affordable, reliable broadband is absolutely critical for Americans to be able to do their jobs and to participate equally in remote learning, to access healthcare, to stay connected. This Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provides $65 billion to expand broadband coverage to areas most in need across the United States, and it also takes steps to make sure that that coverage is more affordable for individuals for whom those costs might be prohibitive.
The bill makes critical investments in our drinking water infrastructure, ensuring that clean, safe drinking water is a right in all communities.
Lastly, I would be remiss, Madam Speaker, if I didn't mention that there are several priorities that I have been working on with many of my colleagues from the western United States that are part of this bill, the Joint Chiefs Landscape Restoration Partnership Program, my bill to help restore our forests and respond to wildfire risks; the reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools Program; and, of course, the Disaster Safe Power Grid Act, which ensures a safer and more resilient power grid in the face of emergencies.
{time} 1330
The Senate has already passed this bill and shown the desire to invest in our infrastructure, and the House must now do the same.
Madam Speaker, these three underlying bills that we are considering today make essential investments in American families and communities, and we have to meet this moment for the American people.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. I will just say, it has been a long and bumpy road to get here so I am happy to finally be here on the floor with the rule.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, House Resolution 601 provides for the consideration of two controversial partisan bills and deems the $3.5 trillion reconciliation resolution adopted that strips away local control and adds trillions to the national debt.
The bill deemed adopted under this rule is S. Con. Res. 14, the $3.5 trillion tax-and-spending binge that passed the Senate earlier this month.
Madam Speaker, prices are at a 13-year high, and inflation is rising. President Biden has already spent $1.9 trillion and is now looking to spend an additional $3.5 trillion, all while his administration pays Americans not to work and stifles our robust economy.
Not only does this budget call for the highest sustained Federal spending level in American history, but it also amounts to a whopping
$68 trillion over the next decade. It raises taxes on the American people, shifts jobs overseas, and taxes American employers at one of the highest rates in the world. It eliminates ``right to work'' protection and does nothing to address the historic flow of illegal immigration at the southern border.
Democrats know their proposals are unpopular. They can't even get their own conference to agree. Instead, they are resorting to smoke and mirrors to push it through and hoping the American people aren't paying attention. Where is the transparency?
If Democrats truly want to serve and help the American people, they need far more transparency and input from everyone, not just a few. This is no way to build a budget.
Madam Speaker, then there is H.R. 4, which would make changes to the Voting Rights Act and strips State and local governments of their ability to manage their own elections. The Constitution places the responsibility for elections at the State level, and we have a long history of letting each State run their own elections. But H.R. 4 grants the Federal Government unprecedented control over State and local elections. It empowers the Attorney General to bully States and forces those States to seek Federal approval before making changes to their own voting laws.
H.R. 4 also provides incentives for advocacy groups to file as many objections as possible to manufacture litigation in the hope of triggering coverage under the Voting Rights Act. We need safeguards that make it easy to vote and hard to cheat. H.R. 4 is not the solution.
Madam Speaker, finally, the final bill in this resolution is the Senate amendment to H.R. 3684, which provides for $1.2 trillion in new infrastructure spending.
Madam Speaker, I hate to say it, but my Democrat colleagues are using the bipartisan infrastructure framework to force their Members to also push through trillions more in their outlandish spending resolution. Our constituents are tired of Washington playing games with their livelihoods.
To be sure, investing in our Nation's infrastructure is critical. However, only a fraction of this $1 trillion-plus bill is for roads, bridges, and other projects the American people would consider traditional infrastructure. With tens of billions for electric vehicle plug-ins, Amtrak, and light rail, if you live in a deep blue city, this bill is for you. But if you are one of the millions of Americans in a more rural area, this bill leaves you behind.
Madam Speaker, our country's infrastructure should not be tied to the Democrats' partisan spending spree, especially during a pandemic. But here we are. Until Democrats stop playing games and work with their colleagues on a truly bipartisan compromise, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule and the underlying bills.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I must say with great respect for my colleague from Minnesota, I think the Republican minority leader of the United States Senate, Mitch McConnell, would disagree with the gentlewoman's characterization of the bipartisan infrastructure bill being for--I think she said--urban cities or blue cities.
Madam Speaker, 19 Republicans voted for that bill in the United States Senate, including the Senate minority leader. So I think that it is important for us to recognize that the investments made in that bill, as well as the investments made in the resolution, the Build Back Better plan that we are also considering over the coming weeks are incredibly important for the future of our country.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of both the Committee on Rules and the Committee on the Judiciary.
Ms. ROSS. Madam Speaker, the rule before us provides for consideration of three landmark pieces of legislation. First and foremost, we are here to assume our duty to protect our American democracy. Just this year alone, 18 States have enacted 30 voter suppression laws. In response, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act would reinvigorate section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, restore geographic preclearance requirements eliminated in the Shelby decision, and take other steps to block discriminatory voting measures before they are implemented.
The history of the fight for voting rights in America is long and painful. But at crucial forks on that difficult path, Members of this body from both parties have set politics aside and done the right thing.
We are meeting here today at another pivotal juncture in the struggle for voting rights, and it is up to us to meet the urgency of the moment, live up to our constitutional responsibilities, and pass this critical legislation.
Madam Speaker, I also rise in support of our $3.5 trillion Build Back Better budget resolution. By taking real action on climate change, expanding the child tax credit, and supporting universal pre-K and free community college, this budget represents an investment in all of our people, especially our children and grandchildren. For the sake of our constituents and our country, let's approve this vital funding.
Madam Speaker, lastly, the rule before us provides for future consideration of the Senate's bipartisan infrastructure package. From expanding broadband to rebuilding roads, bridges, airports, rail, and water systems, this historic bill will help bring America's aging infrastructure into the 21st century and create jobs.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and this legislation.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith), ranking member of the Budget Committee.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding.
The last 24 hours, we need to just step back and look at it. And I need to remind my colleagues and remind the folks across the aisle that what we just witnessed is a circus; and also remind them that this is the people's House. This is not Pelosi's palace, this is the people's House.
Madam Speaker, the middle of July, we were supposed to mark up a budget in the House Budget Committee, but the Democrats did not have the votes.
Madam Speaker, before the August recess, we were suppose to pass the House budget. The Democrats did not have the votes. Yesterday--up until about 1 a.m. this morning, in fact--we were going to pass the House budget, but the Democrats did not have the votes. So now they have a scheme before us, a scheme that they are putting Bernie's budget with the transportation bill, which is not even going to be voted on today, not even going to be voted on this week, not even going to be voted on this month, along with a voting rights bill, because they can't pass Bernie's budget. You know why they can't pass Bernie's budget? Because the American people are fed up with the Democrats' reckless spending.
Right now, we are facing the Biden inflation crisis. We are facing the Biden border crisis. We are facing the Biden energy crisis. And we are facing the Biden Afghanistan crisis. Yet, they bring forth a budget resolution that only makes those crises worse, $68 trillion in new spending, the most spending in the history of this country; $17 trillion of debt, the largest increase of debt, in fact, more debt than the entire economies of every country in the world, except for the United States.
Bernie Sanders may have lost the Presidential primary, but his policies have won. Bernie Sanders controls this Chamber, along with the liberal squad. But the American people are watching, and they are fed up. And they are letting the American people know whenever this Chamber changes and we actually bring order back to the House of Representatives.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, you know what is interesting? I don't remember the ranking member complaining about the deficit 3 years ago when they passed tax cuts for billionaires across our country to the tune of $2 trillion in terms of adding it to the deficit. I don't remember them complaining about process when they had to do three rules within a time period of 6 weeks to try to repeal the Affordable Care Act back in 2017.
I heard much today by way of process, but very little in terms of substance. Why? Because they know that the plan we have put forward today will lower costs, will cut taxes, and will create jobs.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of this House.
Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his distinguished role on the Committee on Rules.
Now, let us praise the Committee on Rules for the important work that they do making sure that legislation comes to the floor in a way that is consistent with the rules of the House, and in this case, a budget that is consistent with the values of our country.
I thank the gentleman from Colorado and the chairman, Jim McGovern, for his leadership as well. And to each and every member of the Committee on Rules, we have to salute them, on both sides of the aisle, for the time they put in and how they facilitate the work of the House.
Madam Speaker, today is a great day of pride for our country and for Democrats. We have a President with a big, bold vision for our country and unprecedented opportunity to keep our promises for the people. We promised ``for the people'' that we would lower healthcare costs by lowering the cost of prescription drugs; we would increase paychecks by building the infrastructure of America; and we would have cleaner government by passing legislation.
This rule does all three of those things and much more, enabling the Congress to vote on some of that legislation today; some of it in the bill, and some of it for later.
When the President spoke about the infrastructure bill which is provided for in this rule, he said to our Republican friends, I want to find our common ground on infrastructure, but I will not confine my vision to what is in the bill that we can do in a bipartisan way unless you want to help us build back better. I like to say build back better for women, because that is what this budget will do; that is in this rule.
So I salute the President, not only for his vision and his determination to get the job done, but for the priorities that will be contained here in this budget as we go forward.
The Build Back Better budget agenda is one that is liberating for families, not just women, moms and dads, with childcare, with a child tax credit, with universal pre-K, with home healthcare, with workforce development. So that not only are we building the physical infrastructure of America, we are building the human infrastructure of America to enable many more people to participate in the success of our economy and the growth of our society. It does so with equity, a 40 percent justice provision that will be in there.
{time} 1345
Now, it remains for us to work together, work with the Senate, to write a bill that preserves the privilege of 51 votes in the Senate. So we must work together to do that in a way that passes the House and passes the Senate, and we must do so expeditiously. Expeditiously.
The authorizations for highway, et cetera, will expire September 30. By October 1, we hope to have in place, that is the plan, to have in place the legislation for infrastructure. That is bipartisan, and I salute that, but it is not inclusive of all of the values we need to build back at a time when we have a climate crisis.
So I salute our distinguished chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Mr. DeFazio, for the knowledge that he brings, the value system and the knowledge that he brings to looking at how we do a reconciliation bill, a build back better bill in a way that is preserving of our planet for the children. For the children.
Exciting in all of this is the fact that we will have the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. This is pretty exciting. And I commend you, Madam Speaker, for your leadership in making this possible; for you to be the author of it. But when you are the author, though, you will no longer be able to preside, you have to come down and manage us on the floor. So it is appropriate that during the rule that will enable this to come to the floor, you are presiding, so we can all congratulate you in a highly visible way.
This legislation is so important. I was very much a part of passing the previous bill, that was in 2007, we wrote it in 2006, it became effective in 2007 when President Bush was President. We had Republican majorities in the House and Senate, and we passed the legislation overwhelmingly. Over nearly 400 votes in the House, unanimous in the Senate; signed by President Bush, as bipartisan as anything that has come to the floor.
We walked down the steps of the Capitol in a bipartisan way, saluting the fact that we had extended the Voting Rights Act and President Bush signed it. And with great pride, he came to your neck of the woods, to Selma, on the 50th anniversary of the Selma march. But he came as the person who had signed the Voting Rights Act. And even more important than that, Laura Bush came, too, so their hearts are in this legislation.
I would hope that there would be some level of bipartisanship on that as well. We will talk more about that as we go into the debate on that bill in a little while.
But I do, again, want to thank Congresswoman DeLauro for her relentless, persistent, dissatisfied until now, I hope satisfied to a certain extent, more to come, of the child tax credit. For 10 Congresses she has introduced that bill, and now it is being advanced.
And Mr. Yarmuth, the chair of the Budget Committee, will lead us now as we prepare in our individual committees, our work for the Budget Committee to put together a package.
Madam Speaker, as you know, a national budget should be a statement of our national values. What is important to us as a Nation should be reflected in our budget. And this will be the case. And under the leadership of Mr. Yarmuth, who is not only values-based, but eloquent in conveying that message, we are very excited about how we go forward.
Again, I mentioned Peter DeFazio. In terms of the Voting Rights Act, the very distinguished chair of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Nadler; and Zoe Lofgren for her work as chair on the Committee on House Administration; Mr. Butterfield, and so many people; and our distinguished whip, Mr. Clyburn, who has made this his life work.
Passing this rule paves the way for the Build Back Better plan, which will forge legislative progress unseen in 50 years that will stand for generations alongside the New Deal and the Great Society. This legislation will be the biggest and perhaps most consequential initiatives that any of us have ever undertaken in our official lives.
Everything we do is about the children. As you have heard me say when people ask me, what are the three most important issues facing the Congress? I always say the same thing: Our children, our children, our children; their health, their education, and the economic security of their families, a safe environment in which they can thrive, and a world at peace in which they can reach their fulfillment.
When children come here to the Capitol, it is such an invigoration for us and an inspiration to us to see them because we are here for them. And as I say to them, as you see the statues and the monuments to those who went before, it is appropriate that we honor them, but they want us to honor you, the future of our country, to make it better for the children.
Again, any delay in passing the rule threatens the Build Back Better plan, as well as voting rights reform, as well as the bipartisan infrastructure bill. We cannot surrender our leverage for the children. For the first time, I don't remember a time as historic as this, for the children.
President Biden has given children leverage in his visionary proposal. The children have the leverage, not those at the high end who benefitted from the Republican tax bill, and I wouldn't even have brought it up except you are acting as if you don't even know, when you added $2 trillion, or more, to the budget to give 83 percent of the benefits to the wealthiest people in our country.
Leverage for the rich, no. We don't begrudge them their success, but this is about leverage for the children, for them, for their families for the future.
And guess what? It would be our attempt to pay for this bill so it is not a burden to those children as we go forward. And that means that some of the people that benefitted from that tax bill, that tax scam in 2017, are now going to have to pay their fair share, fair share, pay their fair share, and that we may have to address other ways to pay for the legislation by putting the responsibility on the high end, both whether it is corporate or individual, so that we can again make progress for the children without burdening them with the debt, some of which they got in 2017.
So it is a pretty exciting day. I congratulate all on the Rules Committee for going in time and again as we sought clarification on how we go forward. I thank Mr. McGovern, Mr. Neguse, and so many other members of that committee.
I thank all of our colleagues for their involvement in all of this. And I would hope that as we proceed, we could do so in the most transparent, bipartisan, and fair way for the children.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to provide for additional consideration of H.R. 5071, authored by Representative Gallagher.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into 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 gentlewoman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, President Biden's failure to lead has resulted in a national security and humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan that we cannot ignore.
Now the Taliban is back and the United States is less safe. The President has offered no specific plan for getting those Americans out of Afghanistan safely.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Gallagher), from Wisconsin's Eighth Congressional District.
Mr. GALLAGHER. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge defeat of the previous question so that we can consider my bill, H.R. 5071, to ensure no Americans are left behind in Afghanistan.
Over the past week, we have all seen the horrifying images coming out of Kabul: babies being passed over barbed wire, 2-year-olds trampled to death, bodies falling from C-17s. These pictures are now forever painted onto American history. They don't depict the orderly withdrawal that the President promised. These are, instead, portraits of chaos, tragedy, and dishonor.
And, yet, the administration assures us a plan for every contingency. Was the plan for America to give billions of dollars worth of U.S. military equipment to the Taliban? Was the plan to put terrorists, effectively, in charge of security around the Kabul airport? Was the plan to leave over 10,000 American citizens stranded behind enemy lines?
Madam Speaker, if this was the plan, a plan to surrender so incompetently and on such ignominious terms, then our country can't withstand any more of this administration's plans. It is time for this body, this Congress, to act, to hold the administration accountable and save lives. This bill would do that by requiring daily reporting to Congress on the number of Americans left in the country and the number of Afghan allies that are seeking refuge.
The bill also critically prohibits the President from withdrawing our forces until all Americans, who want out, are safely out of the country. Right now, it seems, the President is doubling down on this August 31 withdraw date, despite strong bipartisan opposition and push back.
Make no mistake, if we get out on August 31, we are going to condemn thousands to death. I don't care what secret side deal was struck with the Taliban, this is America, we don't leave anybody behind. A great country, such as ours, takes care of our citizens and our allies.
Our enemies are mocking our surrender right now. We have all seen the images. The Taliban, for example, just mocked the iconic image of Marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima. It may be too late to save face because of this debacle, but it is not too late to save lives. This isn't a news cycle that will blow over. This isn't a narrative that you can spin. We are talking about American lives, and we are talking about America's honor.
Madam Speaker, let's act now, before this crisis, and with it, America's standing in the world deteriorates even further.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I certainly understand where my colleague is coming from and have great reverence and respect for him and his service to our country, and I certainly look forward to continuing to work with him on the important issues that he described.
But defeating the previous question would hand over the floor to the Republican Conference. And, as you know, Madam Speaker, we have incredibly important pieces of legislation that we are considering, specifically, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, and the bipartisan infrastructure budget, and the President's Build Back Better plan today.
Madam Speaker, I look forward to voting for the rule, and would encourage all Members in the House to vote for the rule, to vote for the previous question so that we can proceed with the business of the House.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania
(Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, I rise today in enthusiastic support of this rule and the underlying legislation.
H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, is essential to ensuring that every American voter has equal access to the ballot box, and the freedom to make his or her voice heard.
Ever since the Supreme Court's decision in Shelby v. Holder opened the door, we have seen State legislatures pass hundreds of laws to restrict voter access while claiming, falsely, to protect our elections from voter fraud that doesn't even exist.
Now, the unjustified attacks on the 2020 election results by the former President and his supporters have produced a wave of anti-
democratic bills. But it doesn't have to be this way. In Shelby, the Supreme Court invited Congress to amend the Voting Rights Act to address its concerns.
For 8 years, our Republican colleagues refused the Court's invitation to reinvigorate the Voting Rights Act, while extremist politicians worked overtime to close polling locations, limit voting hours, purge voter rolls, and erect barriers to the ballot box.
{time} 1400
We can't continue down this path if we want America to remain a functional democracy. Congress needs to do its job. I urge all of my colleagues and all Americans to support this bill.
I would also like to speak briefly about the bipartisan infrastructure bill and the Build Back Better Act, which today's vote will move forward. Together, they are the key to helping Americans and American businesses succeed in the 21st century.
Our country is facing multiple, interconnected crises: the COVID pandemic, a deeply unequal economy, long-neglected infrastructure needs, underfunded public services that often fail to serve those most in need, and climate disasters that are impacting our communities more often.
The Build Back Better agenda is simple: make major investments in physical infrastructure and working families to create a fairer, more productive, and sustainable economy.
We need the bipartisan infrastructure deal to enable America to compete in the 21st century, but we also need the Build Back Better Act to create jobs and lower costs and taxes for working families. These bills have the power to improve the lives of millions of Americans.
Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the rule.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mast).
Mr. MAST. Madam Speaker, let's be bipartisanly honest here for a moment. We just walked out of probably the most bipartisan moment in the last couple of years, a classified briefing with the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary, the Secretary of State, and others.
There are things that, real-world, need to be done where Americans are at risk. They are cut off, and they are stranded. They are now in the situation where they are the hostages of Afghanistan because of everything that has been allowed to transpire under President Biden. And in this body, we are going to walk out of that classified briefing concerned behind closed doors but do nothing--do absolutely nothing--on the floor of the House.
I am going to say the same thing I just said a few minutes ago: What the hell are we doing?
Let's say that again: There are Americans cut off who need our help, and there are Special Immigrant Visa applicants cut off who need our help right now who will be killed. We heard the descriptions of the dangers in the briefing we just got out of.
Defeat the previous question and bring up the only thing that this body will do in this entire week that has anything to do with what is going on in Afghanistan. This is the only opportunity, the only thing that is going on related to Afghanistan in this body.
That is unconscionable. How in the world is that the case?
Every time somebody tries to do something different in here, like take the ability of States to determine their own voting rights or other things, everybody needs to say: Stop. What the hell are you doing? Get focused back on Afghanistan and saving Americans.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), who is the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Mr. PALLONE. Madam Speaker, this budget resolution allows us to implement President Biden's Build Back Better agenda to revitalize our economy by creating millions of good-paying jobs, and it allows us to aggressively combat the climate crisis. The goal of the Energy and Commerce Committee with this budget resolution is to make healthcare more affordable and accessible for all Americans. We can help accomplish that by closing the Medicaid coverage gap to provide quality comprehensive coverage to an estimated 4 million Americans who qualify for Medicaid but who have been denied access to care in their State.
It will also continue subsidies under the Affordable Care Act to reduce health insurance costs. The Energy and Commerce Committee plans to lower the price of out-of-control and skyrocketing prescription drug prices by giving the Federal Government the ability to negotiate lower prices and will use the savings to expand Medicare benefits. Our plan is to provide investments in our public health infrastructure to help us respond to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and better respond to future public health emergencies.
The Build Back Better agenda will allow us to create millions of new, homegrown jobs and combat the climate crisis by aggressively investing in clean energy and clean technology. The moment is here to invest in a more advanced and resilient economy and toward a 100 percent clean economy.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this budget resolution that allows us to carry out President Biden's bold vision and deliver on the Build Back Better agenda for the people.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy).
Mr. McCARTHY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time.
Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to today's rule.
Madam Speaker, before I came here, I was listening to the debate. I listened to Congressman Gallagher, a veteran, come to the floor and talk about an idea that he has, an idea that here we are, Afghanistan is collapsing, and thousands of Americans in Afghanistan are trying to get out.
Here we are, called back for a special session. All his previous question would say is that we would have to have a report every day on those Americans, that we wouldn't pick a timeline until the mission is finished, and that people would be able to be brought back.
As I listened to his impassioned speech, I waited for the response. I listened to my friend on the other side. He respects Mr. Gallagher, but he could not turn the floor over because if the floor were turned over to Republicans, instead of changing the election law and spending $5 trillion, they would put the American public first. God forbid we would do that.
Madam Speaker, I heard the Democrat on the other side say we could not turn the floor over to the Republicans to let the American public know how many Americans were there. It would be devastating--
devastating--to allow that to happen.
This week, the House is in session for the first time since Kabul fell to the Taliban. What is happening in Afghanistan is a disaster for America's security and credibility, not for just today and not for next week, but for decades to come. Other countries are questioning whether we have the resolve to honor our word because of the bungled withdrawal.
President Biden magnified this damage over the past week by hiding at Camp David, delivering incoherent speeches, and is reported as failing to contact a single foreign leader for 36 hours. Today, he signaled an unconditional surrender to the Taliban, promising to leave in just 7 days.
We just had a classified briefing for all the Members. I don't believe any Member walking out of there believes that in 7 days we could get the thousands of Americans out. That is why we can't relinquish the floor to the Republicans to actually get a report on it.
Madam Speaker, the President's actions gave the impression of incompetency and a declining power. This week, we learned that the Taliban seized millions in U.S. weapons, making them stronger than they were 20 years ago.
Madam Speaker, it is reported the Taliban now has more Black Hawk helicopters than Australia. Military missions should be dictated by our Nation's interests, not by our enemies or by arbitrary timelines.
Right now, there is no greater national priority than getting our people home. But I just heard from the Democrat on the other side that we could not relinquish the floor to allow Mr. Gallagher's, a veteran's, previous question to come up because that would be dealing with the Nation's interests right now. No. We need to deal with the Democrats' priorities right now.
As I look around, I see our allies responding to this crisis with the seriousness it deserves. Madam Speaker, the Speaker called us back here. We are not the only body of power that has been called back.
In Britain, Parliament returned from its summer recess. Do you know what they are doing, though, Madam Speaker? They are working in an emergency session on this current situation to get their citizens home.
In France, President Macron is trying to rally the U.N. Security Council.
This House should be correcting this disastrous record left by this Commander in Chief and proving that America never abandons her people or shrinks from defending our interests.
Madam Speaker, that is not what I heard on this floor. I heard a direction, Madam Speaker, by the Democrat leading and in charge of this right now that we could not relinquish the floor simply to Mr. Gallagher's request of letting America know how many Americans are there and to not put a timeline until every American comes home.
We should be doing nothing else on the floor until every single American is home. Democrats called us back for an emergency session, the first session since Kabul fell to the Taliban. But faced with a national security and credibility crisis in Afghanistan, they have done nothing to plan to address it.
We were allotted 90 minutes, and, oh my God, we went over 15 minutes. But we made sure that then the Democrats had to shut that meeting down, that Members of Congress could ask no more longer questions because we needed to get back to the floor right now.
When history writes about this day, they will talk about the entire week. They will talk about last night, how Congress worked late into the night, actually ordered food to come in, was in the Speaker's Office for late hours, spent their day calling other Members and twisting votes. We had reports that the President called people, that former Presidents called people, and that people were threatened and that their spouses were threatened about jobs. We heard that they were threatened even in their own campaign.
But what were they threatened about? Was it anything to deal with Americans coming home? No. It was about this rule. It was about what we are bringing up right now. The reason we had to stop our briefing was because we had to come to the floor to deal with this.
So, what are we talking about? $5 trillion of hard-earned taxpayer money being spent on more Big Government, changing election law to benefit one party over another, outlawing IDs even though the majority of America wants it, and nothing about how that $5 trillion will spend
$1 bringing Americans home or making us safer.
What is the definition of a public servant? I would say doing something for the good of the others.
Madam Speaker, the party today of the majority, the Democrats here, their interest is themselves, to stay up late into the night while other nations are working to bring their citizens home.
Madam Speaker, as people walk onto this floor and vote on this bill that they worked late into the night on, I want them to think about one thing. I want them to think about those American families in Afghanistan who late into the night were not knowing if they could even make it to the airport, not knowing if they will even get out, and wondering if the public servants were thinking of them. The sad answer is the majority was not. They were thinking of themselves, that it is too important to deal with anything else.
Madam Speaker, there are allies who are sitting in Afghanistan. Why did they go? They went to defend America because America was attacked and out of the respect and character of who we are.
This body, elected and respected around the world, in a time of crisis doesn't speak of it and doesn't act on it but only acts for themselves and, in a moment of time of using the rules to allow the opportunity to change its course and to correct them when they were wrong, the voice of the other side says: No, we could not turn the floor over to allow America to know how many Americans are there or to get a report on it.
{time} 1415
Just as they bang the gavel down, the 90 minutes have come. You have asked enough questions. You can ask no more because we must get to the floor to pass $5 trillion and change election law so the Democrats believe they can buy and change an election.
Madam Speaker, if there is any moment in time to put an election aside, if there is any moment in time to put politics aside, I would have thought today was the day. I would have thought we were being called back so that we could focus on what the rest of the world is focused on.
So when the Speaker came to the floor to speak, I turned my volume up. Surely, she was going to speak of this day. Surely, she was going to talk about the Gold Star families. Surely, she was going to thank those veterans and those who have served here knowing what they are going through and what they are watching.
And you know what she said? Speaker Pelosi actually said: Today is a great day of pride for our country and Democrats. Today is a great day of pride for our country and our Democrats.
Let me be very clear. It is not. It is an embarrassing day for our Nation. We are 3 weeks away from the twentieth anniversary of 9/11, and this is what history will write. This is what you did with your majority. This is what you controlled. This is how you made sure you would not release the floor for the idea that Americans can find out how many are stuck in Afghanistan or how they are going to get home.
I hope you are proud of that because this is what your leadership has done. This is what your leadership worked on. This is what the power of the twisting of the arm has delivered. The United States of America is not going to let terrorists dictate when and how we get Americans out.
I firmly believe what has been said many times and especially by Abraham Lincoln, `` . . . government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.'' If you believe that too and you are watching, I ask that you pick up your phones and you call, especially if you are a Democrat because I do not think the leadership here represents you with what they are asking for. I know your love of this country.
I know the thousands upon thousands of Democrats who served their Nation, who served in Afghanistan, and I know those Americans who are in Afghanistan are not just of one party. I would like to see both parties work on the issue, what is really before us.
Can you not put politics aside? Can you not care for one moment that you could rig an election to get elected? Can you not care about making government so large that you are going to bring more inflation and trillions of dollars?
That is what you spent last night on. That is what you spent the whole time on. That is what you brought us in for. That is what you closed the briefing on, but we couldn't ask any more questions. Time is up. That is what you are fighting so hard for that a veteran who has served his country asked for a previous question to simply say: Can we get a report of how many Americans are still there? And asked that we do not pick a date when we get out until every American is out.
But I heard the leadership on the other side say that we could not do that. We have to change the election law. We have to spend $5 trillion. This is what we came back for in a special session. This is what our mission is.
Everyone who votes for this rule today, that is what you are voting for. That is what you are championing. That is what history will write. And, no, it is not a good day. Maybe in your caucus you think it is a great day for you and the Democrats. It is an embarrassing day for America. It is an embarrassing day for this floor, and it is embarrassing that you would even move forward with it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair, and not to each other in the second person or to a perceived viewing audience.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague on the Rules Committee for the respectful way in which she has engaged in today's debate. I wish I could say the same for all of the speeches that Members have delivered today.
I think it is unfortunate to have deeply partisan speeches made on the floor on matters of such great significance. I have great respect and reverence for Democratic and Republican Members of this body who have served so honorably in our Nation's Armed Forces and who have been working together to do everything they can, in concert with the administration, to evacuate Americans and our Afghan partners out of Afghanistan.
I think it is unfortunate, as I said, to hear folks politicize that particular issue. I didn't hear much, Madam Speaker, regarding the bipartisan infrastructure deal that we are considering today. I didn't hear much by way of specifics in terms of the voting rights advancement act that we are considering today. Why? Because my friends on the other side of the aisle know that both the Build Back Better plan and the bipartisan infrastructure deal will create jobs, will lower costs, and will cut taxes.
I wish we could have a reasonable debate on the merits of these particular policies, but it is clear that some would prefer to avoid that debate entirely.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), my distinguished colleague on the Judiciary Committee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I am very proud to be able to stand here today remembering the Constitution and saying to my good friends that this floor belongs to the American people. This floor is a floor, as John Lewis has often challenged us, that calls upon us to be courageous.
I am also here to say to you that I have no doubt that the United States military, with the will of the American people, will ensure that all Americans come out of Afghanistan and our allies. But at the same time, I am grateful for the idea of a build back America act that will have Texas get universal pre-K childcare, tuition-free community college. And then, of course, the invest act that will see us get $537 million for bridges, $100 million for broadband, $3.3 billion for public transit so that our climate can improve.
I know that the Texas delegation, State representatives who sacrificed and came to this Nation's Capital to cry out for justice, Texas Democratic representatives who are here in this place now, that H.R. 4 is going to save the day, not partisan, but it is going to make us a democratic Republic. And we need to pass H.R. 4 because John Lewis said: Do you have any courage?
Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Judiciary Committee and an original cosponsor, I rise today in strong support of the Rule governing debate of Senate Amendment to H.R. 3684, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act; S. Con. Res. 14, Budget Resolution For Build Back Better Plan; and H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, I rise in strong support of the Rule governing debate of Senate Amendment to H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which represents the most significant long-term investment in the United States' infrastructure and competitiveness in nearly a century.
This legislation will make life better for Americans across the country, create a generation of good-paying union jobs, grow our economy, invest in communities that have too often been left behind, and better position the United States to compete globally and win in the 21st century.
The United States is the wealthiest country in the world, yet after decades of underinvestment, the country's roads, bridges, and water systems are crumbling, and our electric grid is vulnerable to catastrophic outages.
Too many families lack access to affordable, high-speed internet, clean drinking water, and public transportation, and too often, past infrastructure investments have disproportionately and negatively impacted low-income neighborhoods and communities of color.
Investing in our infrastructure--and investing in communities across the country--can create millions of good-paying jobs in underserved areas and lay the groundwork for not only a full economic recovery from the pandemic, but also usher in a new era of American innovation and prosperity.
The historic Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act invests $550 billion in new federal investment to make an array of transformational investments in our country's infrastructure including:
$121 billion to repair and rebuild our roads and bridges with a focus on climate change mitigation, resilience, equity, and safety for all users, including cyclists and pedestrians.
$89.9 billion to modernize America's public transit, by increasing routes, reducing the transit maintenance backlog, and providing more frequent service, resulting in better options for riders, improved environmental outcomes, and increased access to jobs and essential destinations.
$66 billion to modernize and expand passenger and freight rail networks across the country, to position our railways to play a central role in our transportation and economic future.
$15 billion in zero emission and clean buses and ferries and to build the first-ever national network of electric vehicle chargers in the United States, in order to address the adoption of electric vehicles and support domestic manufacturing jobs.
$42 billion to modernize our airports, ports, and waterways;
$50 billion to weatherize our infrastructure and insulate it against the threats of droughts, floods, and wildfires.
$55 billion to drinking water infrastructure, including eliminating the Nation's lead service lines and pipes, thereby delivering clean drinking water to up to ten million American families and more than 400,000 schools and child care facilities that currently do not have it, including in Tribal nations and disadvantaged communities.
$65 billion to upgrade our power infrastructure to facilitate the expansion of renewable energy.
$21 billion in environmental remediation, making it the largest investment in addressing the legacy pollution that harms the public health of communities and neighborhoods in American history.
$65 billion to connect every American to reliable high-speed internet, building on the billions of dollars for broadband deployment in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
Across this country, far too many communities are struggling with crumbling roads and structurally unsound bridges, outrageous congestion, lead-coated pipes and no broadband access.
The Senate Amendment to H.R. 3684 addresses economic disparities in our economy and the consequences of decades of disinvestment in America's infrastructure that have fallen most heavily on communities of color.
Through critical investments, the legislation increases access to good-paying jobs, affordable high-speed internet, reliable public transit, clean drinking water and other resources to ensure communities of color get a fair shot at the American dream.
These critical investments are first steps in advancing equity and racial justice throughout our economy.
Additional investments are needed in our nation's caregiving infrastructure, housing supply, regional development, and workforce development programs to ensure that communities of color and other underserved communities can access economic opportunity and justice.
This bill will address these challenges, and will also deliver much-
needed investment to my home state of Texas, making life better for millions of Texas residents.
Specifically, under the bill, Texas is expected to receive:
$26.9 billion for federal-aid highway apportioned programs and $537 million for bridge replacement and repairs with a focus on climate change mitigation, resilience, equity, and safety for all users, including cyclists and pedestrians;
$3.3 billion over five years to improve public transportation options across the state through healthy, sustainable transportation options for millions of Americans;
$408 million over five years to support the expansion of an EV charging network in the state; and
Texas will also have the opportunity to apply for the $2.5 billion in grant funding dedicated to EV charging in the bill;
A minimum allocation of $100 million to help provide broadband coverage across the state, including providing access to at least 1,058,000 Texans who currently lack it.
In addition, 8,381,000 or 29% of people in Texas will be eligible for the Affordability Connectivity Benefit, which will help low-income families afford internet access.
Madam Speaker, in sum, I encourage all members to support the Rule governing debate of Senate Amendment to H.R. 3684 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, so that we can invest in strengthening our infrastructure and competitiveness, and do so in a way that creates the good-paying union jobs of the future, addresses long-standing racial and economic injustice, and helps to fight the climate crisis.
Madam Speaker, as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, I rise in strong support of the Rule governing debate of S. Con. Res. 14, which reorders budgetary priorities to provide $3.5 trillion investments to build back better and provides reconciliation instructions to 13 House and 12 Senate committees to support visionary and transformative investments in the health, well-being, and financial security of America's workers and families.
It is often said that the federal budget is an expression of the nation's values and the budget resolution before us is a clear declaration of congressional Democrats' commitment to ensuring that our government, our economy, and our systems work For The People.
Madam Speaker, these long-overdue investments in America's future will be felt in every corner of the country and across every sector of American life, building on the success of the American Rescue Plan, accommodating historic infrastructure investments in the legislative pipeline, and addressing long-standing deficits in our communities by ending an era of chronic underinvestment so we can emerge from our current crises a stronger, more equitable nation.
Should our friends across the aisle join us in this endeavor, it would send a powerful signal to the American people if our colleagues across the aisle would join us in this effort because nothing would better show them that their elected representatives can set partisanship aside and put America first.
And that bipartisan achievement would portend success for similar initiatives in the area of strengthening the infrastructure of democracy in which every American has a vital interest, national and homeland security, and criminal justice and immigration reform.
I would urge my Republican colleagues to heed the words of Republican Governor Jim Justice of West Virginia who said colorfully several months ago, ``At this point in time in this nation, we need to go big. We need to quit counting the egg-sucking legs on the cows and count the cows and just move. And move forward and move right now.''
The same sentiment was expressed more eloquently by Abraham Lincoln in 1862 when he memorably wrote:
``The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, so we must think anew and act anew. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country.''
Madam Speaker, the bipartisan action we took in February 2021 when we passed the American Rescue Plan was a giant step in the right direction, but it was a targeted response to the immediate and urgent public health and economic crises; it was not a long-term solution to many of the pressing challenges facing our nation that have built up over decades of disinvestment in our nation and its people in every region and sector of the country.
We simply can no longer afford the costs of neglect and inaction; the time to act is now.
The Build Back Better Plan makes the transformative investments that we need to continue growing our economy, lower costs for working families, and position the United States as a global leader in innovation and the jobs of the future.
This $3.5 trillion gross investment will build on the successes of the American Rescue Plan and set our nation on a path of fiscal responsibility and broadly shared prosperity for generations to come.
The Build Back Better Plan will provide resources to improve our education, health, and child care systems, invest in clean energy and sustainability, address the housing crisis, and more; all while setting America up to compete and win in the decades ahead.
The Build Back Better Plan is paid for by ensuring that the wealthy and big corporations are paying their fair share and Americans making less than $400,000 a year will not see their taxes increase by a penny.
Let me repeat that: No American making less than $400,000 a year will not see their taxes increase by a penny.
In sum, Madam Speaker, the investments made by the Build Back Better Plan will expand opportunity for all and build an economy powered by shared prosperity and inclusive growth.
Madam Speaker, while I am proud to strongly support this Rule and underlying bill, I would be remiss if I did not express my disappointment at the Rules Committee's decision to not include my amendments to this bill.
Jackson Lee Amendments #6, #7, and #8 are easy to understand and vitally important--they simply protect state legislators who, in keeping with their sacred oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, refuse to perform unconstitutional acts under the guise of legislative process.
Specifically:
Jackson Lee Amendment #6 allows for federal judicial review of any warrants issued for the arrest of a state legislator where said state legislator refuses to engage in the state legislative process due to a reasonably held belief that doing so would infringe on the right to vote.
Jackson Lee Amendment #7 inserts a Sense of the Congress stating that a state's power to arrest a duly elected representative of a constituency for refusal to engage in a state's legislative process should be subject to federal judicial review where such elected representative's refusal is premised upon a reasonable belief that participation would result in the suppression of voting rights or other violations of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Jackson Lee Amendment #8 privileges against arrest any member of a state legislature for any reason except treason or murder while the legislature of that state is debating or voting on legislation relating to redistricting or election practices or legislation relating to the right to vote in federal, state, or municipal elections.
These amendments would have critically strengthened H.R. 4 because state legislatures across the country are utilizing every weapon in their arsenal to curtail voting rights; and no one should fear arrest due to fighting for the Constitutional rights of their constituents.
This includes my home state of Texas, where earlier this month officers of the Texas House of Representatives delivered civil arrest warrants, signed by the Texas state Speaker of the House, for more than 50 absent Democrats in an attempt force a vote on the naked attempt at voter suppression known as Texas S.B. 7.
This is the latest Republican attack on these brave state legislators, which began on May 30, where after a night of impassioned debate and procedural objections, these Democratic lawmakers in Texas took action to block passage of this massive overhaul of the state's election laws.
Since the arrest warrants were issued, it is my understanding that mass intimidation of the Texas House Democrats has occurred.
State officials came to their homes with the purpose of dragging them back to eviscerate the voting rights of thousands of Texans.
These elected Texas Representatives have had to hide away from their friends, their families, and their loved ones, all to ensure that Texans retain their most sacred of rights.
They are risking their freedom to ensure every Texan has full access to their constitutional right to vote.
Texas Republicans seek to pass voting regulation laws focused on diverse, urban areas, by setting rules for the distribution of polling places in only the handful of counties with a population of at least 1 million--most of which are either under Democratic control or won by Democrats in recent national and statewide elections.
Standing between all of this and the voting rights of thousands of Texans are those brave state legislators who currently have a warrant out for their arrest.
No elected representative in this great nation should fear that he or she will be locked away for simply standing up for justice and ensuring that America's citizens have the right to vote.
For this reason, I believe that H.R. 4 would have been greatly strengthened by the inclusion of my amendments in the Rule.
I strongly encourage all Members of Congress to support this Rule and the underlying bill, because it is the responsibility and sacred duty of all members of Congress who revere democracy to preserve, protect, and expand the precious right to vote of all Americans by passing H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Madam Speaker, I am here today to remind the nation that the need to pass this legislation is urgent because the right to vote--that
``powerful instrument that can break down the walls of injustice''--
faces grave threats.
The threat stems from the decision issued in June 2013 by the Supreme Court in Shelby County v Holder, 570 U.S. 193 (2013), which invalidated Section 4(b) of the VRA, and paralyzed the application of the VRA's Section 5 preclearance requirements.
Not to be content with the monument to disgrace that is the Shelby County decision, the activist right-wing conservative majority on the Roberts Court, on July 1, 2021, issued its evil twin, the decision in Brnovich v. DNC, 594 U.S. __, No. 19-1257 and 19-1258 (July 1, 2021), which engrafts on Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act onerous burdens that Congress never intended and explicitly legislated against.
Madam Speaker, were it not for the 24th Amendment, I venture to say that this conservative majority on the Court would subject poll taxes and literacy tests to the review standard enunciated in Brnovich v. DNC.
According to the Supreme Court majority, the reason for striking down Section 4(b) of the Voting Rights Act was that ``times change.''
Now, the Court was right; times have changed.
But what the Court did not fully appreciate is that the positive changes it cited are due almost entirely to the existence and vigorous enforcement of the Voting Rights Act.
And that is why the Voting Rights Act is still needed and that is why we must pass H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Let me put it this way: in the same way that the vaccine invented by Dr. Jonas Salk in 1953 eradicated the crippling effects but did not eliminate the cause of polio, the Voting Rights Act succeeded in stymieing the practices that resulted in the wholesale disenfranchisement of African Americans and language minorities but did not eliminate them entirely.
The Voting Rights Act is needed as much today to prevent another epidemic of voting disenfranchisement as Dr. Salk's vaccine is still needed to prevent another polio epidemic.
As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated in Shelby County v. Holder,
``[t]hrowing out preclearance when it has worked and is continuing to work to stop discriminatory changes is like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.''
For millions of Americans, the right to vote protected by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a sacred treasure, earned by the sweat and toil and tears and blood of ordinary Americans who showed the world it was possible to accomplish extraordinary things.
I strongly encourage all Members of Congress to support this bill, because it is the responsibility and sacred duty of all members of Congress who revere democracy to preserve, protect, and expand the precious right to vote of all Americans by passing H.R. 4, the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), the minority whip.
Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise to object to this whole process. What we are doing here today, this is an example of the misplaced priorities of this Democrat majority.
Let's start with the bill at hand, this package of bills that includes a budget that I am sure very few people in this Chamber have read, that authorizes the taxing and spending of trillions more dollars.
Now, what does that mean? They call it the for the children act. It really should be called the mountains of debt for the children act because that is what it does. If you look at inflation today, every family in America is facing inflation. They are paying over 40 percent more for gasoline, for cars, for things that they buy at the grocery store.
Families know that if you add trillions more in debt, trillions more in spending, trillions more in taxes, inflation will only go up and you know who is going to pay for it. It is not anybody in this Chamber, Madam Speaker. Under their own budget--it says it--it is the children. That is who is going to pay for it.
Right here. Just go to page 7 where it authorizes up to $45 trillion in debt--we are at about $28.6 trillion right now--$45 trillion in debt with taxes and spending through the roof that will hit every family in America, Madam Speaker.
Then let's get back to those priorities. Now, you would think with the backdrop of everything that we have been dealing with in Afghanistan, as we here in this Chamber, with so many of our veterans who served in Afghanistan honorably, have been calling on the President to ensure and commit that he will get all Americans out. Yet, what is our President doing? I will tell you what he has been doing. He has been working the phones pressuring Members of Congress this week.
I wish, Madam Speaker, I could say he was pressuring Members of Congress to help get Americans out. That is not what he was doing. He was working the phones this week pressuring Members of Congress to vote for this trillions of dollars in spending and tax package. That has been President Biden's priority.
He just said today he is going to bow to the Taliban's deadline of August 31 even if we don't get all Americans out. President Biden should be the President of the United States; not bowing to terrorists; not bowing to anybody except committing that he will get all Americans out instead of living by some artificial deadline.
Every ounce of his energy ought to be focused between now and next Tuesday, the date he set and the date the Taliban set, every minute he ought to be spending between now and next Tuesday should be focused on getting all Americans out. But if he fails to do it, people will look back and say: What was he doing instead? What were the President of the United States' priorities? He was pressuring Members of Congress to vote for this garbage: trillions of dollars in debt and spending, rather than focus on getting Americans out of harm's way that he left behind.
It is a national and international disgrace. Our priorities ought to be with the American people. That is what we will fight for. That is why we oppose this whole process.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, while I would relish the opportunity to respond to the points made by my colleague, we have a lot of enthusiasm on our side to speak in support of this rule.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut
(Ms. DeLauro), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Appropriations, who has led on the child tax cut for decades.
Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, this rule allows us to move forward on rebuilding our Nation's crumbling infrastructure, restoring the power of the Voting Rights Act, and an historic budget resolution that advances our priorities by making critical investments to expand our Nation's social safety net to continue to build back better.
For far too long, the deck has been stacked for the wealthy and the well-connected, while middle-class hardworking families and the vulnerable have been left behind.
After decades of disinvestment, we have an opportunity today to make history, to deliver on a promise we made to the American people: to build a stronger, fairer future for our kids; a once-in-a-lifetime moment, creating more jobs, cutting middle-class taxes, while simply asking the biggest corporations and the top 1 percent to pay their fair share of taxes.
What are the transformative issues in this bill: expanding to improve the child tax credit already acclaimed to cut child poverty and hunger with only one payment; guaranteeing affordable high-quality childcare; tackling the long-term healthcare crisis; access to long-term services and supports for aging loved ones and those with disabilities; universal pre-K; 2 years of tuition-free community college; maximizing the Pell grant award; launching the first-of-its-kind paid family and medical leave benefits; historic investments ranking alongside the New Deal and the Great Society, standing the test of time and strengthening our society.
President Roosevelt didn't just rebuild America. He created Social Security, and when it came to infrastructure and human needs, he did both. So to meet today's moment, we must and we can do both. We have that opportunity not to throw money at a problem but to build the architecture for the future.
Today, we must advance this rule and the budget resolution, demonstrating our commitment to our values, making a difference in the lives of so many Americans. This is a moral imperative. And to paraphrase President Franklin Roosevelt: This is our rendezvous with destiny, a watershed moment. Don't let the moment pass. It will not come back again. Let's seize it with action, with hope and unity of purpose for a better, stronger America.
{time} 1430
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).
Mrs. KIM of CALIFORNIA. Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the rule that is being debated as we consider the $3.5 trillion budget reconciliation.
I rise today in support of workers, families, and businesses in communities I represent in California's 39th Congressional District.
Now is the time for Congress to show it can work together for the American people.
As our economy recovers during the COVID-19 pandemic and Americans across the country pay more everywhere from the grocery store to the gas pump, Democrats are once again bypassing bipartisanship and moving forward with a partisan $3.5 trillion budget.
According to Tax Foundation, this budget reconciliation would also raise taxes for people I represent in California's 39th District by an average of over $600. My constituents have been burdened enough by some of the highest State taxes in the country.
Now, our Nation is scrambling to keep promises we made in Afghanistan to Americans and Afghan partners. The last thing we need is trillions more in spending on unrelated priorities and more taxes. This makes no sense.
The majority's budget will increase prices, raise taxes, and take even more money out of taxpayers' pockets. I urge my colleagues to vote
``no'' on this reconciliation.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, my colleague from California is certainly right about one thing, the Build Back Better plan would raise taxes on billionaires. The tax cuts that ultimately were approved by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle several years ago for the richest Americans in our country, we do not pursue that in our bill. Instead, we pursue tax cuts for working families, for middle-class Americans.
Madam Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Financial Services, whose leadership has kept millions of Americans in their homes over the course of the last year.
Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule, which would pass the House's budget resolution. The budget resolution will make historic investments in housing in this country.
We are in the middle of a housing crisis. As chairwoman of the Financial Services Committee, it is not lost on me that more than 580,000 people experience homelessness on any given night, while millions of families are, at this moment, paying the bulk of their income toward rent.
The bottom line is that housing is infrastructure. This is why I introduced groundbreaking legislation, the Housing Is Infrastructure Act of 2021, to provide more than $600 billion to address our country's affordable housing crisis, increase first-generation homeownership, and end homelessness.
While the budget resolution only allocates $339 billion to the Financial Services Committee, this funding is still historic and will transform the lives of millions of families. However, we must first pass the budget resolution so that we can then pass the President's Build Back Better agenda, including this historic funding for housing programs.
This rule also brings us one step closer to the critical House passage of H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
This President is going to bring all of the Americans who want to come home, home.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Waltz).
Mr. WALTZ. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of Representative Gallagher's bill, to get us some simple facts: How many Americans are stranded and are we going to get them home.
Yes, these issues are important. We should debate these issues. Infrastructure, healthcare, all of these issues are critical to our country.
But the number one job of the Federal Government is to keep Americans safe. Today, America is less safe. Americans are stranded behind enemy lines, and they are not all going to get out by August 31.
Colleagues, what happens in Afghanistan does not stay in Afghanistan. It will follow us home. Terrorism is a cancer that once again will threaten the United States.
I want everyone to see this picture and remember it: Osama bin Laden--by the way, then-Vice President Biden opposed the raid to bring this man to justice. His deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri--know that name--who is now leading al-Qaida, now has a terrorism playground from which to plot and plan attacks on the United States once again.
The intelligence has been clear. Al-Qaida 3.0 will come roaring back. The Taliban equals al-Qaida. As we head into the 20th anniversary of 9/
11, we once again are going to face the prospect of more Pulse nightclubs, San Bernardinos, and, God forbid, another 9/11.
What has me so upset, so flaming mad, as a veteran, as a Green Beret that has had to fight this fight, is future soldiers are now going to have to go back and deal with this again, but now with no bases, no local allies, and a Taliban that is armed to the teeth with our own equipment. That is unconscionable. It is unacceptable. If the White House won't lead, then Congress will.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell).
Ms. SEWELL. Madam Speaker, I rise today in full support of H.R. 4, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
Madam Speaker, I have the great privilege of not only representing Birmingham, Montgomery, and my hometown of Selma, Alabama, but growing up, literally, at the foot of the Edmund Pettus Bridge, I had an opportunity time and time again to see John Lewis in action.
John would come to my home church, Brown Chapel AME Church, to remind us all that what happened on that bridge 56 years ago was that Americans, ordinary Americans, dared to stand up to this country and to make sure that it lived up to its ideals of justice and equality for all.
I am proud to say that I get to walk in the footsteps of John Lewis, but I am more proud of the fact that so many of us in this Chamber walked with him.
The best way that we can live up to the legacy of John Lewis is to remember that he fought for every American to have the equal right to vote, equal access to the ballot box.
I get that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is reserved for the most egregious State actors. But what it says is that Federal oversight is needed when States go amok.
Since the Shelby v. Holder decision, I have introduced, in four successive Congresses, the Voting Rights Advancement Act, and we renamed it the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act.
We must live up to John's ideals of equality and justice for all in voting rights. What we have seen in States like Georgia and Texas, and around this country, has been State legislatures making it harder for people to vote.
I just want to say that we must get into good trouble, necessary trouble. John reminded us that we must be courageous in the face of adversity and in the face of inequity. I ask for you to please vote for H.R. 4 and vote for the rule that would get it to the floor.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers), the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee.
Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule.
For 4 months, Republicans have demanded to know the President's plan to evacuate Americans and Afghan allies and conduct counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan. For 4 months, they have told us: ``We are working on it.''
Well, now it is clear they never had a plan. The President's abject failure to plan is endangering the lives of thousands of American civilians and our allies in Afghanistan.
Reports have been rolling in for over a week of Americans being assaulted or having to hide from Taliban thugs while they wait for a rescue. Afghan allies are being brutalized and killed by these terrorists as they desperately try to get inside the gates of the Kabul airport.
And that is just those lucky enough to be in Kabul. Thousands of Americans and Afghan allies are still stranded hundreds of miles away from Kabul with little hope of rescue.
Now comes an ultimatum from the terrorists that if our forces don't withdraw by next Tuesday, they will start shooting.
What is the response from the majority? Well, Speaker Pelosi brought us back to Washington, but not to deal with this dire situation in Afghanistan. No, we are here today to vote on a partisan, $4 trillion giveaway to the radical left; a bill that doesn't include a single dollar to rescue Americans or our allies from Afghanistan or even a single penny on national security.
I have to wonder what the majority is thinking. Instead of this partisan exercise, I urge the majority to work with us to hold the President accountable and save Americans and allies still in Afghanistan.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan).
Mr. RYAN. Madam Speaker, we see our Republican friends are very upset. They said: This is embarrassing. What are we doing? What have we done?
What you are mad about is that we are delivering for the American people. We saved pensions; we cut taxes for working-class people; we invested in the communities, and we invested in the schools. Now, universal preschool; everyone can go to community college; vision, dental, hearing for Medicare recipients; and paid family leave.
If you think for one second I am going to apologize for what we are doing, you are wrong.
Once again, we should have done this 30 or 40 years ago. And, obviously, once again, the Republican Party is MIA.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Sewell). Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ellzey).
Mr. ELLZEY. Madam Speaker, I rise to urge defeat of the previous question so that we can immediately consider H.R. 5071.
Operations Enduring Freedom and Freedom's Sentinel are coming to a conclusion in a way that no American should be willing to tolerate nor accept. This conflict began nearly 20 years ago. There have been 2,443 U.S. military killed in action, 3,800 contractor and DOD civilians killed in action, 1,144 allied troops killed in action, and over 30,000 veteran suicides since 9/11; the victims of their internal and unseen wounds.
In Texas District 6, we lost Staff Sergeant Jeremy S. on April 6, 2011, and Private First Class Joel R. on April 16, 2011. Brothers in arms, killed 10 days apart.
In Texas, we have lost 193 of our sons and daughters, all of whom, like Luke Bushatz would say: ``Not one ounce of sweat or blood in the defense of others is a waste.'' But last week, this administration handed over 600,000 weapons, 75,000 vehicles, and 200 aircraft to the enemy.
What we have now is September 10, 2001, with a well-armed enemy.
For those who have stood the watch and those who have died standing that watch, duty, honor, and country is not an academic study; it is a way of life and sometimes death.
So I call on our Commander in Chief, Madam Speaker, to take those words as seriously as we do and to do his duty to honor our servicemembers and their families by informing this body, and the Americans we represent, every day on what is happening on the ground in Afghanistan and what this administration is doing to bring American citizens, and the Afghans who helped us, to safety.
Infrastructure needs did not leave 10,000 to 15,000 Americans stranded. Climate change did not cause this catastrophe. Combat is a not a PowerPoint briefing. American lives are at stake. Get our countrymen out of Afghanistan. The mission is only complete when they are out, not one minute before.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1445
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).
Mr. ARRINGTON. Madam Speaker, with respect to the rule and bills, if someone were to devise a plan to intentionally destroy the great State of Texas, they would do the following:
They would sabotage their sovereignty by opening its borders and granting amnesty and citizenship.
They would steal the right to safeguard the integrity of their elections.
They would strip the freedoms of both employees and employers by forcing unionization of the workforce.
They would destroy its agriculture and energy economy by abusing their regulatory authority and weaponizing the tax code in the name of a politically manufactured climate crisis.
They would crush the most prosperous economy in the Nation under the weight of the highest tax rates in the world.
They would quench the spirit of self-reliance.
They would diminish the dignity of work by trapping their citizens in an endless cycle of government dependence and poverty.
And they would permanently plunder the freedom and independence of the Lone Star State by saddling future generations with a debt they could never repay.
While this legislation, Madam Speaker, may not have been written with the intention of destroying the State of Texas, it is clear that should these bills pass, that is exactly what it would do, and not only to my great State but to the entire Nation.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert).
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Madam Speaker, this is a moment where I am hoping our friends on the left will keep a certain promise that many of you have made, Madam Speaker, because we have a long list of the promises from the President to leadership and to others promising that this spending will be 100 percent paid for.
You already know we are going to have probably a continuing resolution with the omnibus. There is a trillion dollars of structural debt there. Okay. And the $1.2 trillion so-called bipartisan--
bipartisan in the Senate.
Okay, when we actually do the honest math, it is not a quarter trillion of borrowing; it is about $500 billion of borrowing because a bunch of the pay-fors are fake.
When we start looking at what Senate Finance and others--where are you getting the other $1.7 trillion on your $3.5 trillion of spending?
Look, I am just asking you to keep a promise because when you add up all the new revenues, all the new receipts, all the new tax hikes, the corporate tax hikes that unemployed some million Americans in 24 months, the capital gains tax that loses money, where are you going to get all this cash that you have promised will be 100 percent paid for?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair again reminds Members to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority leader.
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this rule. This rule allows the Congress of the United States to do the people's business in two critical areas--actually, three.
Number one, it provides for us to receive from the Senate the budget and to do what the Republicans did on their tax bill: act on a budget reconciliation bill.
You did that. You, of course, didn't pay for it. We are going to pay for this.
Secondly, this rule allows us to proceed on a piece of legislation which seeks to make sure that the Voting Rights Act, protecting the most important asset a citizen has, and that is their right to vote or, as our Speaker has said, the voice of those not empowered. That is not exactly what it was, Madam Speaker.
Two of these items are critical, and when we talk about saving lives, the reconciliation bill and the budget, the Build Back Better Act is going to save lives and enrich the quality of lives of our people.
Thirdly, this rule will allow us to proceed to adopt the bipartisan--
69 Senators voting for it--infrastructure bill. It is not a perfect bill. It is not our bill, and it is limited in some respects in terms of its addressing one of our most important challenges and enemies, and that is climate change. It nevertheless is a very, very substantial investment in America, its growth, people, and jobs.
Vote for this rule. It is a good bill for the people.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close.
Madam Speaker, Democrats continue to ram through controversial policies and reckless spending with a complete disregard for the rules and with no consideration of what those decisions will mean for future generations and what they have to pay back.
President Biden took office saying he would be President for everybody, but he certainly isn't acting like that. The legislation before us today that is included in this rule would leave rural communities behind, concentrate even more power at the Federal level, and tax and spend recklessly.
The President is too busy pressuring Members of his own party to support $5 trillion in spending to even address the crisis in Afghanistan.
Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule and the underlying bills, and I ask Members to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
We have heard a lot about partisanship during the course of today's debate.
What are the three bills that we are considering within the rule today?
The John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, a reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act. VRA has been reauthorized by Republicans and Democrats in the United States Congress for decades. The last time it was signed by George W. Bush, a Republican.
A bipartisan infrastructure deal that earned the votes of 69 Senators, 19 Republicans, including Mitch McConnell, but apparently, that proposal is too radical for the House Republican Conference.
And a Build Back Better plan that would invest in American families, that would lower costs, that would cut taxes for working families.
Americans are worth investing in. Our families, our students, our teachers, our firefighters, our communities are worth investing in. And we have a chance to do that today.
The late Congressman John Lewis once said that every generation leaves behind a legacy. What that legacy will be is determined by the people of that generation. Madam Speaker, I would say that our legacy must be one of progress, of courage, and of action.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this rule and on the previous question.
The material previously referred to by Mrs. Fischbach is as follows:
Amendment to House Resolution 601
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 7. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 5071) to direct the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress daily reports on the evacuation of citizens and permanent residents of the United States from Afghanistan, 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 Armed Services; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 8. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 5071.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam 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.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, nays 212, not voting 0, as follows:
YEAS--220
Adams Aguilar Allred Auchincloss Axne Barragan Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Bourdeaux Bowman Boyle, Brendan F. Brown Brownley Bush Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Carson Carter (LA) Cartwright Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Delgado Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doggett Doyle, Michael F. Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Fletcher Foster Frankel, Lois Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Golden Gomez Gonzalez, Vicente Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Higgins (NY) Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jacobs (CA) Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Jones Kahele Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim (NJ) Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lieu Lofgren Lowenthal Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Manning Matsui McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Mfume Moore (WI) Morelle Moulton Mrvan Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Newman Norcross O'Halleran Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Pelosi Perlmutter Peters Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Ross Roybal-Allard Ruiz Ruppersberger Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell Sherman Sherrill Sires Slotkin Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Suozzi Swalwell Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Trone Underwood Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wexton Wild Williams (GA) Wilson (FL) Yarmuth
NAYS--212
Aderholt Allen Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bentz Bergman Bice (OK) Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Boebert Bost Brady Brooks Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Calvert Cammack Carl Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Cawthorn Chabot Cheney Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Comer Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Donalds Duncan Dunn Ellzey Emmer Estes Fallon Feenstra Ferguson Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fortenberry Foxx Franklin, C. Scott Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gibbs Gimenez Gohmert Gonzales, Tony Gonzalez (OH) Good (VA) Gooden (TX) Gosar Granger Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Greene (GA) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hagedorn Harris Harshbarger Hartzler Hern Herrell Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Hill Hinson Hollingsworth Hudson Huizenga Issa Jackson Jacobs (NY) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kim (CA) Kinzinger Kustoff LaHood LaMalfa Lamborn Latta LaTurner Lesko Letlow Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Mace Malliotakis Mann Massie Mast McCarthy McCaul McClain McClintock McHenry McKinley Meijer Meuser Miller (IL) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Mooney Moore (AL) Moore (UT) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunes Obernolte Owens Palazzo Palmer Pence Perry Pfluger Posey Reed Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Rodgers (WA) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rosendale Rouzer Roy Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sessions Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Steel Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner Upton Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Wagner Walberg Walorski Waltz Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Young Zeldin
{time} 1533
Messrs. ROUZER, BRADY, and RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress
Aderholt (Moolenaar) Amodei (Balderson) Barragan (Raskin) Blumenauer (Bonamici) Bowman (Omar) Brownley (Clark (MA)) Calvert (Garcia (CA)) Cardenas (Correa) Curtis (Moore (UT)) Davids (KS) (Kim (NJ)) DeFazio (Brown) DeGette (Blunt Rochester) DeSaulnier (Thompson (CA)) Deutch (Rice (NY)) Diaz-Balart (Cammack) Duncan (Babin) Emmer (Cammack) Escobar (Garcia (TX)) Fleischmann (Bilirakis) Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA)) Garbarino (Miller-Meeks) Garamendi (Sherman) Gibbs (Smucker) Gomez (Raskin) Granger (Cole) Grijalva (Stanton) Hagedorn (Meuser) Harshbarger (Kustoff) Herrera Beutler (Simpson) Horsford (Kilmer) Jayapal (Raskin) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Katko (Malliotakis) Kelly (IL) (Clarke (NY)) Khanna (Lee (CA)) Kind (Connolly) Kirkpatrick (Stanton) Lawson (FL) (Evans) Luetkemeyer (Long) Maloney, Carolyn B. (Clarke (NY)) McEachin (Wexton) McHenry (Budd) McNerney (Huffman) Meijer (Moore (UT)) Meng (Jeffries) Moore (AL) (Brooks) Moulton (McGovern) Mullin (Lucas) Napolitano (Correa) Nehls (Jackson) Newman (Casten) Nunes (Garcia (CA)) Payne (Pallone) Pingree (Kuster) Pocan (Raskin) Porter (Wexton) Pressley (Omar) Reed (Arrington) Reschenthaler (Meuser) Rodgers (WA) (Joyce (PA)) Roybal-Allard (Aguilar) Ruiz (Correa) Rush (Underwood) Salazar (Cammack) Sanchez (Aguilar) Scott, David (Cartwright) Sires (Pallone) Steel (Obernolte) Stefanik (Meuser) Steube (Cammack) Stevens (Dingell) Stewart (Owens) Strickland (Larsen (WA)) Thompson (PA) (Meuser) Timmons (Cammack) Titus (Connolly) Tonko (Pallone) Torres (CA) (Correa) Trone (Connolly) Vargas (Correa) Velazquez (Clarke (NY)) Wagner (Long) Walorski (Baird) Watson Coleman (Pallone) Welch (McGovern) Wilson (FL) (Hayes) Young (Malliotakis)
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.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220, nays 212, not voting 0, as follows:
YEAS--220
Adams Aguilar Allred Auchincloss Axne Barragan Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Bourdeaux Bowman Boyle, Brendan F. Brown Brownley Bush Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Carson Carter (LA) Cartwright Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Delgado Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doggett Doyle, Michael F. Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Fletcher Foster Frankel, Lois Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Golden Gomez Gonzalez, Vicente Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Higgins (NY) Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jacobs (CA) Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Jones Kahele Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim (NJ) Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lieu Lofgren Lowenthal Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Manning Matsui McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Mfume Moore (WI) Morelle Moulton Mrvan Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Newman Norcross O'Halleran Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Pelosi Perlmutter Peters Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Ross Roybal-Allard Ruiz Ruppersberger Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell Sherman Sherrill Sires Slotkin Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Suozzi Swalwell Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Trone Underwood Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wexton Wild Williams (GA) Wilson (FL) Yarmuth
NAYS--212
Aderholt Allen Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bentz Bergman Bice (OK) Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Boebert Bost Brady Brooks Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Calvert Cammack Carl Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Cawthorn Chabot Cheney Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Comer Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Donalds Duncan Dunn Ellzey Emmer Estes Fallon Feenstra Ferguson Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fortenberry Foxx Franklin, C. Scott Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gibbs Gimenez Gohmert Gonzales, Tony Gonzalez (OH) Good (VA) Gooden (TX) Gosar Granger Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Greene (GA) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hagedorn Harris Harshbarger Hartzler Hern Herrell Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Hill Hinson Hollingsworth Hudson Huizenga Issa Jackson Jacobs (NY) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kim (CA) Kinzinger Kustoff LaHood LaMalfa Lamborn Latta LaTurner Lesko Letlow Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Mace Malliotakis Mann Massie Mast McCarthy McCaul McClain McClintock McHenry McKinley Meijer Meuser Miller (IL) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Mooney Moore (AL) Moore (UT) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nehls Newhouse Norman Nunes Obernolte Owens Palazzo Palmer Pence Perry Pfluger Posey Reed Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Rodgers (WA) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rosendale Rouzer Roy Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sessions Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Steel Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner Upton Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Wagner Walberg Walorski Waltz Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Young Zeldin
{time} 1608
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.
Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress
Aderholt (Moolenaar) Amodei (Balderson) Barragan (Raskin) Blumenauer (Bonamici) Bowman (Omar) Brownley (Clark (MA)) Buchanan (Dunn) Calvert (Garcia (CA)) Cardenas (Correa) Curtis (Moore (UT)) Davids (KS) (Kim (NJ)) DeFazio (Brown) DeGette (Blunt Rochester) DeSaulnier (Thompson (CA)) Deutch (Rice (NY)) Diaz-Balart (Cammack) Duncan (Babin) Emmer (Cammack) Escobar (Garcia (TX)) Fleischmann (Bilirakis) Frankel, Lois (Clark (MA)) Garbarino (Miller-Meeks) Garamendi (Sherman) Gibbs (Smucker) Gomez (Raskin) Granger (Cole) Grijalva (Stanton) Hagedorn (Meuser) Harshbarger (Kustoff) Herrera Beutler (Simpson) Horsford (Kilmer) Jayapal (Raskin) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Katko (Malliotakis) Kelly (IL) (Clarke (NY)) Khanna (Lee (CA)) Kind (Connolly) Kirkpatrick (Stanton) Lawson (FL) (Evans) Luetkemeyer (Long) Maloney, Carolyn B. (Clarke (NY)) McEachin (Wexton) McHenry (Budd) McNerney (Huffman) Meijer (Moore (UT)) Meng (Jeffries) Moore (AL) (Brooks) Moulton (McGovern) Mullin (Lucas) Napolitano (Correa) Nehls (Jackson) Newman (Casten) Nunes (Garcia (CA)) Payne (Pallone) Pingree (Kuster) Pocan (Raskin) Porter (Wexton) Pressley (Omar) Reed (Arrington) Reschenthaler (Meuser) Rodgers (WA) (Joyce (PA)) Roybal-Allard (Aguilar) Ruiz (Correa) Rush (Underwood) Salazar (Cammack) Sanchez (Aguilar) Scott, David (Cartwright) Sires (Pallone) Steel (Obernolte) Stefanik (Meuser) Steube (Cammack) Stevens (Dingell) Stewart (Owens) Strickland (Larsen (WA)) Thompson (PA) (Meuser) Timmons (Cammack) Titus (Connolly) Tonko (Pallone) Torres (CA) (Correa) Trone (Connolly) Vargas (Correa) Velazquez (Clarke (NY)) Wagner (Long) Walorski (Baird) Watson Coleman (Pallone) Welch (McGovern) Wilson (FL) (Hayes) Young (Malliotakis)
____________________
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
House Representatives' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.
Alerts Sign-up