committee worked tirelessly to pass three health care bills unanimously to address them. now, how often is that said on this floor? not very often. it was a moment that i heard from almost every member in that committee a moment of pride. we could have legislation passed in a bipartisan fashion today. we could take from that committee and bring it to the floor and we'd have the exact same thing happen. you know who wins? all of america. sadly, however, these good faith efforts have been unnecessarily thrown into a partisan and senls attempt to bail out -- senseless attempt to bail out pieces of the affordable care act. now, i don't say that, but i guess i just did, mr. chairman. i knew it because i happened to

be a member of congress. i watched it because i watched the committee work together, finds common ground, in place that it's really difficult. but when i looked at "the washington post," it was very interesting. this is what they said. they actually put it best. democrats are putting a political pot hole, yeah, that's what they said, a political pothole in the way of real drug pricing reform. if you ever spend time back in your district or across this country, i will promise you one of the top three issues you will get are the price of drugs. i think everybody in this body was look forward to this day prior to -- was looking forward to this day prior to the democrats playing with political pot holes. the drug pricing exronet of this is bill is very strong. the three drug pricing bills in this legislation get to the heart of the problem. the lack of competition in the

generic drug market, increased competition for generic drugs would lead to lower prices and make medication more accessible. two things i think anybody in america that they would desire. just think for a moment, you get more competition, more choice, and lower prices. we were so close, we got out of committee. the members on both sides said yes. the only step you had left, go to the rules committee and come to the floor. but as you pass through that committee to get to the rules committee and get to the floor, i guess it had to go through leadership. leadership made a choice. politics before people. these reforms would have removed barriers to generic drugs entering the market. again, making health care more affordable for patients. it's a real change. that boo have -- would have been a positive moment we all could have celebrated. but you know what's going to

happen here? it's going to be a partisan vote and a bill that goes nowhere. it's going to be a pothole that most people will say, this is what elected officials are supposed to fix. not create. it is the opposite of what elected officials are supposed to do. they're supposed to fill in the potholes, not dig them. but if you read "the washington post," they'll tell you exactly who created them. the democrats. there's a lot of things that happened on this floor, that at times are reckless, irresponsible and just downright embarrassing. mr. chairman, this is one of them. why in a time when both sides say they want to lower the price of the drugs and give people more options? it actually goes to the core of the individual of their own

health. the departments don't want to make law. they love playing politics -- democrats don't want to make law. they love playing politics. but do you know what happens when they play politics? not only do they keep drug prices high, they break another promise. i happen to have been in this body, mr. chairman, when i heard those words, if you like your health care, you could keep it. i thought those millions of americans who lost their health care that time, that that would be the end. but no, mr. chairman. the democrats took the majority again. i thought that was enough. you had taken enough health policies away from millions of americans? the answer was no. they had a few more to go. 1.5 million, the congressional budget office says. so think tomorrow what american -- when americans wake up. there was a moment, the prices could be lower. but no.

would they ever think, and not only are you not going to lower them, you're going to take my health care away? that's exactly what's going to happen here today. that's the poison pill they dded to the bills. 1.5 million americans will lose their plan. now, if you listen to the other side, they say, no, no, it's not neutral. you know what it is? the cobb says no, it goes down to -- the c.b.o. says no, it goes down to 500,000. i heard them use the congressional budget office thousands of times, mr. chairman, on this floor. i haven't heard them use them today. because, mr. chairman, if you read books about politicians, if you read the prints and you read the mack vellian, it's interesting. the end justifies the means. that's what it says. you see, it's about control.

it's really about who can control what you can have. there was a moment there that you'd have greater options and lower prices. no. we will tell you what you need and what you can have. there was a moment there that you would have options even greater when it came to health care. no, that's not going to be, we're going to take that away from you. and you know what, it's going to cost you more when we do it. now, mr. chairman, i would say i would be shocked that this was going to happen. i can't say i'm shocked anymore. because, mr. chairman, on one side of the aisle in this chamber, half of an entire party of the majority party has co-sponsored a bill, medicare for none. not only are they taking more than 1.5 million americans' plans today, they have a plan to take more than 150 million americans' plans away. they're going to bankrupt medicare. they're going to deny you if you

have a private health care now. but that's ok. the end justifies the means. why? because they have control. that's exactly what happened here, mr. chairman. you had a committee that worked in a bipartisan manner. it's really irresponsible that the rules committee or the leadership would undercut their own chair of that committee to put a poison pill on three bills that came out in a bipartisan manner. an idea that they would work in good faith, an idea that they would put people before politics. you know, when you study history and they talk about elected officials, they'll tell you even from the most local places you get elected, the jobs you're going to have are filling in potholes. i never heard someone say your job as elected officials is to create potholes.

that's what we witnessed today. t.s.a. sad day for this house. we could do so much better. we did in committee. is it just, mr. chairman, that the majority doesn't want to solve a problem? mr. chairman, i've searched. they've been in power for quite some time. and i have not found one problem they've solved yet. i found a few pot holes they created. i think we have enough problem db problems and when we have that moment that -- enough problems, and when we have that moment that we can come together inside a committee, could we just keep it a little longer so it could get to the floor? but, mr. chairman, there will be an option, there will be an amendment on this body that gives you the opportunity. so if you were in that committee of energy and commerce and you voted on these bills without the poison pill, it will be your moment of truth.

, it will tell a lot to america, mr. chairman. whether you serve your constituents or whether you serve your leadership. that's what we'll be watching. that's what america will be wondering. and that's with a we all hope will happen. i yield -- what we all hope will happen. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: may i inquire how much time is left? the chair: the gentleman has 1 1/2 minutes left. mr. walden: thank you, mr. chairman. again, i want to thank the republican leader of the u.s. house for not only his leadership on this issue, but on so many others. and for giving us clarity of what's really going on here. it is unfortunate, as "the washington post" reported, and other news media organizations, that it didn't have to be this way. didn't have to be this way. we did pass the three drug reform bills unanimously out of the committee. i was a big supporter of them. every republican was. i think every republican on the

floor will be if they get a chance to vote for those. in the past, when i was chairman of the committee, we moved over 143 bills out of the committee, 93% of them had bipartisan votes on the house floor, 57 became law. and one of those 57 contained about 6 to different opioids bills we -- 60 different opioids bills we rolled into just one. i agree with the leader, this is going to delay passage in the senate. because they're going to have to sort this out, rip it apart, the added spending and the navigator piece probably doesn't survive. but didn't have to be that way. i found that if you had a big bipartisan support out of the house, you're likely to get quicker action in the senate. and it goes on down to the president. if you want to do something quickly about high cost of drugs, stop bad behavior that denies access for new eninjuryic, then you want to move quickly, not slow slowly. you want to move in a bipartisan way, not a partisan way. unfortunately that's not our way today. with, that mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time -- with, that mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time --

with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. the chair is advised that amendment number 25 will not be offered. it is now in order to consider amendment number 26 printed in house report 116-61. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from oklahoma seek recognition? ms. horn: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 26 printed in house report 116-61 offered by ms. horn of oklahoma. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 377, the gentlewoman from oklahoma, ms. horn, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from oklahoma. ms. horn: i claim as much time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. horn: mr. chair, i am

pleased today to offer an amendment that ensures that rural areas are included in navigator outreach. under h.r. 987, strengthening health care and lowering drugs costs act. this amendment ensures that workers -- that the navigators who help people understand their options under the affordable care act also help our rural communities. the overall bill places federally funded grants and communities across the country to pay navigaters who play a vital role in helping americans understand their health coverage options in the marketplace. it helps them know what they qualify for. and without question, access to health care is one of our nation's most critical issues. this is true across the country, whether in major metropolitan areas, big cities, small towns, on the coast or in the heartland. but the specific problems look different from place to place. and our rural communities are undoubtedly struggling.

one of the worst outcomes in rural communities of lack of access to health care is hospital closures. sadly, oklahoma is no stranger to them. we have already lost six hospitals since 2010 and many ore are teetering on the edge. hospitals can't simple -- simply put, hospitals can't stay open. when their parents -- patients don't have coverage and the hospitals aren't able to pay their bills. right now oklahoma has the second highest uninsured rate in the nation and our rural areas often bear the brunt of the coverage gap. they simply don't have enough patients with coverage to offset the ones without it. "the washington post" just wrote a story about a 15-bed hospital in my home state in a town called fairfax. fairfax community hospital was so close to closing that their computer software won't operate. because the licensing fees haven't been paid.

and their air conditioning is also shut down. imagine that. as it gets hotter and hotter in the oklahoma summer time. i just want to share an excerpt of the story because these matters are about real lives. it's not about numbers. these are about people who are suffering because they don't have access to care. it starts with c.e.o. tina steele talking to the employees who are crammed in a crowded office and sweating. so how desperate are we, one employee asked. how much money do we have in the bank? somewhere around $12,000, steele said. and how long will that last us? under normal circumstances, steele looked down at the chart on her desk and ran calculations in her head. probably a few hours, maybe a day at most. the only reason the hospital had been able to stay open at all was that about 30 employees continued showing up to work without pay. there was no other hospital

within 30 miles of the two-lane roads and prairie-sprawling osage county which meant fairfax community was the only life line in part of the county that needed increasing services. . if we aren't opened, where do these people go, thinking about the dozens of patients he treated each months in the e.r., including some in critical condition after drug overdoses, fall from horse, oil field disasters, and car crashes? they'll go to the cemetery, another employee said. if we're not here, these people don't have time. they'll die along with this hospital. like i said, there are similar stories in other hospitals that have played out six times across oklahoma and in many other places. according to some estimates, there are 102 hospitals that have closed nationwide. and we as americans can't let our neighbors die simply because they live in small

towns. we must solve this rural hospital crisis. navigators are a part of that solution. this amendment makes sure that we have -- that a we help people living in small towns across oklahoma and the country stay healthy and understand their options so that they can take care of themselves and their families. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? mr. walden: i seek time in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. walden: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from oregon reserves. the gentlewoman from oklahoma is recognized. ms. horn: thank you, mr. chairman. adding on to this, the inclusion of rural communities and with navigators serving them is critical because from 2016 to 2018, oklahoma lost 78% of its navigator funding. the very communities that are in the most need were people have the least access to

services an understanding including broadband that they can access the services they need are the very ones suffering most. these closures and the lack of access not only have an effect in the communities that directly impact them, but ripple across my state and this nation. the chair: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'm outraged to find out that these navigators are not reaching out to people in rural areas. what we have learned today on the house floor is that aapparently this program doesn't reach people in rural areas. that's why the gentlelady from oklahoma has this amendment, apparently. is these 1/2 -- what the heck do they do? we have had amendments to say you got to have navigators reach out to people on medicaid. you have to have navigators to

reach out people on children's health insurance programs. we have to tell them that? what have they been doing? we have an amendment coming up saying navigators, we're going to put in federal law that you have to reach out to the veterans community. they don't do that today? are you serious? we're going to have navigators be educated. when you are reaching out, you better talk about mental health services and substance abuse. have they been ignoring that all along? i guess so. because my friends on o the other side of the aisle have been bringing amendment after amendment to correct these obvious omissions and problems with the navigator program. what has been going on in the navigator program? this is outrageous to learn that rural areas, and i represent an area that would stretch from the atlantic ocean to ohio, 69,000 square miles,

talk about rural. i'm going to find out why the heck those navigators aren't talking to people in my district. and why we have to put in law that they have to now? how many years has this been going on under obamacare? and at what cost to taxpayers? and you're going to give them another 25 million? who are they talking to? are they talking to people in suburban areas only or urban areas only? if they are not talking about medicaid and chip and apparently not to veterans, who are they counseling and what are they telling them? hat a disaster of a program. we ought to halt right now and figure out who are these people and what are they getting paid to do? we know they cost $767 for every enrollee compared to $2.40 in the private sector. we're paying them a lot. we know that investigations have shown that one grantee

took $200,000 and enrolled one person. apparently that person was not a a veteran, not on medicaid, not in a rural area, not on chip. who knows. i appreciate the gentlelady's amendment, but i'm astonished to learn the fact that we have to put it in law that they have to talk to people in rural areas. this demands investigation and 23ig out what in the heck is going on. let's talk about what else is facing us. what really takes care of people in rural areas are community health centers, 27 million people, one in 12 in every state. district of columbia and the territories rely on community health centers for their car, and the patients treated at these centers, one in three are living in poverty, one in five are rural residents, one in nine are children. if you want to put money, taxpayer money to good purpose, it would be to fund our community health centers like republicans led the way on last

time at record levels because we know they deliver for people in rural areas. they deliver for people in urban areas. they deliver quality care. that's where our money should go. not into a program like this apparently that we have to have these amendments from democrat members. i think we had 25 amendments telling navigators g. to rural areas, veterans. who are they serving today? it's a mess. mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yolds. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from oklahoma. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 27 printed in house report 116-61. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition?

>> mr. chair i have a an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 27, printed in house report number 116-61, offered by mr. cunningham of south carolina. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 377, the gentleman from south carolina, mr. cunningham, and a member opposed, will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina. mr. cun canning ham: mr. chair, i rise today in support of my straightforward, commonsense amendment which would ensure that our nation's veterans have access to quality, affordable health insurance coverage. while people often think that everyone who has served in the military immediately has access to v.a. health care, this is not the case. in fact, only three out of five veterans under the age of 65 are eligible for health care through the v.a., and only a quarter of those who are eligible for v.a. health care rely on the v.a. as their sole source of insurance younger veterans who served forer 24

consecutive months are eligible for v.a. coverage for five years after their discharge, and veterans over the age of 65 qualify for medicare. this leaves a potential gap in coverage for many veterans who have recently served after their five-year period and before they become eligible for medicare. that is why it is imperative that health care exchange outreach and educational strategies be designed in a way to reach our nation's veterans. as a member of the house committee on veterans' affairs, i am committed to ensure every veteran has access to high quality health care regardless of where they receive that care. and studies show that when americans are informed about the correct time to sign up for health care and the options to make that coverage affordable, they choose to get insured. my amendment is simply asking that bemake our nation's veterans a -- that we make our nation's vetance aware of the benefits available to them. this is particularly important to the low country because my district has one of the highest

concentration of veterans in the entire country. has the highest concentrations in the entire state of south carolina, and i want to make sure each of them are aware of their coverage options. so they can can can make the best choice for them -- so theek make the best choice for can make ek -- they the best choices for themselves and their family. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? mr. walden: i seek time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. walden: thank you, mr. chairman. as i said in the last amendment debate, it's astonishing to me that apparently these navigators aren't serving people in rural areas. now i find out that they are apparently the not serving our veterans population effectively as well. i am a' going to reserve the balance of my time. -- i'm going to reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from

south carolina is recognized. mr. cunningham: in closing i would like to thank chairman pallone and chairman scott for their work in constructing this important legislation which will lower drug prices, stabilize the insurance market, and decrease premiums for hardworking families across this country. i also want to thank chairman mcgovern and my colleagues on the rules committee for allowing my amendment to come to the floor. i would urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of this commonsense amendment, as well as the underlying legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yield. the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the gentleman for his service to the country and all our veterans, men and women who wear our uniform, deliver our undying appreciation and thanks. but it is astonishing, once again, astonishing, appalling that these navigators apparently aren't serving our veterans. and we have to come to the floor with amendments to federal law to order them to take care of our veterans.

what kind of program is this? we know it's expensive. we know some in the news media, some of the editorial writers in our country have said it's open to fraud and -- let me read it. editorial paper out west, the navigator scheme is a make work government jobs program rife with corruption and highly susceptible to scam artists. it's a slush fund for regressive constituent groups. that's how one editorial came out. i am a' sure they have good people in there somewhere doing good work. we know that according to c.m.s.er 17 navigators enrolled less than 100 people or average cost of $5,000 per enrollee. what kind of program is this? we know it's expensive. one grantee took in $200,000 and enrolled one person. top 10 most expensive collected $2.77 million, signed up 314

people. it's inefficient but at least it's really expensive. what a waste. i'm sure they enroll people, but it's 1% of those enrolled on the exchange are helped by navigators. then today we find out we have to tell them what to do. which makes you wonder what have they been doing? because we have had amendments say you got to have them educate people about medicaid or chip or veterans, rural areas, mental health, substance abuse. one thing after another. i think we ought to investigate them. the whole program, stem to stern. there is waste and fraud, we ought to go after it. there is all this expense, we ought to knock it down. if they are not serving people -- i'm glad we had the rural amendment. do we need one for urban and suburban and semi-- frontier counties? it makes me wonder who they do serve. we know it's expensive. obviously we're going to tell

them to serve the veterans. i'm not -- that makes sense. glad your amendment got made in order. we had 16 republican amendments, only made one in order. 25 democratic amendments made in order. two of those we had to edit on the floor. one technical amendment. seems an odd way to run the house. we were promised in the opening days by the chairman of the rules committee it was going to be different. he was right. it's just a different way. i think our member on the rules committee could probably tell us 92% of the amendments that have been allowed on the house floor have been from democrats. when republicans were in the majority, 48% of the amendments, or 45 came from democrats. we tried to have an open process. now we're being shut out and that's unfortunate. mr. chairman, we have had a long day here. i think we all care deeply about making sure people have access to affordable health care. republicans believe we need to reform how our systems work.

we need to drive down the cost of drugs. and nobody's led more on this in my history around here than the president of the united states, donald trump. from day one he has told the drug companies, you need to get your prices down. i was with him in the white house when he said that. about february of 2017. he's never relented. and he is a partner in this progress to go after surprise billing, to go after high drug costs. he's leading through his administration, and he will sign the drug bills that we worked out in committee. the travesty is the pothole created by the democrat plit he uld hes -- plit coast -- politicos that we had an agreement the president would sign to bills that we know are bailing out obamacare and worse we're now finding huge money and even more authorized today into a program that apparently wasn't taking care of veterans. nor veterans in laurel areas, nor people in rural areas.

it's astonishing. mr. chairman, this amendment's fine. makes sense. it's just outrageous we have to put in federal law that these navigators have to help veterans. they ought to be doing that day in and day out. veterans are the ones who give us our freedom. we need to investigate the navigators. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from south carolina. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in house report 116-61 on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment number 2 by mr. mckinley of west virginia. amendment number 6 by mr. harder of california. amendment number 21 by ms.

wexton of virginia. the chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 116-61 by the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mckinley. on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 116-61 offered by mr. mckinley of west virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 189. the nays are 230. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 6 printed in house report 116-61, by the gentleman from california, mr.

harter, on which further proceedings were postponed and which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in house report number 116-61, offered by mr. harder of california. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 243, the nays are 174. the amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 21 printed in house report 116-61 by the gentlewoman from virginia, ms. wexton, on which further proceedings were postponed and

on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 21 printed in house report 116-61 offered by ms. wexton of virginia. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: on this vote the yeas the nays are 185. the amendment is adopted. there being no further amendments, under the rule, the committee rises.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 987 and pursuant to house resolution 377 reports the bill as amended by that resolution back to the house with sundry further amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule, the previous question sword. is a separate vote demanded -- is ordered. is a separate vote demanded on any amendment recorded in the committee of the whole? if not, the chair will put them engross. the question is on the adoption of the amendments.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendments are agreed to. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to amend the patient protection and affordable care act to provide for federal exchange outreach nd educational activity. the speaker pro tempore: the ouse will be in order. he house will be in order. members are advised to take their conversations off the floor.

he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? mr. walden: mr. speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? mr. walden: oh, my gosh, mr. speaker, in its current form, absolutely, yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. walden of oregon moves to recommit the bill, h.r. 987, to the committee on energy and commerce, with instructions to the report -- to report the same back to the house with the following amendment. strike title 1 and insert the following. title 1, lowering prescription drug costs. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition?

mr. walden: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with the reading. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? without objection, the reading is dispensed with. the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. walden: thank you, mr. speaker. republicans and democrats worked together on provisions to bring generic drugs to market faster. and to stop abusive practices. we did that on the energy and commerce committee and we brought this house multiple bills to achieve that goal and we did it unanimously. we believe our bipartisan work will increase competition and ultimately help lower the cost of prescription drugs. these policies passed unanimously out of the energy and commerce committee. they help consumers and they have the added benefit of helping the federal government by producing $4 billion in savings. unfortunately our friends on the other side of the aisle,

democrats, decided to pair these bipartisan bills to lower drug costs with what they knew were very partisan bills that i frankly think waste taxpayer money in many cases. we ought to be working together on this, not descending into partisan politics on a seemingly bipartisan issue. those are the words of stat news as reported today. the fact is, when we do work together, we can achieve real results. in the last congress we re-authorized the food and drug administration and we gave that agency new tools and resources to get generic drugs into market faster, it's already working. produced the f.d.a.'s efforts a record number of generic drugs coming to market. we did the same thing in the prior congress and representatives jupt ton and

degette did advanced research. unfortunately today you have partisan bills, a poison pill, if you will. the democrats used to use the money used by our work on generic drugs to fund navigateors. they cost you $767 every time they sign up an individual. in the private sector, it's $2.40 and added another $25 million to that. "wall street journal" reported that one grantee took in $200,000 to enroll one person. the top 10 most expensive navigateors collected $2.77 million in contracts from the federal government. they signed up 314 people. that's how they spent the money. ne newspaper editorialized the

schemes with corruption and highly susceptible to scams. on the floor, you will have a choice on this motion to recommit. add more money into that navigator program which we approved a bunch of amendments to tell navigateors to work in rural areas, apparently they weren't working with these folks. same drug bills that we passed out of committee and be able to vote yes on those and the money that is generated rather than going to this flawed navigator program will go to the n.i.h. research fund to support childhood research. that is your choice. and by using the savings from the drug pricing provisions to pay for childhood cancer research, the amendment makes clear the offsets should be used

to pay for bipartisan health care priorities. if you support lowering prescription drugs and the support of n.i.h., then you vote on the motion to recommit. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon yields. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from georgia seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. >> health care is an issue that is deeply personal to me. i myself, like millions of americans live with a pre-existing condition. as a two-time breast cancer survivor, i understand what it is like to have your life turned upside by a diagnosis, it is physically and emotionally.

ms. mcbath: i did it all while raising my family and working full-time. i was terrified. despite having health insurance through my job, i was worried about my financial security. i was concerned about making it to my radiation treatments every single day, sometimes for weeks and then back to work and back home to raise my son jordan. i had to do it, just like millions of americans who share a similar story like mine and i don't know what i would have done or what would happened if i had lost that health care insurance. state 0,000 people in my have a pre-existing condition. 45,000 of those people are children under the age of 17. my colleagues here are worried about the health and well-being of their constituents and we have heard countless heart-wrenching stories from americans, our neighbors,

friends and loved ones. americans are worried about their health care. i'm worried about their health care. they are tired of these games. let's stop playing politics with the health and well-being of the american people. it just needs to stop. last year, the trump administration allowed the expanded sale of junk insurance plans. many of which do not cover maternity care, mental and behavioral health and coverage to treat pre-existing conditions. under these plans, women can be charged more than men. insurance companies can cancel coverage as soon as an enrollee gets sick. people enrolled in these plans might seek care for themselves or for a family member only to be left out in the cold without coverage. no matter what the white house or my colleagues on the other side of the aisle cook it up to, the american people have said

time and time again, that they oppose plans that rip health care coverage away from those with pre-existing conditions. while the motion does not attempt to fund vital public health services and programs that have long garnered bipartisan support, the funding levels fail to provide greater investments to these programs. i know that we can work together to fund these programs by keeping the administration junk plan rule on the books would harm public health and not help it. we don't have to make these false choices. this underlying bill combines key pieces of legislation that lowers drug costs, strengthens health care, reverse the sabotage and rescind the junk plan rule. and we are making it easier for american families to assess and sign up for affordable health care. we are making sure that plans cover essential health benefits

like maturnt care and treatment or substance use disorder. we are making sure that patients do not face annual or lifetime caps. we are making sure that patients are not discriminated against based on their pre-existing conditions like myself. this is what we are elected to do for the american people. republicans plan to support protections for pre-existing conditions, but they have failed to condemn the administration's decision asking the court to invalidate the entire a.c.a. they have failed to call on the president to reverse course and refuse to join us in condemning the administration. if our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are serious about protecting pre-existing conditions, they will support the underlying bill and defeat

this m.t.r. actions, not words, is what the american people demand and what they deserve. demands democrats are committed to put consumers first and we will fight for people with pre-existing conditions. we will make sure that no one, absolutely no one, has to choose between a prescription drug or their mortgage. that is unconscionable. and i urge my colleagues to join us in ensuring that americans have access to affordable health care and prescription clugs. i stand in opposition to this m.t.r. join me in opposing the political ploy that would hurt americans with those of pre-existing conditions and those who are trying to afford their health care and rescription drugs. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection. the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . the noes have it. mr. walden: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote has been requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 188, the nays are 228. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider -- the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. walden: i ask for a recorded

vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 234, the nays are 183. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on house administration be discharged from further consideration of

house resolution 30, which requires each member, officer and employee of the house to complete a program of training in workplace rights and responsibilities each session of each congress and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 30. resolution requiring each member, officer and employee of the house of representatives to complete a program of training and workplace rights and responsibilities, each session of each congress and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the resolution? without objection, the resolution is agreed toont motion to reconsider is laid on -- to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. ms. lofgren: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to take from the speaker's table the bill, s. 1436, a bill to make technical corrections to the compewtation

of average pay under public law 110-279 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1436, an act to make technical corrections to the comptation of average pay nder public law 110-279. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to consideration of the bill? without objection, the bill is read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be authorized to file a supplemental report on the bill, h.r. 965. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of the bill, h.r. 987, the clerk be authorized to make technical corrections and

conforming changes to the bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that the committee on judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 962, the born-alive abortion survivors protection act, and ask for its heed consideration in the house -- its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: under guidelines consistently issued by successive speakers as recorded in section 956 of the house rules and manual, the chair is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships. r. latta: mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is not recognized for ebate. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute peaches -- speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new jersey seek recognition?

>> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. watson coleman: watson democrats continue to fight for access to health care in our work to deliver progress for the people. because it is essential to daily life. you cannot work, you cannot care for your children, you cannot do anything without your health. i was recently blessed to come through a health challenge myself and i believe more strongly after thaten that whether it's cancer therapy or prescription medication, access to the best treatment cannot be reserved for only the wealthy. last week i secured funding in the appropriations committee to study the impact of prior authorization policies on patient health. people are dying because insurance companies want to ceeloer cost treatments, see them fail before they'll cover more expensive ones, even if

your health care provider specifically recommends it. whether you have cancer like i did or you're dealing with a chronic illness, you shouldn't have to endure extra pain or wonder if you can survive long enough to get to the treatment that will work for you. i will continue to fight for access to high-quality health care for all americans. i yield back the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: i rise today to recognize mr. alex kouda for becoming the first student to have perfect attendance from kindergarten through the 12th grade. his sister passed away from a rare illness.

his sister maintained perfect attendance during her medical treatment. receiving the award on her behalf, he pledged to his sister he would continue her streak. 13 years later, he's done it. he hasn't been tardy or and september and checked out one single time during his primary and secondary jeag. he and his family planned trips and apointments around his ability to go to school while fighting the urge to use a sick day. keeping a promise should be an inspiration to us all. concxds con gratlations. good luck in college. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my marks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized

for one minute. >> this week, my community and communities across our nation are paying tribute to law enforcement officers who made the ultimate sacrifice in our defense. national police week is a moment to reflect on those sacrifices and the men and women who put their lives on the line. we recognize the families who live with this sacrifice and reaffirm our commitment to work were state and local leaders. ms. wild: we owe it to the memory of fallen officers and majority of men and women in uniform who carry out their skills with skill and professionalism to make sure officers are safe. we need to do our part to ensure the communities they seve are safe as well. in this same spirit of progress, let's commit to working to shape a more secure future for

officers and for the communities they serve. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does gentleman seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. i encourage my colleagues and never forget the heroes act introduced by congressman members ma loany, king and nadler which would stepped the authorization through 2090. mr. zeldin: there are 279 co-sponsors and we need more. this should not be a partisan issue. it's not a partisan issue but an american issue. first responders came from at least 433 out of 435 congressional districts. we lost thousands of americans on 9/11. we have lost more americans since 9/11 due to toxic exposure than we did on 9/11 itself.

any colleague out there who hasn't co-sponsored look at h.r. 1327. chairman nadler has scheduled it for a hearing on june 11. do what you can to get it passed and signed into law. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today during national police week to honor law enforcement officers across arizona and the nation. as a former investigator and officer, i know what the brave young and women go through every day to protect their communities. this week brings back the memories of the friends and partners i have served along side. during my time on the force. and we remember the officers who have been killed on the line of duty, many of them friends of mine. cluding d.p.s. officer tyler

edmund hoffer and no gales apply police officer ga rmp d omp va. we will never forget them. i join my colleagues this week in thanking the men and women who serve our communities and protect our families and allow us to continue to be free in society. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today to honor first lieutenant hope crooken d arch hmplmp from lakeland, florida who served in world war ii. he heard the call to serve after seeing the bombing of pearl harbor. she joined the army as a nurse

and one of the first women deployed to normandy. she worked 12-16 hour days during the front lines in major battles. and treated wounded american and german soldiers and received the french legion award. you provided hope to many on the battlefield and your legacy continues to provide hope to us at home. i thank you for all you have done to defend and serve our great nation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker for allowing me to speak to the

members of the house. right now, we are in the season where folks are deciding where to go to college and a bad factor of that decision is their financial aid package. the skyrocketing costs of college is sad willing many ithout outrageous student loan debt. it is reaching $1.56 trillion among 45 million borrowers and causing people to delay home ownership, raising a family and moving comfortably into the middle class. i introduced the understanding the true cost of college act. it's to help students and families make informed zigs about financing their education and their future by requiring standardization of communications and the definitions of financial aid terms. it is in the best interest of our country to start addressing this issue in a bipartisan way.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker -- mr. payne: from the health outcomes to their unemployment income, from their education rate, to their incarceration rate, black men and boys are disproportionately impacted by government policies. not that plaque men and boys are falling behind, it's that they have never been ahead. for centuries government policies have redlined them into a lower social status. this is an institutional problem. yesterday, i joined with many of my colleagues at the house triangle to stand in support of congresswoman wilson's bill to

create the commission on the social status of black men and boys. we were joined by young men who want nothing more than to live the american dream free of discrimination. this country owes us -- them that. .r. 1636 will bring together experts that have kept black men and boys behind. it will mark the beginning of the end of racial disparities that have kept communities across this country down. i am proud to support it. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for ne minute. >> thank you, madam speaker, i rise today to talk about the life of a hero of mine, maurice a. feret.

he is a public servant and six-term mayor and hispanic 1985 serving from 1973 to and served for eight years on the florida transportation commission. as mayor provided leadership and provision when miami took its place as one of the most vibrant cities. throughout his years in office, he focused on economic development, job creation and improving south florida's transportation and public infrastructure and transforming the area into a center of inter-american trade, banking active erce and remains in current events and in 2006, a explored these issues in -- book on political status. he has been encouraging people

from wide views to work together in the name of common good. he framed early on as a commissioner and mayor of the city of mayor and vice chairman of the county board of commissioners. he has served on numerous boards well as been on president forward's committee and president carter's committee. he credits his wife of 64 years and as his north star and six children and 13 grandchildren as his anchor. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. he gentlelady is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker.

you must have a moral awakening a spiritual revolution of how we treat a person's health. every single woman has a right to live with dignity and receive the health care they need to flourish. this understanding is in conflict with the sinister and unjust force, corporate depreed. why are people forced to keep insulin -- skip insulin injections. why are my residents charged $70 a pill that could reduce-transmission when it costs $7 abroad. corporate greed has replaced the moral imperative. there is more wealth in this country than any other in human history and millions go without health insurance and prescription drugs. people condemn to live with pain and suffering because we choose

corporate profits. we are watching a crisis unfold in real-time and time to break e corporate stronghold, lost profits be damned. we have the soul of this country to rescue. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: do any ther members seek recognition? the chair announces the speaker's appointment pursuant to 22 u.s.c. 276-h and order of the house january 3, 2019 of the following members on the part of the house to the mexico-united states interparliamentary group. the clerk: mr. correa of california, mr. gonzalez of texas, ms. jackson lee of texas,

mrs. love green of california and mr. caba hall. the speaker pro tempore: house resolution 6, 116th congress and the order of the house of january 3, 2019 of the following members to the house democracy partnership. the clerk: ms. moore of wisconsin, ms. titus of nevada, mr. connolly of virginia, mr. liu of california, ms. kelly of illinois, ms. sewell of alabama, ms. degette of colorado, and ms. lee of california. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence mr. massie of ken tuck for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

the request is granted. spouns -- under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019,, the gentleman from florida, mr. rutherford, is recognized for half the remaining time until 10:00 p.m. as the designee of the minority leader. mr. rutherford: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and tend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. ruster ford: thank you, madam speaker. this week thousands of law enforcement officers and their families, their supporters from around the country gathered in washington, d.c., to commemorate national police week. we're here tonight to thank those who put on the uniform every day to protect our communities. by putting their lives in the

breach between the rimal element and the public they protect. we're also here to recognize those who have completed their service and now enjoy a well deserved thank you for their selfless service to their communities. most importantly, we're here to honor the fallen. last year 158 bliss officers -- police officers gave their last measure of devotion to their communities. among these heroes you will find every gender, every creed, every race, every religion, they hail from every corner of america. one of those 158 officers was t only from my district, but served at the jacksonville sheriff's office with me where spent a 41-year career. officer lance whitaker began

his career with the atlantaic beach police department and -- atlantic beach police department and then served 17 dedicated years in the jacksonville sheriff's office. he was tragically killed while responding to a call in the early morning hours of may 15, 2018. almost one year ago today. he left behind his son, cade, his mother, and his sister. but he also left behind a memory and legacy that will live on in the hearts and minds of those who knew him. many of us are here today to honor friends, family, and loved ones like officerer whitaker who gave his last full measure of devotion to a community he loved and a community that loved him back. i now ask that we observe a moment of silence for officer whitaker and all of the 158

brave law enforcement officers who lost their lives protecting our community. amen. tonight, madam speaker, in a very bipartisan fashion, we will hear from members on both sides of the aisle and from all across the country as we join together to show our unity to supporting our police officers. and with that i am proud to now yield to my friend from california who is from a a law enforcement family and brings a strong pro-police voice to congress, congresswoman katie hill. ms. hill: thank you so much. i want to thank my colleague from florida for joining forces with me this afternoon to host

this bipartisan special order hour in honor of national police week. as you are about to see, supporting our law enforcement is an issue that unifies us across geography and political party, bringing together diverse perspectives and deep gratitude. i'm so proud to rise in support of our law enforcement and the professional peace officers who work tirelessly every single day for the safety and security of our communities. i represent california's 25th congressional district, which is home to many of the police officers who serve all of los angeles county. my community is rooted in service, it's a value that i grew up with and one of the reasons i chose to serve my community by running for office. my dad is an air force veteran and has bent three decades in law enforcement. he was here with us this week as part of a large group from our district who flew out for police week. as a little girl i remember what it was like to wonder if my dad would make it home at night. i remember being so scared for his life because he was on the frontlines protecting mine and

all of the other members of our community. i was proud of hem then and i'm proud of him now. unlike then i now have the opportunity to fight for him and the men and women serving just like him, protecting and supporting our law enforcement should not be partisan, and the speaker's joining us today demonstrate we can have meaningful legislative reform that works across the aisle. i want to briefly touch on several pieces of legislation that i believe will protect and support our police officers, including h.r. 838, the threat assessment prevention and safety act, or taps, which institutes a process that will identify, investigate, and assess, and mitigate threats before they happen. fighting for long-term also means supporting legislation like h.r. 2070, pouter act torques develop new grants for chemical screening. h.r. 1236, the extreme risk protection order act to empowerer police to keep guns out of the wrong hands. and h.r. 2379, the bulletproof vest partnership, to increase the number of lifesaving

bulletproof vests accessible to our law enforcement. through these bills and others in development we can keep our communities and officers safe. but most importantly i'm standing herer today to honor the life of officerer jonathan tanner. he's a you true public servant from the valley in my district who passed away tragically at the age of 28 years old after battling cancer. he will be remembered for his steadfast devotion to his community, his church, and his family. officer tanner proudly served the california highway patrol with a dedication to the safety of the anti-lope valley. in just his first year out of training, he received the mothers against drunk driving award for excellence in removing impaired drivers from the road and known for his efforts to build public trust in law enforcement. out of uniform officer tanner served his community by volunteering his time at lancaster baptist church where he was a lifelong member. he taught youth ministry classes, coached sports teams, and led a bus route that a gives children rides to church.

officer tanner leaves behind his wife, their two young sons, and a baby girl who is expected to arrive later this month. he's also survived by his parents, two older brothers, and a younger sister. i'm proud to have helped officer tanner and i know that his loved ones in the community will carry on the legacy of his light in the world. today in honor of police week and in honor of all the members of our law enforcement community, i'm proud to stand in support of the men and women who put their lives on the line every single day. like officer tanner and like my dad. thank you for all you do. with that i yield back to my colleague from florida. thank you. mr. rutherford: thank you, congresswoman hill. i look forward to working with you on some of those bills you just highlighted. i know your law enforcement family is proud. thank you. now, madam speaker, i yield three minutes to my good riend, brian style, who is

from wisconsin's first district. brian. mr. style -- mr. steil: madam speaker, i rise to recognize racine county sheriff deputy eric schneider for his her rowic actions on march 18. while on duty, deputy schneider rushed to the scene of a house fire. he wocked on all the doors and windows yelling to see if anyone was inside. a man came out of the house, but without regard for his own safety, deputy schneider entered the burning house to check if there were more people inside. risking his life, he found a man who was unconscious. deputy schneider dragged him out of the house and saved his life. deputy schneider is a hero. we're fortunate to have brave men and women light deputy schneider protecting us. to deputy schneider, thank you. i commend you for your actions.

madam speaker, when law enforcement officers put on their uniforms and badges, they do not know if they'll return home after their shift. their job is dangerous. too o often they sacrifice their lives to strangers. over the past year, wisconsin has lost three police officers in the line of duty. those heroes died while protecting us from harm. we'll never forget them. we will not forget their service. we will not forget their bravery. we remember officer charles irvine, end of watch, june 67, 2018. officer michael mihalsky, end of watch, july 25, 2018. and officer matthew writtener, end of watch, february 6, 2019.

thank you. i yield back my time. mr. rutherford: thank you, brian. i want to thank you and the great state of wisconsin for your support of law enforcement. thank you. ow, madam speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to mrs. torres small, colleague from new mexico's second district. she serves on armed services and homeland security and actually after law school worked for u.s. district judge in new mexico. she's got that law enforcement background also. mrs. torres small: thank you, madam speaker. it's an honor to join my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as americans to address this issue and to recognize national police week. to support the brave men and women who protect and serve our communities every day and honor those who paid the ultimate

sacrifice in the line of duty. the work you do is extraordinary. and it makes me proud to be the granddaughter of a former las cruces police sergeant. he didn't talk much about his work on the beat, but throughout my life i have been stopped by people who have told me the difference he made in their lives because he showed he cared by holding people accountable. he was the true embodiment of what it means to be a selfless public servant, just like so many in new mexico and across the country. it means something. something i will never fully understand to know that every day you risk your life because of what you do. it means something, something i will never understand, to know that every day and every time you enforce the law you could lose your life because you signed up to serve. and as you risk your life to treat people with humanity,

dignity, and respect, that is superhuman. that's why i bring national police week and every day we support our law enforcement officers and work to ensure they have the resources they need to protect and serve our community. thank you. i yield back my time. mr. rutherford lon i thank the gentlelady -- mr. rutherford: i thank the gentlelady for the kind words of support for our law enforcement community. and thank you for your service earlier as well. madam chair, i'd now like to yield two minutes to my good friend, general don bacon from ebraska's second district. make that four minutes. he serves on our agriculture and armed services committee, retired brigadier general, and did his deployment in iraq and we thank you for that service. i yield to the gentleman from

nebraska. mr. bacon: i thank mr. rutherford, great friend and colleague. thank you for yielding. i rise today to recognize a bipartisan issue that threatens the safety of our law enforcement officers and communities in which they serve, and we have a solution for it. enacted in 2004, the law enforcement officers safety act, established clear guidelines allowanced experienced, retired, or off duty officers who maintain proper training to obtain certification allowing him or her to carry concealed firearms. desired purpose was to create a shared national policy between states while offduret and retired officers to carry their firearms wherever they are. granted they are qualified and received appropriate credentials. as many of my colleagues know, it has enjoyed a long history of support from both sides of the aisle. what was first he proposed by a republican. it was co-sponsored by more of half the house and subsequent amendments signed into law in

2010 and 2013 under democratic president barack obama expanded the coverage to include law enforcement officers and federal agencies. as well as military police. in both instances reforms were sponsored by democratic senators. it's always been a bipartisan priority because it's a law enforcement and public safety issue. it's not a second amendment or guns right issue. the same is true about improvement the to h.r. 1156, the liosa reform act which i am a' sponsoring. the act seeks to correct a number of unintended gaps and weaknesses in the original bill. these gaps and weaknesses are not due to intentional restrictions in the original statute, rather they are areas which the original statute is silent, resulting in conflicting interpretations and unattended restrictions which effectively limit the ability of off duty and retired officers to carry their firearms. and we want them to do it in a manner safest for them and the public. the lack of specific language

defeats the original intent of the law which is to allow off duty and retired officers to carry their firearms wherever they go. granted they have to be qualified and have to have received appropriate credentials. that's a a given. it's also -- it is also created inconsistent implementation across states, leaving many office oers to either assume unattended risk when carrying in accord with it the bill or decide not to carry at all. the reform act adds specific large hwang to address these weaknesses and in doing so make the law stronger and more workable while maintaining the standards that currently apply. the bill does not put more guns in our communities. individuals affected by this legislation already have the authority to carry concealed weapons in most locations. rather h.r. 1156 will help ensure guns already the in the hands of trained and certified law enforcement officers and retired officers can safely and legally be carried wherever they may be. they allow law enforcement

officers to keep their firearms on their person rather than being forced to leave them unattended in locations that restricted from carrying. rapid intervention by retired officers has been made clear in california where the actions by he law enforcement officer saved countless lives. with the rice in tragic shootings in our nation, the professionals to carry will allow them to respond quickly. the importance of these changes to help the lives of our heroes and ability to protect themselves. and it has been endorsed by 20 professional law enforcement

organizes whose membership is represented well over half of law enforcement in our country. our national police week, i urge my colleagues og both sides of the aisle to join me in providing greater public safety for law enforcement and our communities at home. by co-sponsoring the act. the public safety is a bipartisan issue and together we must do better. i'll close with this. if i'm in a situation where i'm being victimized. i would love to have a retired or off-duty police officer and this bill makes it more likely. and with that, i yield back of the mr. rutherford: i'm a proud co-sponsor of your bill. and having been a law enforcement officer, i understand what you are trying to accomplish and i support you 110% in that effort. thank you. appreciate the words. i would like to yield two

minutes to the gentlelady from spanberger. she is also, i think we can say this a former seay case officer. and her father was a career law enforcement officer also. thank you. ms. spanberger: thank you very much. thank you for the opportunity to stand here in solidarity with our colleagues across the aisle in honor of police week and honor of our police officers and peace officers across the country. i rise today to remember the remark lives, one from our district and one from a nearby county. on august 12, 2017, lieutenant jay cullen and trooper pilot

burke bathe were not responding to an ordinary call. they were flying to an event at became infamous in modern virginia history. they were to monitor the events on of the forces of hate had gathered and law enforcement was called to help in the chaos. after police canceled the event, they were instructed to assist their fellow officers and circle over chargets villain provide order and help the community end the nightmare that had transpired. mid-flight their helicopter crashed on the outside of charlottesville and they were killed. in the wake of tragedy, executive director of the police

association said, i don't know in its 85 years had a more excruciating time. the pain of the families is unimaginable and the loss experienced by the virginia state police and fellow brothers and sisters is still felt to this day. this national police week, we remember the brave and dedicated service of lieutenant cullen and rooper pilot ba tmpemp s and their sacrifice will be recommend. as a former federal agent, as the daughter of a career law enforcement officer and as a grateful american and virginian i thank the law enforcement officers and peace officers who dedicate their lives to keeping us safe. this week and every week, we stand with our law enforcement officers and we will never forget those who laid down their lives for their neighbors.

i yield back. mr. rutherford: i thank my colleague from virginia and just know that our condolences goes to those officers' families, those heroes that you lost. thank you. god bless them. and now, madam speaker, i would like to introduce a member from the great state of minnesota, pete stauber. nd was a police officer in duluth, minnesota for 23 years. thank you for that service and i yield, two minutes. mr. stauber: thank you, congressman rutherford for yielding me time to speak today. this week is police week, a time to honor our brothers and

sisters in the plus and brown. every day law enforcement officers both local, county, state and federal, walk out of their homes, leaving their loved ones behind and put their lives on the line for the safety and security of others. they are our last line of defense, the protectors of our communities and i'm so honored to have served along side some of these brave men and women. as a local law enforcement officer with the duluth, minnesota police department for 22 years, i have seen and experienced firsthand the violence committed against law enforcement officers. those who are only there to uphold the law and improve the safety of our communities. that is why i have co-sponsored legislation like the thin blue line act and the protect and serve act, which hold the

perpetrators of these heinous crimes accountable. so now, more than ever, we must show our support for our law enforcement officers. we must make a commitment to them as they have committed to our friends, our families and communities. and i am happy to stand here today, with so many of my colleagues to show support for the men and women in the blue and brown. and i look forward to working with them in the 116th congress to advance legislation that will support them, both when they are in and out of uniform. the men and women in law enforcement deserve our respect, our admiration, our prayers and love every single day, 365 days year, 24 hours every day. i stand before you, madam

speaker, having done a total of 23 years in law enforcement. i can tell you that the men and women that i served along side with, i would go into any dangerous situation with them. we love our law enforcement officers. we love their families. and this congress stands ready to defend them in their needs, their requests and any help they need from this congress. thank you, madam speaker. and i yield back. mr. rutherford: thank you. and i want to say thank you for your 23 years of service. i know what a commitment that is and god bless you for that. now, madam speaker, i yield hree minutes to my good friend

josh gottheimer and was a white house speech writer and in the private try for microsoft. i yield three minutes. mr. gottheimer: i thank ngressman rutherford for having this special order. i'm proud to serve you with both as a congressional law enforcement caucus co-chaired by bill pascrell. we are here to honor all the brave law enforcement officers in new jersey and across the country who put their lives on the line every day to protect our communities. they get our backs and we should always get theirs. there is nothing partisan about that. in 1962, president contendy declared may 15 to be peace officers' memorial day. accomplished by a joint resolution, national police week

pays special recognition to police officers who lost their lives in the safety and protection of others. 43 police officers have died in the line of duty across the united states. we will never forget their bravery, service and sacrifice. may god bless them and their families. police officers are america's heroes and i'm so deeply grateful to all law enforcement, federal, state and local for what they do day in and day out and in new jersey's 5th district and across our state. i'm committed to fighting for all our sworn officers and first responders by making sure our police officers have the training they need to do their job. that includes critical like the cops and bulletproof vests and the access equipment program. we should support the thin blue act which was referenced,

because our officers rely on us to get their backs and to make sure we give them the resources they need to protect them from violent crime, homegrown terrorism. i recognize the men and women who took place in the tour. and all of new jersey's finest who are here in washington including new jersey from the new jersey state troopers and many, many others. just yesterday, i spent time with the port authority police and the honor guard who came to member those names who are inscribed at the national law enforcement officers' memorial. and p.b.a. police officers were here. together we are fighting to fully fund and authorize the 9/11 victims' fund and countless others who we lost that day and all the injured and 9/11 first

responders and survivors we must do right by today. thank you to my colleagues for working across the aisle. most of all thank you to every law enforcement officer for your solemn commitment to protect and serve. we live in the greatest country in the world with the brave law enforcement protecting our borders and ensuring that our best days are ahead of us. average thank you. may god bless the united states of america and i yield back. mr. rutherford: i thank the new jersey and thank you very much for being here tonight to show that support for law enforcement that is so important across our country. thank you. and madam speaker, i would like to yield two minutes to my good friend from virginia, kline. tative ben

he is a lawyer and is an assistant commonwealth attorney and chief of staff and i didn't know this, chief of staff for bob goodlatte who is one of my heroes from congress. thank you, and i yield. >> thank you for yielding the time and putting together this event this evening. i rise today to honor the men and women in law enforcement who serve with honor and bravery. these are our friends and neighbors who face danger and make our cities better places. joined >> lucas dowell who was shot

while serving a semple warrant was 28. hunter edwards who died in a vehicle collision while responding to a fight in winchester was only 30. as this week draws to a clause, i would ask that all americans remember the 150 officers this year who died in the line of duty and consider the danger that all officers face each day in order to keep americans safe. your lives are a shining example of what is right in our world by getting up each day, donning a uniform and badge, you are making a difference in our communities across this nation and every single day you have our gratitude. mr. -- madam speaker, i yield back. . mr. ruster ford: i want to thank the gentleman from virginia, and particularly i

want to offer again our condolences, those heroes from virginia who gave their lives in service. now, madam speaker, i'd like to recognize representative clay higgins from the great state of louisiana, their thundering herd district. he was a national a guard, military police officer for many years, a swat operator. and i'm sure he'll have some great words for us. three minutes. mr. higgins: i rise today to recognize american men and women who put a damage bank on every day. men and women of every color and creed, ethnicity and heritage, and background, varied ideology and political affiliation. they are american patriots, one and all. -i our job officer

begins with with an oath. -- police officer our job begins with an oath. our oath is not to the sheriff or marshall, it's to the constitutional principle that is represent the badges that we wear, badges like this. in this body here we stand within the people's house, we serve within the parameters of our ability. we wear a small pin on our lapel to designate our status as congressmen and congresswomen. and the humble service and honored, yes, it is. but forget not, america, the men and women in your community unseen, unheard, far too frequently unappreciated and

unrecognized that patrol your streets, your neighborhoods, your counties, your states, your parishes in my state of louisiana. if e they serve unknowing they shall return home. they do so willingly. they place a great faith in their lord. the word tells us that the lord is my strength and my shield. many in ways we should recall that this small shield that we wear begins with faith that this chamber began with faith, and that the shields that officers wear from sea to shining sea maintains itself by faith. the thin this week

blue line. you are known, are you loved, you are recognized, and we honor you. thank you, sheriff, for allowing me it o speak. madam chair, congresswoman, my colleague and friend, thank you, and god bless you. mr. rutherford: i want to thank my good friend from louisiana for all his service for many years. now, madam chair, i'd like to recognize, again, my co-host for tonight, representative katie hill, for five minutes, to do her little close. thank you. ms. hill: i will not take the entire five minutes. i just wanted to finish out by thanking the 2,200 capitol police officers here that protect us and the three to five million people who visit the u.s. capitol every single

year. they do the job that often goes unnoticed, but we're ensured our safety and protection and that of every single person who comes to visit us because of their hard work and service. to every single law enforcement professional who dedicates their life every single day, we're eternally grateful and i am a' so proud to be working with my colleagues -- i'm so proud to be working with my colleagues for recognizing our officers and take this forward for many years to come. thank you so much. mr. rutherford: thank you very much. it's been an honor to be here with you tonight to recognize our law enforcement community. madam chair, i'll close with this. a quote from ralph waledo emerson. he said the purpose in life is not to be happy. it's to be useful. to be honorable. to be compassionate. to have it make some difference that you live and live well.

madam speaker, 158 lives that we honor tonight, all of the thousands of law enforcement , ficers serving this moment they live well. and for that we're grateful. with that, madam chair, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the gentlewoman from michigan, ms. talib, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. ms. talib: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to uplift my lgbtq neighbors at home in the 13th congressional district. i want them to know that i uplift them today and always as their unwavering advocate in the united states congress. there are ideals and values we

all should attempt to live up to in this country. and i know many of us ran to be in this chamber to ensure that our laws match those values and ideals as well. when i think of these issues we confront as people and as representative body, i always feel that we must use an approach that is rooted in values. that uplift our whole communities. the values of equality, justice, and acceptance come to mind when i think of the need to past the equality act. far too long our lgbtq neighbors have been forced to live a life of fear. a life in hiding. a life of depression, oppression, and life of instability. we have come a long way in the lgbtq rights community, but we have a long way to go. the equality act is a step in the right direction on this important path towards justice. i think of the right side of history when the right to

marriage was afforded to same-sex couples. the moment when our lgbtq neighbors in michigan were able to create the special bond with their loved ones. i'm also reminded of the stark reality that they faced being in states where they could still be fired for their jobs -- at their jobs the day after their wedding for being gay. i think of the transcommunity across the country that still faces discrimination and violence. especially transwomen of color who are disproportionately targeted and killed. our laws still do not protect them. lgbtq americans remain vulnerable to discrimination on a daily basis and too often have little recourse. 50% of the national lgbtq community live in states where though they have the right to marry, they still have no explicit nondiscrimination practices in other areas of their daily life.

one's identity can could still mean deep harm and even death for some communities in this country, and we must change this. i think of our lgbtq neighbors who are denied public accommodations just because of who they are and who they love. i think about how we're failing them by not living out our values rooted in justice. this week we have a chance to begin to change with the equality act. we now from a pro-equality majority, madam speaker n. this chamber, and i'm so glad we can can change that fact that lgbtq folks are being denied housing services and employment in the majority of our states. i'm so glad to be part of ensuring that everyone has full protection in our civil rights laws regardless of who they are and who they love. thank you, madam speaker. i yield my time -- yield to my colleague from the great state of massachusetts, congresswoman

ressley. ms. pressley: thank you. madam speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 5, the equality act. rise on behalf of nongendered americans, on behalf of drag kings and drag queens. on behalf of all nonheteronormative americans, i rise today to let you know that you are seen, you are heard, and i am proud to stand in solidarity with you. it is our mandate as legislators to protect all americans, and yet we're failing entire communities. in my home state, the commonwealth of massachusetts, leader in marriage equality, we have the second largest lgbtq population of any state in the country. even though our queer pride extends far and wide, 61% of

transgender based daters experience housing discrimination in the greater boston area, and 65% of lgbtq bay staters experience discrimination in public spaces. from public transportation to retail establishments, places of worship, restaurants, and health care settings. as we consider h.r. 5, we must remind ourselves of our values. my forever president barack obama once said, when all americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we're all more free. it is true. when we defeat hate with love, we all win. during the time of bigotry and public turmoil, it is unconscionable we're still debating the liberties of people who ask only to be received as their fullselves. it's our fundamental right as americans to live happily, peacefully, and unapologetically. it is our fundamental right to live free of harassment and discrimination. it is our right to pursue happiness. i extend my deepest gratitude

to congressman cicilline, the author of the equality act, who has worked tirelessly for years to aa firm the rights and liberties of lgbtq americans. thanks to the leadership, h.r. 5 takes a comprehensive approach to making the pursuit of life, love, and happiness a reality for all of us regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity. the equality act ensures that lgbtq people are protected by a nationwide standard for nondiscrimination. it's time for to us live up to our values. it's time for us to strike out against injustice that is devalue our humanity together. we can affirm that our diversity is our strength. and that our collective safety is nonnegotiable. i urge my colleagues to vote in support of h.r. 5 and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you so much. thank you, madam speaker. ms. talib: i would also love to recognize the fact, pretty historic, that the -- madam

speaker who is presiding over this chamber right now, is a member of our beautiful community of the lgbtq community and that to me is pretty historic as we now are debating and putting forward the equality act. and that is congresswoman angie craig. with that i yield to my colleague, congressman al green. mr. green: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. and before getting into my message, i'd like to acknowledge that i am an ally of the lgbtq community. and i do this and announce my support for h.r. 5 because of a debt i owe. i haven't always had the privileges that i enjoy now. someone stood and suffered so

that i could come in the front door of probably this very facility. someone suffered so that i would have the opportunity to go to some of the schools that i attended. and i believe that there is reciprocity in life and that you don't get where you are and fail to appreciate those who have suffered so that could you have the opportunities that you enjoy. so i support h.r. 5 for a multipolicity of reasons, the least of which is not the fact that i'm repaying a debt. i'm going to help make sure that others don't endure the pain and suffering that i endured and that my predecessors endured. no one should be punished or treated with disrespect because f how you look or who you are.

every person's dignity is given to them from a higher authority and we all should respect the dignity and humanity of every individual. so i support h.r. 5 and i do so proudly because of a debt i owe. ti thank my friends who brought this to my attention. this is a part of my life to make others are treated properly. toam speaker, i rise tonight address a crisis that our country finds itself engulfed in, a crisis that if we are not very careful, will cause the congress of the united states to be seen as a less than when it

comes to the co-equals that it is supposed to be on the same plane with. this crisis is a constitutional crisis. and while there are some that would differ with me and say this is not a constitutional crisis, remember this, there is the hard and fast definition of what a constitutional crisis is. but whenever i give my thoughts or someone else gives their thoughts, we are giving opinions. tonight, i would like to share my opinion about this constitutional crisis. remember, all of these thoughts are opinions, just as the thoughts of persons who hold themselves out to be constitutional scholars. there are are opinion. there are some who say you don't have a constitutional crisis in the circumstance when we are dealing with the president who has refused to honor subpoenas,

by and through his various administrators. there are some who say this will not be a constitutional crisis until it gets to the supreme court and the supreme court has to rule on whether or not the subpoena must be honored and if the supreme court rules that the subpoena must be honored and memberships of the administration refuse to obey the supreme court, there are persons who conclude that this now is a constitutional crisis. i would conclude if the president of the united states fails to honor a subpoena after having been so ordered by the judiciary, this is more a constitutional crisis, you have a constitutional collapse. the keice is occurs when the president is at odds, meaning the executive branch, with the legislative branch. and the legislative branch and executive branch are at a stale mate. the executive branch is

declining to cooperate, declining to allow the legislative branch to have the legislative branch. and as such, there is a crisis and that crisis is rooted in the constitution because the legislative branch has this responsibility pursuant to the constitution. what is a constitutional crisis? and we have a duty to address it. and we must do so or we will have failed on our watch to take membersesponsibility as of congress. this is our watch. and we have a responsibility to takes re that this house ts proper place in the a nmp a lmp s of history with respect to

the question of impeachment. mpeachment is something we should not take lightly, but it is something that we have to take seriously. and we have to take it seriously, because if we fail to this, we will have allowed august body to become minimized. you see, there are checks and balances in the system. the check on the executive branch is impeachment. that is the check. hat is a sort of -- sword of damacl everyone es and if we il to exercise this duty, we then do not provide the checks to make sure the balance of

power remains as it should be. i see for what is happening to this congress. i'm grateful concerned, because i don't see us aggressively pursuing the checks so as to make sure the balance of power remains in place. checks and balances are in place to make sure there is no concentration of power in any branch of government. if we don't become the last line of defense with reference to the resident, if we fail to do so, we then say there are no guardrails, that there are no rules that the president has to obey. he doesn't become just another president. he becomes a monarch.

the framers never intended for us to have a monarchy. the framers intended for the president to be checked by the congress. my hope is that we in this congress will take up our responsibilities and we will provide the checks necessary to make sure that this president and no other president is above the law. i hear many members of congress say that the president is not above the law, no one is above the law and they go on to say this president, notwithstanding his actions, we should not impeach. how can we say that he has committed impeachable acts and then conclude that he should not be impeached? we literally are saying he is above the law when we say that he has committed impeachable

acts but then decline to impeach. anyone else breaking the law of have to answer the bar justice. except the president. we know that he has done it. the mueller report is replete with examples, yet we have not exercised our constitutional responsibility. and as a result, we, the congress of the united states of america, are allowing the president to be above the law. this is unacceptable. i refuse to allow this to continue. and i say, as i have said, that the president will have to come before the bar of justice, which is the house of representatives. if we fail to do so, we will have literally allowed him to be

above the law. not in this country, and not on my watch. i take my oath seriously and i assure you that this will not be the final word that the impeachable, ot because he is. and we will have to have a vote on it. tomorrow will be the second nniversary of the date that we initially called for the president's impeachment. i believe that we cannot have another anniversary without another vote, there will be one. and i hope it will come through the appropriate committees of the house of representatives. but if not, it will come. and i don't know that there will be others who will vote to

impeach him, but i do know that i will. and there are times when you may have to stand alone. and i know that it is better to stand alone than not stand at all. madam speaker, i'm grateful for the time that i have had. i thank all for allowing it to take place. and i assure you, i love my country. and i only speak these words in peril see a country because of a ruthless, lawless president that we are allowing to be above the law. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: members are refrained to engage in permits towards the president. ms. tlaib: i would like to recognize congresswoman hail and.

>> i rise in support of the equality act. america must live up to its values by treating everyone as equals and ending discrimination once and for all. the equality act is making sure that equality for all can participate in our society without fear. new mexico is home to diverse religious and traditional communities and have stood up for hits lgbtq community for a long time. the equality act a adheres us to our faith. no one should have to worry about being discriminated against. when interviewing for a job or struggling to find a health care provider that will treat them. tomorrow morning when i vote for

the equality act, i will be proud to stand with my colleagues, with knew mexicans and my daughter who is a proud lgbtq american sm the time for equality is now and we must live up to our values. yield back my time. ms. tlaib: i would like to now yield to my good colleague from california, congresswoman porter. ms. porter: despite the enactment of marriage equality in 2015, same gender couples continue to experience persist at the present time discrimination when it comes to home ownership. a recent study by iowa state university found discrimination against lgbtq borrowers. despite having a lower credit

rick overall, same sex borrowers are 73% more likely to be denied a mortgage loan. and when they are approved, they face mortgage interest rates % higher in to.2 thousands of dollars higher. 26 states do not have statewide housing protections for the lgbtq communities and the fair housing act does not protect lesbian, gay, transgender individuals. the equality act would change this. this bill would not only improve the lives of the lgbtq community but make neighborhoods across the country more diverse. it means more americans to get to know and understand their neighbors who are gay, transor queer and with that understanding and the friendship

and the neighbor relationships we hope to get tolerant. this is how we magnify the way f lgbtq acceptance in the last decade. imagine growing up in a community where you don't have any lgbtq role models and students in your school were harassed when they were perceived as gay and you never met someone who expressed themselves like you, where you were taught that your gender identity were wrong or immoral. imagine what it would be like to wait years for your country to recognize your loving relationship as equal under the law. now you are timely able to get married and if you choose to start a family. you saved enough money for the downpayment on your first home. and you find that dream house in an area with good schools,

plenty of parks for your dogs and neighbors. you and your spouse fill out a loan application and wait for it to be granted. however, despite doing everything right, you are denied for that loan without reason. you go to another bank, assuming this is a mistake because both you and your spouse have great credit. you applied for a mortgage loan again. maybe this time you are approved, but the interest rate would amount to tens of thousands more dollars than you add heapteded. tens of dollars. you found your dream home and now you can't buy it because of a artificially discriminatory interest rate. by amending existing civil rights laws to include sexual orientation and gender identity

as characteristics, no person may be discriminated for their gender identity in housing, in education, employment, public accommodations and so much more. not only would it protect lgbtq families who want to buy a home or take out a loan but it would allow individuals who are gay, transor queer. and it would ayour their he neighbors that they are like them. they care about their neighborhoods, they care about their communities, they love and want the best for their children like anyone else and take the same pride in home ownership. . injustice everywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. and discrimination against the lgbtq community is a deep injustice. allowing that discrimination to continue in our country flies in the face of the principles of equality and opportunity that

form the basis of our democracy. i am proud to support the equality act and i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same. yield back. >> thank you so much. congresswoman gwen moore. ms. moore: good evening, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentlelady from detroit, michigan, for yielding her time to me. you heard it just a moment ago. those words from the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere. and that is why i am so proud to support this historic legislation that will be on this floor tomorrow. r. 5, the equality act, that will truly provide equality for embers of the lgbtq community.

now, you know many people might argue, madam speaker, that we've made important strides against prejudice over the last few years. and it has been amazing. we've had states pass legislation outlawing discrimination based on a person's sexual orientation. likewise, we've had federal courts that have ruled that discrimination based on someone's sexual orientation or gender identity is illegal under existing law. and yet tens of millions of americans live in areas where these laws have not been passed and federal courts have not made the same determination. h.r. 5 is the remedy for making sure that we don't have this checker board of rights and understand discrimination among

our lgbt community. my district of milwaukee, wisconsin, the fourth congressional district of wisconsin, is notable to mention here. lgbtq youth in particular face significant obstacles and barriers because of their lgbtq identification. we have 500 youth in my district who are homeless and more than 40% of them identify as lgbtq, many permanently homeless because they've been abandoned by their families and turned out onto the streets. to add to their distress, the lgbtq youth are in the foster care in milwaukee. and around the country.

and they face huge disparities in treatment and higher rates of harassment than their nonlgbtq peers -- non-lgbtq peers. there are many foster care organizations that are turning away potential loving families and homes based on discriminatory practices. even though lgbtq couples are seven times, did you hear me, madam speaker, seven times as likely to adopt and are more likely to adopt minority children or disabled children as compared to heterosexual couples. here's what we know. every child wants a loving home. transpeople, like all people, just want to be treated like people. and for these reasons and so many others i fully support h.r. 5 and i look forward to voting

for it tomorrow. i applaud our leadership's commitment to protecting our lgbtq community and all communities from pernicious forms of hate and harm of discrimination. we're all in this together, madam speaker. and in order to protect all of our rights, we ought to remember the oath that we take as we stand under this e pluribus unum. out of many -- one. nd i yield back. ms. tlaib: madam speaker, congressional progressive caucus who puts this special order together every week has truly been committed to the rights of our lgbtq neighbors and i'm very pleased that many of my colleagues tomorrow in a very bipartisan way is going to be supporting a historic equality act. with, that madam speaker, i --

with that, madam speaker, i yield the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the chair lays before the house the following enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 2379. an act to re-authorize the bulletproof vest partnership grant program. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman, for 30 minutes. mr. grothman: thank you very much. first of all, i'd like to thank president trump for earlier today one more time bringing the issue of immigration to the forefront. i think president trump's speech was an interesting speech and provided a nice starting point for the immigration discussion ahead. i'd like to highlight three issues that i hope the president

will consider as we move forward on some sort of compromise on this problem. the first issue that i really wish president trump would have addressed today, but i'm sure will address in the future, because he's dealt with it in the past, is birth right citizenship. if we are going to get a control over who is in this country, we cannot allow the continuation of something which was certainly not intended by the constitution and that is something called birth tourism. i know somebody from california and they see on regular basis people coming to california to have a child here. in the future we want to vet our future immigrants. we want to perhaps have a balance between different countries. we want to make sure that the immigrants who can -- who are coming here learn english, the people that are coming here are going to be hardworking people and not become a public charge.

under current law, the united states interprets -- wrongly interprets the amendment of the constitution as requiring that if someone is born here, they'll become a citizen here. that, of course, was not the intent of the amendment and president trump, i know, knows it was not the intent of the amendment. the 14th amendment of the united states was solely put in for the purpose of making sure that slaves who were born in the country prior to the emancipation proclamation would become citizens. there was a fear at the time that some unethical, particularly southern, states would say that people who were not citizens prior to the civil war were not citizens after the civil war. obviously that amendment was not designed to say somebody who is a tourist here, somebody who is here illeier or whatever, if they had a -- illegal or whatever, if they had a child,

that child would be a citizen. it is time that president trump do what he talked about doing in november and october and i applaud him when he will do it, and that he get rid of the birth right citizenship. and i think he can do this as president by himself, but it will be nice if congress would pass such a law. right now in this country we estimate that 7.5% of our -- or of the births in this country are births of people who are here illegally. there are a variety of problems with that. first of all, it encourages illegal immigration. in part because once somebody is a citizen, under the family laws that we have right now in the united states, the parents eventually, perhaps the siblings, will eventually become citizens. outside of the way we want to pick our future citizens and make sure that they are

appropriately vetted. now, we know that there are -- i call them devious one worlders, on both sides of the island i'll who will fight. this the reason -- i'll who will fight this. the reason -- aisle who will fight this. the reason this has remained a practice for several decades is because perhaps unfortunately even republican presidents for whatever reason do not want to have our immigration laws be treated seriously. but i do call upon president .rump to stop this policy i think it's important not only to discourage illegal immigration, but i do not think right now that when people come here on work visas it is the intent of congress that these people's children will automatically become citizens. i think we want to stop the excessive policy of chain migration which follows, as then the parents who broke the law, when they came into this

country, would be able to turn ound and become citizens themselves. kind of reward for breaking the law. i hope as this immigration law moves through the process and president trump fine-tunes things, he does what we were all so happy to hear him say he would do last october, and thathes end -- and that is end birth right citizenship. the next thing i think we want to look at is the idea of public benefits for illegal immigrants. first of all, under current law, you are not hypothetically supposed to get public benefits if you're here illegally and i'd like to thank housing and urban development secretary carson for stepping to the plate and making sure that people who broke the law to come here do not take advantage of our generous low-income housing benefits. however we should go beyond that. we should pass a bill saying outright that public benefits

are not things that we should give to anybody who is not a citizen. first of all, we're broke. i don't think it's been publicized enough. but about 20% of the current federal spending is borrowed. when you're around $23 trillion in debt, the idea of providing generous public benefits to people who are not citizens is preposterous. secondly, in so far as efforts are made to increase our citizenship through things like daca, we do want to make sure that we are not collecting immigrants who are eventually themselves going to become a public charge or coming here because of our generosity rather than the opportunities that take place for people who work hard. i have introduced legislation which will say that any local

unit of government who gives benefits to people who are not citizens will lose their ability to give those benefits. because we have to crack down on this. otherwise the future generations of americans will no longer be like past generations who came here to take advantage of the opportunity you get through hard work, but will begin to get some people here who will take advantage of the opportunities that are available from government benefits. i hope president trump, as he continues to discuss this -- discuss his immigration situation, talks about this. the third thing i think he should talk about and something i don't think the mainstream media has highlighted enough is what we are going to be spending money on in the next budget. so the viewers back home are aware, when we pass our annual spending bills, we break it into 12 separate bills. right now, as we have 100,000 people a month crossing our

border illegally, i would say that it's probably the number one concern for the future of the united states. sadly, the majority party, as they let us know where their priorities lie, told us the percentage of increases in each one of these 12 bills. for example, labor and h.h.s. was due for a 6% increase. defense for a 3% increase. state and foreign ops a 5% increase. the legislative branch i think about a 3% increase. who came along in last place at 1%? homeland security. in other words, a sign that the least priority in the next budget should be enforcing our borders. this at a time when groups stim the cost of illiam -- estimate the cost of illegal immigration to our country, between $50 billion and $100 billion, not to mention when we talk about the moral fiber of america, which has kept us going for so long, we begin to have the next wave

of immigrants who will become ' e next wave of americans first action coming into this country is breaking the law. neither i for this president trump is anti-immigrant. every year in this country we swear in another 700,000 citizens. i think it's wonderful in this country that we have four million people here on work visas and it's possible that number will go up in the future. but there's a difference between people coming here on work visas, there's a difference between people going through the appropriate steps and getting sworn in legally, and people who are crossing the border illegally. these are three suggestions of things that i think are minimal requirements before an immigration compromise is reached. again, emphasize, we should get

citizenship ight and people saying my child becomes a citizen, must end. i think the practice of people who are here illegally and anybody who is not a citizen get public benefits, physically in the area of health care. our superior benefits to that which the average american has. public housing today is superior to some of the housing that people have to pay their own rent, can afford. i hope the step up to the plate and make sure that with regard to immigration there are no public benefits. and timely with so many people flooding across the border, i hope we fight the idea that the least important part of our upcoming appropriation bills is

homeland security. i yield the remainder of my ime. d i move to -- the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion? growth mr. grothman: i move to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. the house stands adjourned until 9:00 a.m. tomorrow. the house returns tomorrow to

complete work on a measure called the equality act, which aims to ban discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. we heard about the legislation from a reporter on capitol hill. with us from capitol hill is a health care reporter with cq roll call. what with the equality act do and why it is a top -- wise a top priority for house democrats -- and why is it a top priority for house democrats? protections,xtend i advise lgbtq, so it would make sex, sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes free from discrimination. is sponsored by david cicilline, democrat from rhode island. you covered committee hearings in april. a headline from one of your