tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN June 19, 2019 11:59am-1:23pm EDT
leading an investigation into the assassination of saudi citizen virginia, "washington post" journalist jamal khashoggi. the report came out today. it's damning but not surprising but it mirrors the c.i.a.'s conclusions. i quote, it is the conclusion of the special repertoire that mr. khashoggi has been the victim of a deliberate, premeditated execution and extra judicial killing for which the state of saudi arabia is responsible under international human rights law. i'd like to introduce the u.n. report in the record if i may. >> you may. senator kaine: it finds six violations of international law. the prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of life -- >> all of this confirmation hearing will air later in our program schedule on the c-span networks. here on c-span, we're breaking away and going back live to the capitol hill to the u.s. house. they'll come back in and consider spending legislation for fiscal year 2020. they'll take a final passage
the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by he guest chaplain, pastor ryan hodges, rocky faith church, north carolina. the chaplain: dear heavenly father, in jesus' name i want to thank you for today, thank you for salvation. he bible says in i timothy 2:1-2, i exert you first of all that supplications, prayers, intersessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all that are in authority that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in godliness and all honesty. thank you for the members of the house, men and women of congress, and for their families. i pray for their work, their wisdom, and their walk. pray that you would forgive us
our sins as individuals and as a nation. i'm truly grateful that jesus iid, in him that cometh to me will no no -- i will in no wise cast out. thank you for coming to our lives. thank you for america. in jesus' name, amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of of rule 1, the journal stands approve. the pledge of allegiance -- the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson. mr. thompson: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a
message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate agreed to without amendment h.j.res. 60, requesting the secretary of interior to authorize unique and one-time arrangements for displays on the national mall and the washington monument during the period beginning july 16, 2019 and ending july 20, 2019. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx, is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. it is my honor to recognize today's guest chaplain, pastor ryan hodges of rocky face baptist church in hiddenite, north carolina. in 2005, pastor hodges earned his theology degree from cherry grove baptist bible college in wilkesboro. he's since served in four churches in our state. wherever god has called him to
use his gift of preaching and zeal for souls. he's also a loving husband and father. mr. speaker, the surest way to make a positive change in our country is to follow god's will for our lives, which is itself a lifetime's work. north carolina's fifth district is blessed to have a faithful servant in pastor hodges, dedicated to helping others, recognize god's love, and plan for them. we are blessed to have his prayers and service today, as is everyone that god places in his life. i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. espaillat: madam chair, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore:
without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. espaillat: madam chair, the carnegie medal, the prestigious award that annually recognizes authors focused on literature for children or young adults has been widely coveted since its establishment in 1936. surprisingly, the medal has never been awarded to a woman of color in its 83-year existence. that is until the dough minutian american poet elizabeth's win for "the poet x," a critically acclaimed literature. poet x illustrates the journey of x, a shy dominican girl of african dissent who joins her school's poetry club in harlem, a place i represent and know well. elizabeth's brave exploration is remarkable. her childhood upbringing and tribulations gave elizabeth unique authority of x's journey. the poem will inspire young voices who follow her
footsteps. congratulations to elizabeth, fore her monumental accomplish -- for her monumental accomplishment. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: madam speaker, request 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. thompson: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today to recognize and reaffirm the friendship between the united states and germany. i am proud to co-chair the american -- the german american caucus with congressman bill keating, and today we introduced a resolution to reaffirm the history of the united states and germany. under the wonderbar together initiative. our countries are linked by heritage, common values, and shared interests. more than 50 million americans of german origin live in the united states, and many of whom still have strong ties to their heritage. madam speaker, our resolution highlights the alliance between our nations and our shared commitment to free and democratic societies. the wonderbar together
initiative brings together more than 250 partners across the united states with more than 1,500 events and projects in local communities covering very aspect of german-american alliance. german companies create more than 690,000 american jobs. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and reaffirm our deep and historical friendship with germany. thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to honor the outgoing mayor of dallas, mike rowlings, for his eight years of exceptional service to our city. dallas saw incredible economic growth. unemployment has outperformed
the state for 51 consecutive months. mr. allred: the mayor traveled all over the world, working to bring investment to our city. he helped improve the quality of life by adding 215 acres of park lands and trails. worked to close -- maya angelou said you can decide not to be reduced by them. mayor rawlings showed help in times of crisis. he handled the july 7, 2016 attacks on police officers. he's been a unifying voice of -- as a son of dollars, i want to thank mayor rawlings for his service and thank you for this time. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> madam 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
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 requests unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee eadership. the gentleman has not been recognized for debate.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 445 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 30. house resolution 445,resolved, that at any time
-- 445, resolved, that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill, h.r. 3055, making appropriations for the departments of commerce and justice, science, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2020, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 116-18, modified by the amendment printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the house and in the committee of the whole. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read.
points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule 21 are waived. clause 2-e of rule 21 shall not apply during consideration of the bill. section 2. a, no further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution considered pursuant to subsection b, amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution, and pro forma amendments described in section 4 of this resolution. b, each further amendment printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may
be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before action thereon, shall not be subject to amendment except as provided by section 4 of this resolution, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. c, all points of order against further amendments printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules or against amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived. section 3, it shall be in order at any time for the chair of the committee on appropriations or her designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment except as provided by section 4 of this resolution, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question in the house or in the committee of the whole. section 4, during consideration of the bill for amendment, the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations or their respective designees may offer up to 15 pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate. section 5, at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the house with such further amendments as may have been adopted. in the case of sundry further amendments reported from the committee, the question of their adoption shall be put to the house en gros and without division of the question. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. ection 6, during consideration it shall not be in order to
consider amendment proposing an crease pursuant to section 51-b-2-a-2 and emergency deficit control act and an increase in a appropriation -- in an appropriation not so designated or vice versa. section 7, during further consideration of h.r. 2740-a, the amendment printed in part c shall be considered as adopted in the house and the committee of the whole and b this equestion of the adoption of further sundry antidepressants reported from the committee of the whole shall be put to the house engross and without woifings the question. section 8, during consideration of h.r. 3055 or during the further consideration of h.r. 2740, the chair may entertain a motion that the committee rise only if offered by the chair of the committee on appropriations or her designee. the chair may not entertain a motion to strike out the enacting words of the bill as described in clause 9 of
rule 18. section 9, on any legislative day during the period from june 28, 2019, through july 8, 2019, a, the journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as pproved. and b, the chair may at any time declare the house adjourned to meet at a date and time, within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article i of the constitution, to be announced by the chair in declaring the adjournment. section 10, the speaker may appoint members to perform the duties of the chair for the duration of the period addressed by section 9 of this resolution as though under clause 8-a of rule 1. section 11, each day during the period addressed by section 9 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule 5. section 12, it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider concurrent resolutions providing for adjournment during the month of july, 2019. section 13, it shall be in order at any time on the legislative day of june 27, 2019, for the speaker to entertain motions
that the house suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule 15. the speaker or her designee shall consult with the minority leader or his designee on the designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this section. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. mr. mcgovern: for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, congressman woodall, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only and i ask unanimous consent that all members be given five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: i will be asking unanimous consent to make a technical correction to the rule. the page containing the text of a noncontroversial rule
inadvertently omitted. i ask unanimous consent that the amendment placed at the desk be considered as printed as 123 in house report 116-119 offered by -- if offered by representative lee of nevada or her designated and that it be debatable for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number -- amendment offered by ms. lee of nevada. after the first dollar amount insert reduce by $500,000. page 109, line 13rks after the dollar amount insert reduced by $500,000. page 109, line 15, after the dollar amount, insert reduced by $500,000. page 159, line 19 theambing dollar amount, insert increased by $500,000. >> madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: my friend on the rules committee has made a commitment this year that he has
been following through on to try to bring order to an otherwise fairly chaotic process. this is clearly just a clerical error, one we all worked through together last night so i have no objection to the gentleman's amendment. qusm the speaker pro tempore: the reservation is withdrawn. without objection, ordered. mr. mcgovern: i want to thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i want to thank the gentleman from georgia for his kindness. on tuesday, the rules committee met and reported a rule, house resolution 445, it provides for consideration-h.r. 3055 under a structured rule that makes 290 amendments in order. it also provides for one hour of general debate controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations. this appropriations process represents a clean break if the way the republicans ran this place. they furthered an agenda that was like robin hood in reverse, giving to the rich, stealing from the poor. this democratic majority has a
radical idea that the people's house should work for the people. not the wealthy and the well-connected but all americans. and you can see that these values -- you can see these values in the underlying appropriations measure. we support snap, our nation's premier anti-hunger program. this will give a helping hand to many of the 40 million americans who are struggling to put food on the table in america today that includes a lot of working families, it includes veterans, includes seniors and it includes those who are disable. because the truth is there is no plan b for many people that have fallen on hard times. food pantries are important. but many are already stretch today thin and can't meet the demand. so we need to invest in snap. this program is a lifeline as families work to get back on their feet. for the life of me, madam speaker, i don't understand why investing in snap has been a controversial subject for many of my colleagues on the other side. why some have demonized the poor and traded in stereotypes year
after year after year. on average, and i think it's important to make this clear for my colleagues, snap households receive about $259 a month. the average snap benefit per person is about $128 per month. which works out to just $1.40 per person, per meal. $1.40 can hardly buy a cup of coffee for someone, let alone a nutritious meal. that's what we're asking people to live on and it's a shame. i hope in the future we can find a way to expand snap benefits for those who are in need. this bill also provides major funding to help stem the tide of opiate abuse that's ravaging communities across the country and grant policemans that we know work, things like prescription drug monitor, overdose reversal drugs, and at-risk youth programs. and we're not waiting around for this administration's long delayed transportation plan. the president has been rolling it out, two weeks from now, for
the last two years. we have an infrastructure emergency in our country today. i've got bridges in my district that are old enough to qualify for medicare. others are older than some of the other states in this country. it's the same old story all across the country. that's why the american society of civil engineers has given our nation's infrastructure a d-plus. this is appalling, madam speaker. we owe a lot to those that built our roads and bridges a century ago but we cannot expect them to last forever. h.r. 3055 would provide real funding now to rebuild crumbling infrastructure. there were also badly needed investments here in our nation's digital infrastructure. the sad reality is 25 million people in rural communities don't have access to high speed internet. some are in my state. massachusetts has made significant strides in bringing high speed internet to the rural parts of western and central massachusetts but there are
still pockets where connectivity is still a problem. this bill would fund an expansion of rural broadband services that would allow more kids to actually do homework at home. expand economic development opportunities and improve health outcomes. affordable broadband should be available to everyone regardless of their zip code. this bill also helps combat the gun violence epidemic by increasing resources for programs that help reduce crime. that includes things like fully funding the f.b.i.'s national instant background -- that includes things like fully funding the f.b.i.'s national instant criminal background check system, making schools safer, and investing in mentoring programs for at-risk youth. this follows language in last week's minibus appropriations bill that provided funding to research deaths and injuries caused by gun violence for the first time in more than 20 years. because this majority isn't afraid to stand up to the n.r.a. and protect the people we represent. we know the will of the american
people is stronger than the might of the gun lobby. there's also language in this bill that prohibits president trump from diverting important military construction projects to build his unnecessary border wall. this is a wall, by the way, that the president claimed time and time again that mexico would pay for. now he's using a bait and switch to force tax payers to foot the bill. this wall was preposterous when it was just a campaign talking point. it's even more absurd as an actual policy paid for by the taxpayers of this country. these are just a few of our priorities in the bill. we are delivering on our prom to invest in the things that matter to people. chairwoman lowey an ranking member fwranger and the entire appropriations committee and their staffs have done an extraordinary job. their work deserves a great deal of praise by both democrats and republicans. they are trying to fund our government in a timely way. now i don't know what the senate is going to do on appropriations. they haven't done much of
anything on anything so far. but i do know this these bills are an investment in our future. they are tailored toward providing opportunity for all americans and delivering on our pledge to make this place work for them again. fixing our infrastructure, reducing gun violence prorkviding economic tun for small businesses, ending hunger, these are the kinds of things our constituents want us to address. so i urge all my colleagues to show the american people that we are listening by voting for this rule and let's keep bringing forward appropriation measures that truly represent the twhoifl taxpayer. with that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank my friend from massachusetts for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. madam speaker, we just came out of a long night in the rules committee. i say we, on a member side, we were out of there by midnight. i have not asked the rules committee staff yet when they
got out of there last night because i didn't really want to know the answer to that. when we meet in the rules committee on appropriations bills, you know we're in for long night my first year in congress, madam speaker, you may have been following it at the time, it was when the big republican majority came in, as the democrat majority has come in now and the appropriation season hadn't been finished. so the first order of business when we came in was to take on the appropriations challenge. well, it seemed crazy at the time. but what we decided to do, this is a minibus, a group of four bills together. what we decided to do was take the entire discretionary account of the entire united states of america, bring it down here to the house floor and consider it under an open rule. i brought a copy of that rule down with me, madam speaker. it was h.res. 92. you heard the reading clerk read
this morning, it took us a while to get through that. back then, we were only consider -- we're only considering a small fraction of the budget today. back then we were considering the entire federal budget and it was right here in three page. the part that dealt with the appropriations bill was only one of these section. the other two were housekeeping business. we allowed the entire body to bring their ideas to the table to see what might stick. i say it was a radical idea because i just got into congress. it turns out, i went back and looked at the numbers historically, turns out it didn't used to be a radical idea. we've made it a radical idea to let all the amendments come to the floor my friend from massachusetts has a hard job as chairman of the rules committee. i introduced an amendment last night, madam speaker, barely before the committee ended after i'd had a chance to question the cardinals who were responsible for that language, and my friend from massachusetts made it in order. he's doing everything he can to
try to make the process more open and it has been in the most recent past. but if we go back a little bit further if we think about how to change the culture of the institution, it hasn't always been this divided. do you remember the first year that speaker pelosi sat in the chair that you're sitting in right now, madam speaker? she was the first -- as you recall, first democratic speaker since 1994. first woman to ever lead this institution. when she sat in that chair for the first time, we had an opings appropriations process. there were about 110 democratic amendments. that were offered. about 300 republican amendments. because we were in the minority. it's harder to get your agenda in the underlying bill. when you run the show, like mr. mcgovern does, you're able to get all your good ideas in the bill. i have no doubt that every one of mr. mcgovern's good ideas is contained in this underlying bill. that's the privilege of
leadership. when you sit on the outside, like i do, like mr. -- it's harder to get your ideas and so historically as speaker pelosi did in 2007, more amendments are made in order for the minority party than are made in order for the majority party. because the minority party hasn't gotten a chance to work in the process. i'm proud over the eight years i was part of the majority party here and had the privilege of sitting on the rules committee, we made more than half the amendments, more than half of the amendments for any -- on average across all the bills, were given to the minority party. but in this but in this bill, madam speaker, again, despite the chairman's best efforts, the minority party received less than a quarter of the amendments that are available.
what i'm saying is, when republicans were doing this -- from their leadership spot and we were giving more amendments to the other side, now the majority party is giving not 100% more amendments to their side, not 2 pund% more, but -- 200% more, but more than 200% more. by my statistics last time around, we moved in the right direction. it used to be 300% more amendments given to the majority party. i don't say that to gripe about sour grapes. i say it with sincerity what chairman mcgovern is doing in the committee, he's trying to have process. most of what you heard the reading clerk read had nothing to do with amendments.
it had to do with closing down my rocess, in congressional career, the minority party, republicans, are frustrated we have not been able to fund humanitarian needs on the border. i know talking about the border is a dog whistle in this institution. as you heard the gentleman from massachusetts said, it's about the wall and it's about immigration and it's about all sorts of things that it's not. what we are talking about are children in the custody of the united states of america rightly or wrongly, like it or not, that's where we are today, and we can either fund the needs of those children, we can either fund the health care of those children, we can fund the education of those children or we cannot. and what we've heard from this administration is the same thing we heard from the obama administration when we had this ery same crisis in 2014, and that's, we don't have enough resources to provide for the flood of folks who have been taken into u.s. custody.
white house made this request six weeks ago knowing that we were going to run out of money this month, and the house has taken no action on that request. when we had the very same rules committee hearing last week, madam speaker, that we had this week, my friend, the chairman talked about his sincere desire to move this kind of legislation. but it hasn't moved. my friend from california who sits on the majority side of the rules committee and serves on the appropriations committee talked about the meeting they had in the appropriations committee that day to move this in an expedited way, and yet, it has not yet moved. the reason the rule considers these measures to close down the parliamentary process here is because folks are rightfully frustrated with the flow of the floor. we have serious work that we need to do. when you're in procedural nonsense, you don't get any of
that work done, but that properly nonsense comes from a very sincere frustration that we have very real needs that are shared needs, very real passions that are shared passions and that the consequences of failure affect us all. it affects who we are in our individual districts. it affects who we are as a nation. for the life of me, i cannot understand why it is this issue is receiving the neglect it is from the leadership party. we are going to talk about that in our previous question amendment. if we defeat the previous question, we'll bring up an amendment to add to the rule language that will allow us to have this important debate and provide these important funds. i'll reserve the time to talk about that, madam speaker, but i do want to say we had ample opportunity in the rules
committee to make the process wide open and that decision candidly is above the chairman's pay grade and the process was not allowed to be an open process. so then we also had ample opportunity to close the process down completely. that is completely within the chairman's pay grade. he rejected that idea and made the effort to take some very important steps forward into returning us to regular order and for that i'm grateful. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on -- the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, let me yield myself such time as i may consume. i enjoy listening to the gentleman engage in debate, but, you know, i will say this. you know, when i look at this rule and all the amendments that are in, i think i want to waive this rule because there are so many amendments we're making in order here. i appreciate the gentleman's
praise saying we made some good ideas in order. the gentleman referred to his amendment, which i disagree with. we also made from other republicans. i am looking at mr. burgess, mr. rutherford, mr. scalise, mr. king, mr. posey, mr. walberg, mr. gosar, mr. mckinley, mr. hudson, mrs. walorski. i could right through this and continue to read the republican amendments that we made in order. and in the rules committee last night during the markup, my friends offered a number of amendments. you know, of the amendments they offered, nearly half of .hem violated house rules or were duplicative. you know, when people draft amendments in a way that are -- that legislate on appropriations bills or violate, you know, any of the house rules, i mean, it has been customary for democrats and republicans not make them
in order. we try to work with them to fix them. many of the amendments, including a democratic amendment that the minority offered, we could not vote for because it was not complying with house rules. the case. but that's people need to know you need to draft them in a way that's compliant with house rules. you know, a lot of the -- you know, a lot of the amendments that were offered by my friends were the oldies but goodies. we have wall amendments, abortion amendments, stuff we voted on time and time again. i appreciate they want more time to vote on it, but we need to get our work done here. as the gentleman referred to, there's a member on the other side who's decided to have a little bit of a temper tantrum and call for a vote on every single amendment and try to invoke every single procedural measure so that everything is dragged out and moves at a snail's pace. that's his right. you know, i don't think it's a
particularly effective tactic, but if it makes him happy, he can do whatever he wants. he has that right to do that on the house floor. but i -- you know, i was in the minority in the last session. i lived through the most closed congress in the history of our country. when the republicans brought more bills to the floor that were completely closed, they were unamendable. nobody could offer an idea. they did that more than any other congress in history. so we are trying to do this better, and i think we are in many respects doing it better and we're going to continue in that spirit. mr. speaker -- madam speaker, at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from maine, a distinguished member of the appropriations committee, ms. pingree. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from maine is recognized for two minutes. ms. pingree: thank you very much, madam speaker. and thank you so much to the chair of the rules committee for yielding me the time. thank you to him and to his fellow committee members for
the hard work that they do and their staff putting in so many long hours around this appropriations process. i rise in support of the rule for h.r. 3055. i want to focus my remarks on the fiscal year 2020 agriculture rural development, f.d.a., and relations agencies bill. this bill includes robust funding for the u.s. department of agriculture and the u.s. food and drug administration, two federal agencies that touch the life of every single american. i'm proud to be on the subcommittee that oversees this bill, and i'm grateful of chairman bishop and ranking member forten bery for working -- fortenberry for working together to come up with a bill that supports diversity of american agriculture. of growing techniques that are used by american farmers, in maine, organic food sales increased 39% between 2012 and 2017. producing food free of toxic chemicals that are for the health for consumers, for the farmers, and for our
environment. this bill supports growing markets, including organic and locally grown food by increasing the funding for the national organic program to $18 billion and $24.4 million for the local agricultural market program. the bill also boosts usda efforts to reduce food waste by including $1 million for a new composting and food reduction pilot program as well as $400,000 to establish the first food loss and waste reduction liaison at the usda. this is important because 30% to 40% of the food in this country is wasted. if food waste was a country, it would be number three in admitting global greenhouse gases. additionally, the bill acknowledges that farmers are an integral part of playing a positive role in climate change solutions. there's report language urging the usda to look at carbon markets for agriculture, supporting the usda's regional
climate hubs and encouraging the usda to look at other opportunities to support farmers dealing with the effects of climate change. lastly, the bill includes language preventing the usda from relocating -- mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentlelady another one minute. ms. pingree: thank you so much. appreciate that, mr. chair. lastly, the bill includes language preventing the usda from relocating the national institute of food and agriculture and the economic research service. i am deeply disappointed that the administration is moving forward with this ill-conceived plan, and i will continue fighting on this on behalf of their employees. i urge my colleagues to support and i e for h.r. 3055, yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to one of our young leaders, the gentleman
from minnesota, mr. stauber. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. stauber: mr. woodall, thank you for yielding to me today. madam speaker, i offered four amendments to improve this bill and benefit northern minnesota but, like last week, all four were rejected. they were not rejected on the merits, of course, but they were rejected in the rules committee before even being debated on the floor. two of my amendments would have removed onerous studies put in place by seasoned politicians from the twin cities and washington, d.c. these studies in the committee report language are simply designed to delay important job-creating mining projects in my district. unfortunately, these politicians play politics with the consequence of killing jobs because, to them, our livelihood and these mining projects are nothing more than faraway hway idea in a land.
interest groups oppose these jobs, so the attempt to move the goal post, lay down more red tape, require more studies and make it impossible or at least attempt to make it impossible to permit. i say this, we can do both. we can mine and keep our environment pristine and clean. however, to my constituents, these projects are a reality. these jobs will put good -- these good-paying jobs will put food on the table. they'll put gas in our car, and clothes on the backs of our children. these jobs will allow us to work, recreate, play, and raise a family in northern minnesota. these projects, not only mean good-paying union-protected mining jobs in cutting edge industry, these projects can mean a larger property tax base, increase in enrollment in our schools and population growth in our communities. these mining projects are a big
part of our economic engine. yet, washington, d.c., and twin city politicians can sneak language into a committee report to undermine a fair process while arbitrarily rejecting my amendments. another amendment i introduced would have ensured no funding is available to list the gray wolf under the endangered species act. as i testified last night at the rules committee, the gray wolf has recovered. even the obama administration attempted to remove it from the endangered species act in 2015. in northern minnesota, wolf attacks on cattle and domestic pets are becoming far too common, burdening our farmers who already are struggling. one small northern minnesota county accounted for 21 confirmed wolf attacks on cattle and local officials expect the number to be much higher. as many cattle that simply go missing are likely wolf attacks. because the gray wolf is listed
as federally endangered, the minnesota department of natural resources is unable to control them. our local experts who truly understand the problem have their hands tied because politicians in this town, washington, d.c., think they know best. but they do not. mr. woodall: i yield the gentleman an additional 60 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stauber: i thought my final amendment was a no-brainer. it would have forced the timber sales program by a little more than $6 million because it's in the national forest system, it would have no negative budgetary effect. the forest timber sales program provides needed services for personnel. it allows them to research, recycle forest products and find new ways to market them. meanwhile, an increase to this program means getting our loggers out in the woods and creating jobs for our communities. this would have directly benefited both superior and chippewa national forest.
it would have allowed our personnel to handle local environmental challenges like ensuring fallen trees do not contribute to forest fires. my amendment woos have directly benefited the small rural communities in northern minnesota. unfortunately, powerful politicians use the system to their advantage by rejecting my amendments and preventing even an open debate on the issues. i yield the rest of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: let me address the endangered species act the gentleman referred. to it's not washington knows best, not a politician knows best approach. it is based on science. n available science. not on a special interest trying to get a different outcome. if you don't believe in the direction of the act, if you don't believe that it should be
adhered to, the remedy is to introduce an alternative law. i would vote against it but the gentleman has the right to do that. the endangered species act already ensures there is public notice and public participation. there's an opportunity to come -- to comment on listing and delisting decisions. it is our view that congress should not interfere in the process outlined by the endangered species act because it then becomes about politics, not science, buttle to pick -- but politics. science should determine the survival of a species. science is a tough subject for my friends on the other side to deal with because so many of them don't believe we have a chi lat crisis but in any event i wanted to respond. at this point, madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the chair: the gentleman -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. connolly: i thank the chair and i want to thank themy good friend, mr. mcgovern of massachusetts, the distinguished chairman of the committee who i think has done an extraordinary
job. i was listening to my friend from georgia. i don't know, maybe he forgot what it was like, the previous eight years, in the last congress in which my friend from georgia sat on the rules committee, we had the most closed rule bills come to the floor in the history to have the congress. -- history of the congress. mr. mcgovern as hasn'tly pointed out how many amendments are in this bill. one of the reasons we're here night after night voting on dozens and dozens of amendments is because the rule committees got opened up. under mr. mcgovern's leadership. and his able staff. and i congratulate them and i absolute them for -- and i salute them for opening up the process that my friends on the other side closed down. madam speaker, i also want to rise in support of this rule and the underlying bill which would make critical domestic
investments in law enforcement infrastructure and our nation's veterans. i particularly want to commend the appropriations committee chairwoman lowey and chairman price for including in this bill $150 million matching program in capital investment for the washington metropolitan area transit authority, the nation's capital. this funding is part of a successful federal-state partnership and has been used for major investments to upgrade metro. the three metro jurisdiction, virginia, maryland, and d.c., washington, d.c., collectively match this $150 million annual payment with an equal amount of $150 million for a total of $300 million a year far 10-year period. without that continued federal participation this funding partnership would in fact cease, leaving a massive shortfall in wha -- in wmata's capital
budget. i look forward to working with the chairman of the subcommittee, eleanor holmes norton of washington, d.c., and my colleagues to advance a long-term, enhanced re-authorize eags of dedicated funding for wmata. i've been through this bill, the metro accountability act which would do just that and has the full support of every single member of the national capital delegation, maryland, virginia, and washington, d.c. this bill uses a carrot and stick approach to both invest in the essential transit system as well as to hold the system accountable in providing a more safe, more reliable service. i believe with those incentive, we can make metro great again. madam speaker, i urge a yes on this rule and support the underlying bill as well. i salute my colleagues for understanding how investments have positive returns on them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from georgia is
recognized. mr. woodall: my friend from virginia is almost always right about everything but the fact that he's so wrong on this makes it worth comments. we're not here night after night voting because of the committee being open. we are here night after night voting because we can't get a vote on funding that crisis, that humanitarian crisis that is at the border, a crisis that my friend from virginia cares about my friend from massachusetts cares about. my friend from tennessee and i. you go right across this institution, it does not matter your ideological position, you care about this issue. we are voting night after night to draw attention to the fact that we cannot get our voices heard, not because our voices are heard in volumes never before seen. in fact, interesting sidebar, madam speaker, if you go back to the days of open rule, you'll actually find the committee made
more amendments in order on almost every division than we would have ordinarily had if we just had an open rule. when we clamp down on the the s, that steam drives conversations up, these conversations should be had in committee not on the floor of the house. with that, i yield two minutes to my neighbor to the north, a leader on these issue, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. cus to have. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. kustoff: i rise to express my profound frustration with the rules committee. i'm disappointed the majority has chosen to cut members out of the process. i worked with colleagues across the aisle to introduce a bipartisan amendment to address the epidemic of asian carp infestation in the mississippi river and its tributaries. this invasive species has invaded the tennessee and cumberland river basins and continues to threaten our rural economies and native fisheries
that thrive off the recreational and sporting industries. without a doubt, it's a major problem in my home state of tennessee as well as kentucky, alabama, and mississippi. if these states continue to get cut out of the process, the problem will only get worse. i want to thank members from both sides of the aisle who fought hard for this amendment only to have it thrown out at the last minute. we deserve the opportunity to have the concerns of our constituents heard and addressed. but unfortunately, the process is broken. i want to thank the gentleman for yielding time and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i would point out that the gentleman that this legislation contains the largest increase to combat asian carp in years. at this point, madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the
gentleman from new york, the distinguished member of the ules committee, mr. morelli. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. morrall: i thank the entleman -- >> i thank the gentleman for yielding me time. i want to thank the committee for addressing gun violence prevention. it would increase funding for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives by over 9%. that additional funding will enable a.t.f. to train more agents and hire more inspectors to fulfill the mission of keeping illegal firearms out of criminal hands. crimeselle: most guns in have been stolen yet they cannot inspect licensed firearm dealers. this fund, the additional personnel it can provide, will
help a.t.f. reach inspection goals and enforce our existing gun laws making communities across the nation safer. i thank the committee for their hard work rm i urge my colleagues to support both the rule and the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: i yield myself 15 seconds to say to my friend from new york, he's one of the bright spots on the rules committee, we're doing a lot of things differently than we have done in years past and he's been a real partner and leader on that, madam speaker. if you ever think it's nothing but partisan nonsense, which you can imagine in a 9-4 committee, that kind of thing could break out. i encourage you to come see mr. mcgovern, mr. morelle in action, you might be surprised by what you find. with that, i yield two minutes to a good friend and leader from the great state of iowa, mr. king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman from georgia for yielding to me.
i rise to address an issue that's within the underlying bill and express my gratitude and support for the efforts on the part of the subcommittee chair, congresswoman betty mccollum in particular. have a situation in sioux city, iowa, in that area, much of the native american population there at winnebago. of course they've had their problem -- there are winnebago. they've had their problems. one of those problems is drug and alcohol abuse. and addiction. some of the resources that have traditionally been delivered through the indian health services have been suspended over the last years and without the note, i'm going to say seven or eight years, something like that, given the meetings i've been to. we asked that language be included in the report language in the underlying bill that's directed by this rule. of course that report language includes $81 million for urban indian health, $29 million, 6 --
$29,685,000 above the enacted level. there's improvement in that. here's money there also, $1,429,000 for current service, etc. the foundational language that i appreciate being in here so much is, it says, quote, the committee recognizes nonprofit organizations such as the sioux land human investment partnership to help american indians in urban areas outside the urban indian health program and encourages the service to offer technical assistance to such programs within service authority, close quote. very much appreciate that language. there's additional language that sets aside that says that the interior appropriations bill includes $2 million available for 11 grants or contracts with public or private institution services to provide alcohol or drug treatment services to indians including alcohol detoxification services. we are in the prosofse building
what we're calling hope street, which will be a location that allows them to go directly to that facility for that kind of help and -- i ask an additional 30 seconds. mr. woodall: 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: i wanted to conclude with this. the lead on this effort has been mr. frank la mir. he's been a statesman for the winnebagos for years. also for native americans in a broader sense, especially in the upper midwest. he tragically passed away two days ago. his funeral is today. he worked on these projects for a lifetime. it's very fitting that we take action on one of his initiatives here in this congress today and i'm hopeful that we'll be able to take up h.r. 184 which transfers the land back to the winnebagos that they should so rightfully have. i thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts
is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i just -- let me just say to the gentleman from iowa that we made in order last night one of his amendments, related to the census question. i strongly disagree with him on that, i hope we can defeat the amendment with a strong bipartisan vote but nonetheless we made his amendment in order and i look forward to the debate on the floor and again look forward to voting no on it. with that, i reserve my tile. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. at this time i yield two minutes to a classmate of mine, a perennial leader in this institution, the gentleman from ohio, mr. stivers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized. mr. stivers: i'd like to thank the gentleman for yielding and rise to express disappointment that the cruels committee did not make in order a bipartisan amendment from mr. gonzalez of texas and i which would have added 100 immigration judge
teams to address the backlog at the office of immigration review. with the record number of individuals and families seeking asylum there's a backlog of approximately 730,000 people who are waiting on hearings and they're waiting on average almost two years. justice delayed is justice denied and it costs all of us and it costs many social prices, including things like separation of families and children, people who are held in detention centers. we need to do more. i want to -- i want to commend the appropriations committee for adding some additional funding in the base text. but these hundred judges would have made a big difference. there's only 450 judge teams as we sit here today and as we think about immigration, it's a very thorny issue. it becomes shirts and skins pretty quickly. there are very few things, madam speaker, that we agree on. one of them that republicans and democrats agree on is
providing more judge teams so we can process these claims faster and i hope to work with the gentleman from texas, mr. gonzalez. i know he's committed to it and i'm committed to it, as well as the leaders of the rules committee and the leaders of the appropriations committee, as we move through the process to enacting something that funds our government for this year. and i hope that when we get to the final resolution, we will have more judge teams that are in the base text of this bill and i pledge to work with folks. this is a very important issue. it's one of the few issues that republicans and democrats agree on. it's one of the few issues that will make a big difference. i do want to thank the gentleman from massachusetts and the entire rules committee for making in order another amendment that will speed up the hiring process for these judge teams that mr. gonzalez and i also offered. that's a start. but we need more resources. so in closing, i'd like to commit to working with republicans and democrats to
get a solution that funds more judges to clear this backlog. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from ohio for the constructive way that he has brought his concerns to the floor. i'm very sympathetic with what he's trying to do. while the appropriations committee believes that the funding level in the bill will support hiring the maximum number of immigration judges that can be brought onboard in a single year, nonetheless we're going to have to invest significantly more. because there is a backlog. i think the problem with his amendment and we talked about this last night was the offset. he wanted to basically take $71 million from the general legal activities, which funds justice department divisions such as the civil rights division, the civil division under which funding is included for cases
involving consumer and elder fraud. and the criminal division which includes mutual legal assistance reform. and the environment and natural resources division. you know, these litigation components do a great deal of important work and so i think the conversation should continue and we should hopefully be able to build consensus around an offset that doesn't rob peter to pay paul. but i appreciate the gentleman from ohio very much and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself 30 seconds to remind folks that we can defeat the previous question today and get on with the business about providing for the families and children along the border. this is something that everyone in this institution cares about. but for whatever reason we can't move legislation forward. everybody's talking about it, nobody's doing anything about it. there's no member of this institution who is more
frustrated about that than the gentleman from texas, mr. roy. if we defeat the previous question, we will bring up h.r. 3056, the bill to fund that crisis management at the border. and i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, to discuss that underlying bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. roy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i appreciate his working with me on this important issue. i do want to say an appreciation to floor staff and staff in the parliamentarian's office over the last few deas. we've obviously had some interesting -- days. we've obviously had some interesting activities on the floor of the house. i think it's important to vote and i think this issue is important, but i do want to thank the staff for all of their hard work and support of what guess on on the floor. as a form staffer, i know the amount of time that goes into that. i do believe that we should defeat the previous question. i do believe that we should move immediately to consideration of h.r. 3056. my good friend from alabama has put forward as an important
reflection of what the president and his office of management and budget has asked for, to deal with the humanitarian crisis at our border. we've gone over this quite a bit, about what's been going on on our border. but lost in all of that are the people. the humanitarian reality of what's happening at the border. the children. the moms. the families. lack of places to put people. border patrol that is overwhelmed, literally overwhelmed trying to do their job to secure the border of the united states. they literally don't know where to put people. they've got them and they're going, what do i do with them? right? and they have to follow the law. they have to try to do screenings and health screenings. they have to try to perform the basic function of their duty. yet they don't have the resources necessary to do it because this body for whatever reason refuses to do that. i know there's ongoing negotiations, there's ongoing conversations in the senate and the house about trying to reach some agreement. but let's be honest. this has taken far too long since the president's initial
request, leaving border patrol, leaving i.c.e., leaving those who are dealing with this crisis at the border without knowledge that they're going to have the resources necessary to do it, and without any support for what they're doing today. because today somebody's going to be abused at the border. some little girl, some family is going to be abused at the hands of the cartels who have operational control of our border. and if you talk to anybody with deep knowledge of what's going on at the border, they know the cartels have operational control of our border. they're making hundreds of millions of dollars moving people. not just fentanyl, not just dangerous narcotics, but people. and it's something that should end today. and we have the power, this body, to end it today. we should just call up 3056 and pass it. and it would solve the problem. it would at least solve the problem of what they're dealing with. but what it won't do is solve the asylum problem. what it won't do is solve the catch and release problem. what it won't do is solve the problem of being able to take unaccompanied children and safely get them back to families and homes.
none of that will be solved in h.r. 3056. but h.r. 3056 is the bare minimum of what we ought to do in this body to ensure that people have the resources necessary to care for people when we're trying to manage a broken border. that is overrun with crime. or communities in texas are being ravaged. where a mayor yesterday came here and gave a press conference talking about car chases in the streets, where fentanyl is pouring across our border. i would urge this body to defeat the previous question and to move to h.r. 3056. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from georgia reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, i appreciate the fact that the gentleman appreciates the staff who have been forced to remain here late into the night and into the early morning while he has insisted on vote after vote after vote. i'm willing to venture a guess that the staff don't appreciate him very much.
and i appreciate the gentleman wants to do something about the here and now, about what's happening right this second. i wish the gentleman had that same attitude before he voted to delay the implementation of the emergency supplemental bill to deal with the disasters that hit texas and a number of other states. but let me assure you that we are very concerned about the humanitarian crisis at the border. and we are engaged in negotiations with the senate and the white house, trying to resolve this. there are serious humanitarian needs at the border. many of which have been exacerbated by the trump administration's cruel immigration policies. house democrats understand these urgent needs and we want to address them and we are -- negotiations continue. appropriators are continuing to have important conversations about how best to balance funding to address the humanitarian needs at the border with the imperative to hold this administration
accountable. now, if republicans work with us, i'm told that by july 4 recess we can pass a bicameral, bipartisan bill to provide humanitarian funding and protect the rights and the dignity of my grants. but it's hard for me to -- of migrants. but it's hard for me to accept that at the heart of what this administration is doing has anything to do with being humanitarian. with caring about the polite of these my grants -- plight of these my grants. i have seen the -- migrants. i have seen the separation of children from their parents, the cruel separation of children from their parents at the border. i have listened to this president go on a rampage diminishing the plight of these refugees, in many cases fleeing for their lives. so we are working hopefully in a bipartisan, bicameral way, to get this done. but i would say this, if we care about doing what is right
from a humanitarian perspective, it is not embracing the policies of this president. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: madam speaker, i'd ask my friend from massachusetts if he has any further speakers remaining. mr. mcgovern: no. mr. woodall: with that, i'm prepared to close. madam speaker, i want to begin where my friend from massachusetts left off. i have not enjoyed coming down to vote on things we could have voice voted either. i have not enjoyed being here until midnight on votes that i know how they were going to come out when we could have been working together on issues where i didn't know how they were going to come out and we were trying to be agents of change. but when you're in the minority it's the only tool that you have to draw attention. and the reason we have been here night after night is not because mr. roy is trying to inconvenience anyone. it's because he went to the rules committee, he offered an amendment to do something that everybody in this chamber knows
ought to be done, and he didn't even get a vote. folks wouldn't even let him bring his idea. here we are, the people's house, on an issue that's a bipartisan issue, and he did not even get a vote. he's not here to say it's my way or the highway. he's here to say, i thought this was a place where ideas were debated and agreed to or defeated. and on that i think he is absolutely right. he's absolutely right. my friend from massachusetts is right, madam speaker, when he says he has opened up this process more than it was last cycle under republicans. it's true. but you've heard member after member who said, i have a good bipartisan idea. i have a good bipartisan idea, but the rules committee didn't allow it to be heard.
h.res. 92 from 2011, madam speaker. conveniently offered by mr. woodall, me. that was the festival of democracy in that february, march of 2011, where we didn't just have an open rule on one appropriations bill, or two or three or four, we opened up the entire federal budget and allowed every member's voice to be heard. from the most liberal republican to the most conservative, to the most conservative democrat, to the most liberal. everybody had a say. the problem we're having, i tell the gentleman from massachusetts, madam speaker, is not that we're opening up the process and that's why we're having all of these delays. the problem is that the process is still too closed and that is why we're having our delays. i can understand it, if you beat me when i'm trying to represent the views of my constituents, but when you shut me down i think it offends each and every one of us. appropriations bills have been that lone vestige of openness
in this institution. democrats shut them down before i got here. republicans didn't improve much on that model. save this resolution from 2011. there's still much room for improvement on both sides. let's start that improvement, madam speaker. start that improvement by defeating the previous question . let's go back to where this whole disagreement started. let's give the gentleman from texas an opportunity to be .eard on the bill let's fund this crisis that we all agree need to be funded -- needs to be funded. i would ask that the text of my previous amendment be inserted in the record where the previous question is being voted upon. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. with -- mr. woodall: i'll close with the words from the chairman of the rules committee last week. i take a back seat no one on this issue. we will deal with this issue. we will come up with something quick. and i look forward to working
with you. we need to move this bill expeditiously and i believe every word that he said. but it's been seven days and the sole result of those meaningful words is nothing. we might have the luxury of another day. we might have the luxury of another two. but that luxury is fast eroding, madam speaker. my friend from massachusetts does take a back seat to no one when it comes to caring for children, which is why we're all counting on his leadership to to move issue forward with the seriousness that every member of this institution believes it deserves. with that, madam speaker, i urge my friends, defeat the previous question. let's have this conversation today. not tomorrow. not the next day. let's fix today what we can fix today, success has an amazing way of making people feel better about themselves, madam speaker. doing things that matter has an amazing way of making people
feel better. and it turns out in this institution, madam speaker, success is incremental. we do something well together today, we do something even bigger together tomorrow. defeat this previous question. take up this issue of families and their care. and then we'll move on with the rest of the appropriations business, exactly, flawed or not, as my friend from massachusetts has crafted. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i want to thank the gentleman from georgia who is my friend and all those who participated in debate here today. i want to make one observation about the previous question and this debate on the border crisis. i'm looking at a politico column p.m.just appeared at 12:58
it says house interest inches toward an 11th hour deal toward funding the border crisis. we probably would have reached a deal already, because negotiations have been ongoing, but instead, members have had to spend an inordinate time on the house floor voting on amendment after amendment that passed almost unanimously. one of the things i've learned about this plates is we have a lot of people who like this embrace the theater of washington. sometimes it becomes the theater of the absurd. people who know that issues are about to be solved but who then stand up and demand it get solved so when it gets solved they can take a bow and take credit. bottom line, what has gone on on the house floor has delayed, i think, a solution here that we all want and my hope is that politico is correct and that we will get to this resolution soon. and that there'll be a big, strong, bipartisan support of
whatever the agreement is but i assure you about one thing. there's no deal coming to a conclusion because of the theatrics that have happened on this house floor with demanding vote after vote after vote after vote. it really has become silly. it has become absurd. and i think we're better than that. if people want to solve issues, they ought to support the negotiators of both parties that are trying to work out a deal. that's the way this place should operate. when it doesn't, it becomes silly. that's what's been going on here. i would also -- i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the previous question. i would also say that, you know, there's no such thing as a perfect rule or perfect bill but you know, this is it. this 290 amendments that are going to be debated on this, 290. that's not clamping down on the process. there's 290 amendments. and there are a lot of amendments here.
i want -- i started reading some of the republican amendments there have been made in order. i've got to be honest with you, i think a lot of them are terrible ideas. i'm going to fight like hell to try to defeat them because they're so bad. they'll have their teon the floor. that's not counting all the bipartisan amendments made in order where democrats an republicans have actually come together and forged a collaboration and a coalition to try to get stuff done for the goofed the country. madam speaker, i understand that some watching this debate my may find the appropriations process to be a little arcane but it is actually incredibly important. it is about whether congress is going to make investments that give everyone in this country a shot at a better life. that is even more important today. especially with this administration in power. republicans have claimed for years to want a government so small they could drown it in a bath tub. this administration is taking it one step further. it wants a government small
enough leave millions of poor and working americans with nowhere to turn. that's why it is re-- why it has released one extreme proposal after the next that would cut government spending to the bone for hardworking families, all while the wealthy get a windfall. i've heard from so many in my district that are rightly frustrated by this approach. they want to see investments made in our communities that help all americans and that's what this does. let me say it again. the appropriations committee, the democrats and the republicans on the appropriations committee and their staffs, deserve bipartisan praise for the incredible amount of work they have put into this. if you want to grow our economy and you want to combat gun violence, want to rebuild our infrastructure and more, then you should support this bill. my friends on the other side who have talked about wanting to debate more republican ideas on the house floor should also support this bill. again, we're making 290 amendments in order for this bill. again, some of them agree -- some of them i agree with. some i plan to vote against.
they'll all be debated. i just will conclude by saying in addition to thanking this appropriations committee and this -- i want to thank the rules committee. the democrats and the republicans and our staffs. for all the time that they have put in during not only this week but last week as well. i mean, it's like final exam week. these are all-nighters for the staff. often times that gets overlooked. so i want to thank them for their patience and diligent work. i urge a yes vote on the previous question. yes on this rule. and on the underlying resolution. i yield back the balance of my time and prove the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts yields back . the request se on ordering the eprevious question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. woodall: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested.
those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on the question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess for a period of less than 15 minutes.
they will come back shortly for votes, including a vote on that rule, and a final passage vote on the measure they started last week. we spoke shortly -- a short while ago to a capitol hill reporter for a preview on the easure that's coming up today. host: kaitlin joins us. she's looking at 2020 spending. the house moves on to its second spending measure. what's included and what's the price tag of this five-bill package? reporter: so in this latest five-bill package, it's a $383 billion measure. it's the second minibus or, you know, sort of a combination of spending bills that the house is looking to take up. and it includes funding for the departments of commerce, justice, transportation, agriculture and a host of other agencies. and last night we saw the house