Man admitting that he was prejudice, which for people of color was, you know, we kind of all said, finally. Sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q a. And the house gaveling back in. Well take you live right to the floor. Ered by he guest chaplain, dr. James merritt, Cross Pointe Church, duluth, georgia. The chaplain let us pray. Our father in heaven, we come thanking you for sending your son jesus to die for our sins. For these men and women who have given their lives to public service, for the freedom and inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuant of happiness that come from you, our creator. I pray for every member of this sacred house you give them the wisdom of solomon to know what is right, and the strength of daniel to do what is right. May they be ever mindful that they were they will give an account to you for every decision they make and every law they pass. Finally, would you please revive us again that your people may rejoice in you. Hear our prayer in the name that is above every name, jesus hrist, our lord, amen. The speaker pro tempore the chair has examined the journal of the last days proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. Pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition . Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on the speakers approval f the journal. The speaker pro tempore the question is on agreeing to the speakers eaprufle of the journal. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The journal strands approved. Mr. Speaker. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition . I object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. The speaker pro tempore pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 further proceedings on this question are postponed. The pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from illinois, ms. Bustos. Mrs. Bustos 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 without objection, the gentleman from georgia, mr. Woodall, is recognized for one minute. Mr. Woodall thank you very much, mr. Speaker. I have the honor of hosting the guest chaplain today, and i believe you were feeling his words that we were all going to be held account to account at the end, as you were recalling that vote series there. Those are powerful those are powerful words. Ill tell you, its not just something he shares in congress today. Its something he shares with our entire community. If you recognized his voice in that prayer, mr. Speaker, its because he is the host of the touching lives ministry. Youll see that in all 50 states. Youll see that around the world. He has his lovely bride, theresa, bride of more than four decades, here with him today in the gallery. And he leads back in my home state, mr. Speaker, Cross Pointe Church there in duluth. He left Snellville Baptist and was called to plant a new congregation. Its a powerful, powerful ministry, not just with the word but what the word tells us we should do in deed and its lived out there every day. From 2000 to 2002, mr. Speaker, i was the president of the Southern Baptist convention. I told him earlier, if he can handle church politics, he could certainly handle the politics that you and i are involved in here. But the honor for me, because i have such deep respect for all of my colleagues here, is to share a little bit back home with each one of you. He merits he embodies faith and duty and im grateful not only to his prayers and ministry to me, not prayers and ministry to our community, but to the entire nation and world. With that, mr. Speaker, i yield ack. The speaker pro tempore the chair will entertain up to 15 further oneminute requests on each side of the aisle. For what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition . Ms. Bustos mrs. Buss others mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute mrs. Bustos mr. Speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. Mrs. Bustors its a fact that russian breached the voter database for the state of illinois mrs. Bustos its a fact that russian breached the voter database for the state of illinois. This needs to be addressed by the United States congress. Because this isnt a republican issue, it is not a democratic issue. Its our duty as americans and elected officials to protect our democracy. Thats why this week we will pass the securing americas federal elections act. Our bill would require voter machines to be manufactured in the United States of america. It would also make investments to secure our elections and prevent interference from foreign enemies in the future. As members of congress, we take an oath to protect our constitution and our democracy. I hope both republicans and democrats will come together to support this bill and secure our elections. Thank you, mr. Speaker. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentlelady yields back. For what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise . Mr. Thompson mr. Speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Mr. Thompson thank you, mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, religious freedom week began on saturday and runs through june 29. Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right and is protected by our constitution. First amendment protects freedom of religion along with the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. This affords us the opportunity to have open and thoughtful debates on the floor of the house each and every day. The United States is a place where people of all faiths can peaceably practice their Religion Without fear of persecution, which is something we have recognized since our founding. The very foundation of our nation of place of freedom and liberty for all was conceived by individuals in search of religious freedom. Mr. Speaker, the United States of america will always be a beacon of light in the world and will always protect our fundamental unified commitment of religious freedom. Its a central part of what makes america exceptional. It affords our citizens the right to live in a free society because no person should live in fear for their beliefs. Thank you, mr. Speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman rom new york seek recognition . For what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition . Mr. Rose thank you. I rise to address the house for one minute. Thank you, madam speaker. The speaker pro tempore without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. Mr. Rose i rise today to support the appropriations bill on the floor this week that would implement split tolling bridge. Arrows it represents a massive win for all new yorkers. It addresses the unintended consequences of an archaic 30yearold piece of legislation that singled out Staten Island and South Brooklyn with the only bridge in the country whose tolling is controlled by congress. Split tolling removes an obsolete mandate that cars on the verazzano only be tolled as they arrive in Staten Island, meaning eastbound drivers move across tollfree. Thousands of cars each day take advantage of this free ride and cause unnecessary congestion on Staten Island and in brooklyn and in manhattan. Split tolling cuts the toll in half and collects it in both directions, closing the loophole at no cost to commuters in brooklyn or on Staten Island. Cutting down on outofstate tolls shopping will also generate revenues from new york to invest in mass transit projects on Staten Island and in South Brooklyn, two places that all levels of government have consistently ignored or ripped off for a generation now. Finally, my constituents are starting to see a new day after a long commuting nightmare. Fewer cars on our streets, better buses, more mass transit options, incredible alternatives to reach the other boroughs. This is common sense, and were going to get it done. Thank you, madam speaker. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition . Madam speaker, i 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. Thank you, madam speaker. I rise today as a Small Business owner concerned about the pro act, a bill that will harm both job creators and their employees. The pro act would amend the National Labor relations act and amend right to work laws. It protects employers from being fired. It takes away employers rights and Labor Relations board cases by taking away their standing. Mr. Riggleman my home is district to over 21 Small Business franchise owners that could be negatively impacted by this bill. It will help businesses like arrington enterprises. Aside from delivering a quality product, arrington enterprised collected close to 18,000 for Childrens Miracle Network and donated 4,800 to local schools so far this year. In closing, this bill will hurt local businesses and local workers, and i yield my time. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise . I rise 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, im not in the habit of praising the president from this perch, but i do want to say i am very pleased that we are not in yet another shooting war in the middle east today. Mr. Himes i think we came very, very close, and i appreciate that the president had the courage to stand down some raids that undoubtedly would have led to a response and led to another war in the middle east. I know he does that at the risk of being criticized for potentially damaging american credibility, but we are not in a war today. Thats an argument for history. What is not an argument for history is that any aggression, any military action against iran must be approved by the congress of the United States. It is clear in the constitution that a decision to go to war must be made in this building. I would urge my friends on both sides of the aisle to reflect on the reason for that. If we are going to sacrifice blood and treasure, the representatives of the people must make that decision, not one individual at the other end of pennsylvania avenue. Now is the time for us to consider whether another middle eastern war makes sense for the people of the United States of america. With that i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition . Mr. Lamalfa i 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. Lamalfa thank you, mr. Speaker. I rise to recognize june as alzheimers and brain awareness month. Alzheimers disease affects more than five million americans. Its also our nations most expensive disease. We got to continue working towards finding a cure for alzheimers, but in the meantime, we have to cut down on preventable hospitalizations and lower the cost of care. Thats why i cosponsored the bold infrastructure for alzheimers act the last congress, which President Trump has since signed into law. This bill would help educate Community Members and doctors on dementia detection, diagnosis, and symptom management. This congress i cosponsored the bipartisan younger onset alzheimers act to ensure younger people dealing with dementia or other symptoms have access to the counseling and support they need. I urge my colleagues, family, friends and neighbors to do your part, know the warning signs of alzheimers disease, education and awareness can make a huge difference in a persons life. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition . Madam speaker, i 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. I rise today in opposition to the appropriations minibus that well be voting on this afternoon. Like the first appropriations package, this legislation is being considered without reaching a budget agreement and it would bust the budget caps by over 350 billion in fiscal year 2020 and 2021. Mr. Spano not only is the majority spending out of control on programs we currently have, but theyre creating new programs in these bills. This circumvents the authorization process and compounds the problem. Last week i submitted an amendment to eliminate funding for one of these new pilot programs that would use americans hardearned tax dollars to provide legal representation to those arriving at our southern border. My amendment would have reallocated that funding to assist victims of Human Trafficking and address school violence, both issues growing at the local level in our communities. Unfortunately, democrats on the rules committee voted on party lines to prevent my amendment from coming to the floor. I call on democrat leadership to stop silencing commonsense proposals and let us debate those tough issues. It is what we were elected to do. Yield back. The speaker pro tempore the chair lays before the house a clunecation. The clerk before the house a communication. The clerk the honorable the speaker, house of madam, the ves, clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on june 25, 2019, at 9 21 a. M. Appointment, board of visitors of the u. S. Coast guard academy. With best wishes i am, signed johnson. Cheryl l. The speaker pro tempore the order of the house of january 3, 2019, the following member on the part of the house to the japanUnited States friendship commission. The clerk mr. Hill of arkansas. The speaker pro tempore the chair announces the speakers appointment pursuant to section 2a of the National Cultural 76ha and 20 u. S. C. Thed orer of the house of january 3, 2019, the following member of the member on the part of the house to the board of trustees of the john f. Kennedy center for the performing arts. The clerk mr. Smith of missouri. The speaker pro tempore the chair lays before the house a communication. The clerk the honorable, the speaker, house of representatives, madam. Pursuant to House Resolution 6, section 104a, im pleased to appoint the remaining republican members to the house democracy partnership. The honorable Jeff Fortenberry of nebraska. Of honorable Michael Conaway texas, the honorable smith of nebraska, the honorable steve smith of arkansas, the honorable bill flores of texas, the honorable Jackie Walorski of indiana, the honorable tom rice of south carolina, the honorable Mark Wayne Mullin of oklahoma. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Signed, sincerely, kevin mccarthy, republican leader. The speaker pro tempore for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition . Madam speaker, i rise to 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 request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships. The gentleman has not been recognized for debate. For what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition . By direction of the committee on rules, i call up House Resolution 460 and ask for its immediate consideration. The speaker pro tempore the clerk will report the resolution. The clerk house calendar number 32 House Resolution 460. Resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill, h. R. 2722, to protect elections for Public Office by providing Financial Support and enhanced security for the infrastructure used to carry out such elections, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on House Administration now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules Committee Print 11620, modified by the amendment printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on House Administration, and two, one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Section 2, the requirement of clause 6a of rule 13 for a 2 3 vote to consider a report from the committee on rules on the same day it is presented to the house is waived with respect to any resolution reported through the legislative day of june 27, 019, relating to a measure making appropriations. Section 3, at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2b 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. 3351, making appropriations for Financial Services and general government 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 fiveminute rule. The bill shall be considered as read. Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with clause 2 or clause 5a of rule 21 are waived. Section 4a, no amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution, amendments en bloc described in section 5 of this resolution, and pro forma amendments described in section 6 of this resolution. B, each amendment printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules 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 6 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 amendments printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules or against amendments en bloc described in section 5 of this resolution are waived. Section 5, 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 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 6 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 6, 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 five pro forma amendments each at any point for the purpose of debate. Section 7, at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee Shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. In the case of sundry 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 ithout instructions. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. Mr. Mcgovern for purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from oklahomaing, my good friend, mr. Cole, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. During consideration of the resolution all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only. 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 on monday night, the rules committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 460. It provides for consideration of h. R. 3351 under a structured rule that makes 46 amendments in order. With one hour of general debate controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations. It also provides for consideration of h. R. 2722 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate provided, controlled by the chair and Ranking Member of the committee on house admgs. It also provides sameday authority through the legislative day of thursday, june 27, 2019, relating to appropriation measures. Madam speaker this underlying package of bills is proof that this democratic majority is committed to getting its work done. Both for routine matters like appropriations and for emergency priorities facing our nation. Take the first measure, h. R. 3351, the Financial Services and general government appropriations act. This bill is part of our efforts to fund the government in a timely way. Instead of hollowing out important investments like past republican majorities have done this democratic majority is investing in our future. This legislation not only assures both the executive and judicial branches can continue to operate for the American People, theres language to protect consumers from dangerous products and help Small Businesses thrive, especially in distressed communities. Most notably, madam speaker thrnings bill provides hundreds of millions in grants to strengthen the integrity of our election system. This is especially important since, left to his own devices, i dont think our president would even acknowledge theres a crisis of confidence in our elections following russias meddling in 2016. Let alone act so it never happens again. He seems content to welcome future interference their than prevent it so it is especially important that this Congress Takes the lead to protect our democracy. That is why we are also moving here to consider h. R. 2722, the securing americas federal elections act. The Mueller Report made clear that russia waged an allout attack on our elections. Putin put his thumb on the scale for President Trump. And intelligence officials have made clear that he and others are trying to attack us again in the next election. I want to repeat that, madam speaker. In case the president happens to be watching. Our very democracy is under attack. No troops have been sent into combat, no guns have been fired, but a foreign ada foreign adversary is turning the internet into a battlefield with the integrity of the vote at stake. I dont understand why the president hasnt declared a national emergency. Instead he said he thought he would take Campaign Dirt from a foreign government. Thats like leaving the front door wide open when you know theres a burglar in town. Hes not preventing future act, hes encouraging them. Before my friends on the other side chalk this up to a slip of the tongue, let me remind them that his own former advise ror hope hicks testified that she believes hes serious about accepting information from a foreign source. This president may not be stepping up to secure our election bus this democrat majority. Is this bill would enact things like verified paper ballots, Cyber Security upgrades and state grants to ensure voting systems. This majority passed h. R. 1 in the opening months of the congress that package includes reforms to fix our democracy. But under leader mcconnell, the senate did with it what it seems to do best nothing. He refused to bring h. R. 1 up for a vote. I dont know why leader mcconnell is ignoring the warnings from our intelligence officials or why he seems content with weaknesses in our election systems, maybe hes unwilling to ever break from donald trump on anything. Even something this important. Which really is quite sad. But i hope this time he will try something radical for the senate. Have a vote. Bring this bill up so the American People can see whose side you are on. Lastly, madam speaker, this bill also gives us flexibility to deal with an emergency of a different kind, the one the president is creating on our southern border. President trumps policies have led to children sleeping on concrete floors. Dirty and hungry with no access to soap or even a toothbrush. Sometimes left to be cared for by children just a few years older than they are. It is hard to believe that this is happening in the United States of america today. This house will act and i hope the senate does the same thing. I encourage my colleagues to vote for this rule and the underlying legislation so we can do our jobs and act on these important issues and i reserve the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. Mr. Cole i want to thank my good friend the gentleman from massachusetts, chairman mcgovern, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. I yield myself such time as i may consume. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman is recognized. Mr. Cole thank you very much, madam speaker. Were here today on two very different pieces of legislation. Last night the rules at the rules committee, i noted that these unrelated bills have only one thing in common and thats their place in the democratic majoritys partisan, goingnowhere agenda. I believe todays rule is only going to compound that recurring problem of the democrats. Frankly not even trying to work with republicans to actually legislate in divided government. Our first bill today is h. R. 3351, the Financial Services and general government appropriations act of 2020. This is the 10th of 12 appropriation bills to come to the floor. As we worked through these bills i have raised several concerns that are applicable to this bill as well. Like the previous Appropriations Bills this congress, h. R. 3351 is marked to a high allocation figure that has no basis in reality. Remember the house and senate have not agreed to an overall budget for fiscal year 2020. Which the congressional budget act mandates to be done by april 15. Without a budget agreement, the budget caps numbers contained in the budget control act will automatically take effect. Leading to an 11 cut in defense spending and a 9 cut in nondefense spending. But instead of working with republicans in the senate in the senate to reach a deal before marking and reporting funding bills, the majority has instead gone ahead and pushed through their own partisan Appropriations Bills that are marked to feak and unrealistic numbers. The 12 appropriation bills the majority has pr pose have had several flaws in common. They reflect the idea that any increase in defense spending must be matched by nondefense spending. These bills actually underfund defense and Homeland Security, coming in below the numbers the president requested in order to ensure our military can adequately defend our nation. The fsgg bill we are considering today contains an 8 increase over fiscal year 2019 which makes little sense when we are simultaneously underfunding our national security. The Financial Services appropriations bill contains several partisan provisions at must be reproved before a bipartisan, approved before a bipartisan agreement can be made. A rider prohibits the district of columbia from use Government Funds to provide for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, or health of the mother. The majority also cut out a longstanding provision i originally sponsored several years ago, barring Government Contractors from being forced to disclose Political Campaign contributions. Since i originally sponsored this provision several years ago, i find it surprising that the majority would eliminate this provision, which provides important protections for Government Contractors and prevents contracts from being awarded on the basis of contributions. Of course, there was an opportunity to work through and fix these problems through the amendment process, but instead of making things better, the majority has chosen once again to leave out minority voices. I want to reiterate a point i made the last time i was on the floor for a rule. During the last congress, republicans when republicans were in the majority, our record shows that we allowed more amendments sponsored solely by democrats than we did amendments sponsored solely by republicans. The current majority has a much sorier record. As of yesterday, of all amendments made in order this congress, 67 was sponsored by democrats, 19 by republicans, and 13 were bipartisan. Todays rule is right in line with that record. 67 of the amendments made in order are sponsored by democrats. 24 by republicans, and 9 are bipartisan. Madam speaker, this record of partisanship is a far cry from what the majority promised at the start of this congress. There was an opportunity to move forward with fulfilling the majoritys promises with todays rule. But instead, we see fewer republican amendments, many democratic amendments, resulting in a final product that will fail to achieve the bipartisan support needed to become law. The second bill included in this rule is h. R. 2722, which the majority is promoting as a bill that provides security for elections. The reality is that this bill, like its partisan predecessor, h. R. 1, that passed the house earlier this congress, amounts to nothing less than a complete federal takeover of elections. Traditionally, elections are left to the states and local governments to conduct as they see fit. Localities can respond to local conditions, Election Officials can innovate, and elections can be operated in a way that best suits the unique needs of each community. H. R. 2722 turns all that on its head. The bill will force all elections to be conducted using paper ballots, even if the local officials prefer more advanced technology. It will require costly recounts with no apparent purpose, and it will impose significant and wasteful spending on taxpayers. Instead of affirming states as the laboratories of democracy, when it comes to elections, h. R. 2722 will impose a onesizefitsall Regulatory Regime directed from washington on communities across the country. Madam speaker, this state of affairs could and should have been avoided. Instead of pushing these partisan bills this week, the majority could have chosen to work with republicans to craft bipartisan bills to address all these problems, and even if that did not come to pass, the majority at the rules committee would still have worked with the minority to make more minority amendments in order and give all members an opportunity to fix these flawed bills on the floor. They did not. Its an indication where the majoritys priorities lie, with pushing partisan bills to score political points and avoiding bipartisan work the bipartisan work of actually making law. Theres still a chance to change, madam speaker, but in order to do so, the majority needs to decide whether they are here to score political points or if theyre here to make law. Before i conclude, id be remiss if i did not highlight whats missing in todays rule. We should have been considering three bills today, not two. The missing bill is a supplemental appropriations bill providing funding for the humanitarian crisis on the southern border. Each week this crisis grows worse. Our facilities for holding new arrivals, particularly children and vulnerable unaccompanied minors, are already at the breaking point. Simply put, we need more resources and we need them today. And to be fair to the president , hes been asking congress to do that since may 1. The failure to bring forward a supplemental appropriations bill for this purpose is a major failure of governance by the majority. All of us here, republicans and democrats alike, agree that we need to provide funding for this crisis. Time is wasting while we wait. Back in 2014, when president obama asked us for 3. 7 billion in supplemental resources for precisely the same purpose, the house acted to give him those resources that he needed in 24 days. As of today, almost two months has gone by with the majority failing to act. Many of my friends on the other side rightfully expressed concern that unaccompanied minors backing up at the border stations is not appropriate, nor in the best interest of the children. I couldnt agree more. The Border Patrol couldnt agree more. But failing to bring forward a supplemental appropriations bill, the path the majority is taking us on, leads only to this outcome hurting children i know we all want to help. Congress has given h. H. S. The mandate to care for unaccompanied minors. Congress now needs to write the check so that h. H. S. Can do what congress has mandated. I remind my friends across the aisle that republicans are ready and willing to work with them to pass a bipartisan supplemental appropriations package that provides needed funding for housing, for the department of defense, and especially for children who find themselves in an unfathomable situation at the border. With that, madam speaker, i urge opposition to the rule and i reserve the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. Mr. Mcgovern thank you, madam speaker. Let me yield myself such time as i may consume. I want to thank the gentleman for his comments and i just like to say for the record, that when it comes to this piece of legislation, the Financial Services appropriations bill, democrats actually did much better than the republicans did when they were in charge. In fact, we made more amendments in order. We made more minority amendments in order than the republicans did when they were in charge. There is a 57 increase of amendments made in order compared to what they did. Let me also point out for the record that my republican friends i think tend to be a little redundant in the amendments they offer. For example, i mean, we have i mean, i think three amendments on the wall. We make one amendment. Do we have to debate the wall three different times . Spending reductions, four amendments were submitted. We make two in order which is probably two too many. We should have made one in order. But the bottom line is, there is the habit offering the same old same old again and again and again. Quite frankly, the minority will get their opportunity to debate these issues but not over and over and over and over again. But lets also get to the substance here. The gentleman said these are two unrelated bills. Well, i disagree. The Financial Services appropriations bill actually unds the Election Assistance Commission. And the other bill were considering, the safe act, authorizes the Election Assistance Commission at the same amount that is in the appropriations bill. So they are very much intertwined. Let me also say, i expect before the day is out, we will do a supplemental emergency bill to deal with the crisis that this president has created at the border. But let me also be clear that what we want to make sure is that when we provide the funding that this cruel treatment of children at the border comes to an end. This administrations deliberate policy of separating children from their parents, of allowing children almost infants to sleep on cold floors, to be denied basic necessities like soap and toothpaste and toothbrushes, i mean, it is child abuse. I mean, it is unconscionable. We want to demand that this administration stop it. I mean, this is the United States of america. I think the American People are horrified at the inhumanity that they are reading about thats occurring to these little children at our border. I mean, it is unbelievable. I never thought that we would ever be on the house floor talking about how children who have fled some of the worst conditions imaginable are being so mistreated at the border. Yes, we will have a supplemental appropriations bill to deal with it, but we are going to demand that the cruel policies of this administration stop and stop now. With that, madam speaker, id like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from vermont, mr. Welch. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from vermont is recognized. Mr. Welch i thank the gentleman. There is a crisis at the southern border. Thats true. This past month, 140,000 people showed up seeking asylum. 84,000 families. 11,000 children. But everything, every single thing that the Trump Administration is doing, led by President Trump himself, is making a very dire situation worse. First, start with the definition that our president gives whats going on. Its the arrival of rapists, of criminals, of gang members. When every single one of us who has been on that heartbreaking trip to the southern border knows its children, its women, its families who are fleeing violence, who are fleeing gang members, who are fleeing des tution and grinding poverty. Those are the people arriving at the border, and their crime, made criminal by the administration, is to seek help, to knock on americas door and ask for help. We may not be able to do all that we would like, but is it a crime for a person to ask for assistance . Second, by defining the crisis is an invasion of criminals as an invasion of criminals, the trump definition, the trump policy is to treat these people worse than criminals. First, starting with the family separation policy where children literally were yanked out of the arms of their parents, many of those children still dont know where their father or their mother is. That is being done in your name and mine with the full authority of the American Government in the widespread opposition of the American People. And then, when these people are in our custody, the imposition of cruel and brutal conditions on children and innocent people whose crime is to seek some assistance, we had a trump attorney in federal court arguing that when it came to fulfilling the duty that we had , holding in custody children, hat it was ok to deny them toothbrushes, soap, access to showers, sanitary conditions, sleeping on cement floors in frigid conditions, its shocking, its unnecessary and its inhumane. In short, its the policy of calculated cruelty, family separation and infliction of wholesale suffering, this must end. We Must Immediately return all children to their parents, provide humane sanitary, safe conditions for those seeking asylum, and we must work with el salvador, honduras, guatemala, to improve conditions in those countries. The speaker pro tempore the gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Mcgovern i yield the gentleman an additional minute. Mr. Welch not withdraw hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, as the president decrees. Mr. President , the response to this crisis must not be cruelty. Enforce our laws, yes. Work with central American Governments, yes. But treat all who seek americas help with respect and dignity. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair. The gentleman from massachusetts reserves. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. Mr. Cole thank you very much, madam speaker. I yield myself such time as i may consume. I want to remind my friends that it took them weeks, if not longer, to even acknowledge there was a crisis at the border. As a matter of fact, they were accusing the president of manufacturing the crisis a few weeks ago. Now, fortunately, theyve come around to the idea that hundreds of thousands of people arriving over a threemonth period of time is a crisis. Secondly, i want to remind them, they have yet to act in the nifes crisis theyve had the ability, the president asked for it 60 days ago, we havent seen anything in terms of legislation reaching this floor. I also want to point out, madam speaker that frankly, it shouldnt take this long to respond. We candice agree over a lot of things and i have no doubt about the sincerity of my friends when it comes to being concerned about the well being of these children, none whatsoever, but we know that part of this crisis is created because we havent given the president the emergency funds he needs to quickly move people out of facilities where they were never designed to be, into influx facilities that were trying to stand up literally right now. One of these will be in my district. We dealt with this in 2014. We did it with president obama, supported it, gave him the funds he needed. Republican house, democratic senate, the president he got that money in 24 days. One of those facilities was set up in my district, again, we dont like using military bases in this way, dont aprove of it but we understand that president obama faced an emergency situation and gave him the tools and resources he needed to deal with that. That needs to happen now. Frankly what were seeing in the house is quite a contrast to the senate which has a bill in the Appropriations Committee that was reported out 301. Its bipartisan. Its a bill that the president has expressed a willingness to sign. We ought to be working with that vehicle if my friends cant get something to the floor to deal with this urgent crisis now. Madam speaker, id also if i may, like to inform the chair that if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately bring up congressman davis Election Security assistance act for consideration under an open rule. This bill provides targeted and crucially needed resources to state and local election administrateors to help secure americas voting infrastuckture. Unlike to jerretts partisan bill that takes over all election operations and replaces local authority with onesizefitsall mandate from washington the republican alternative provides needed resources without stepping on the toes of state and local election administrators. It provides grants to states to update aging and atrisk election infrastructure prorkvide security clearances to Election Officials to facilitate the sharing of information about threats with frontline officials, increases Resources Available to states and local governments, and provides for hands on assistance as needed. Madam speaker, we all agree that our elections need to be protected. We all agree that more resources and more assets are necessary to accomplish that goal. But rather than pushing a complicated mandate from washington that wastes taxpayer dollars and eliminates the tradition of state and local control over election operations we can do better beprovide regular sources for security improvements for local officials with the minimum additional regulation. Madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The speaker pro tempore without objection. Mr. Cole with that, i would like to yield five minutes to my good friend, the author of the legislation in question, mr. Davis of illinois. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Davis thank you, madam speaker, thank you to my friend, the Ranking Member of the rules committee, mr. Cole. I rise today to urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so the house may consider Election Security legislation that has a chance to become law. As i explained last night during debate in rules, theres no place for partisanship when it comes to securing our elections. H. R. 2722, the safe act is simply another partisan bill by the majority aimed at federally mandating election standards like mandates the states ex, d that states exclusively use paper ballot, effectively ban anything type of direct recording electronic voting machine. Keep in mind if this legislation passes, if one of our local Election Officials had just worked to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars purchasing new digital electronic machines with a paper backup, those machines and that investment ofer that hardearned tax dollars would be obsolete in the year 2022, three years from now. Thats not right. Mandating the exclusive use of paper ballots will create longer lines at polling places and can be last, destroyed, or manipulated far easier than electronic Voting Machines with a paper trail backup. I want to highlight the fact that theres no evidence of Voting Machines being hacked in 2016, 2018, or ever. So why are we forcing states to get rid of what they deem the Safe Technology . We should Work Together to safeguard technology. Safeguard technology. Not abandon it. We dont know in this institution what technology is going to look like when it comes to Voting Machines in the next five to 10 years. Why are we requiring a certain type of ballot process thats only going to be processed by five companies that maybe produce it today . Thats not what we should be doing here in washington. Additionally, the safe act federally mandates hand recounts which will result in drawn out elections that will become unnecessarily expensive. The majoritys bill also contains irresponsible funding commitments. The funding of elections is the primary responsibility of our states. Democrats are committing 1. 3 illion over 10 years with zero funding match requirements from states. Congress has a responsibility to be good stewards of taxpayer dollars. Funds should be given based on need, not a guess of what might be needed a decade down the road. I want the record to be clear. Many of the provisions in the safe act are inconsistent with what weve heard from experts in Election Administration. But the majority is ignoring their requests. As my colleagues across the aisle know, i believe there are areas on Election Security where republicans an democrats can find and have found common ground. There is a role for congress in Election Security which is why me and my fellow member on the House Administration committee introduced h. R. 3412, the Election Security assistance act. I want to thank my colleagues on the committee, mark walker and Barry Loudermilk for joining me in this effort and the other two others who cosponsored it since its introduction. It provides 380 million grants to states to upgrade their aging election infrastructure while requiring a 25 match from states. If its good for transportation projects, good for d. H. S. Projects, good for d. O. J. Projects, other project, why dont we have local and states to have skin in the game . In addition it creates the cyber assistance unit, aimed at creating at connecting state and local officials with Cyber Security officials from across the nation. Our bill empowers state officials by providing means to better facilitate sharing of information and requiring the department of Homeland Security to notify state Election Officials of Cyber Attacks and any foreign threats within the state. Keep in mind, the majority bill does not address. This if d. H. S. Hacked the local Election Officials election system, saw a hack in lets say central nevada, d. H. S. Would not be able to notify your local election official because he or she may not have security clearance. The majority vote doesnt agree bill doesnt address this, our bill does. To sum it up, our solution provides muchneeded Election Security improvements and reinforcements for local Election Officials without overstepping the states authorities to maintain elections. The Election Security assistance act, our bill is the only proposal being discussed today that has a realistic chance at becoming law. If the previous question is defeated, it will be the first step in putting forward Election Security legislation that has a chance of helping states improve their security aed of the 2020 election. Thank you, Ranking Member cole, for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of this important somebody and i yelled back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserve. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. Mr. Mcgovern i yield myself such time as i may consume. I always enjoy listening to my republican colleagues debate on the floor. I always love listening to the gentleman from illinois when hes on the house floor. Ut i cant help but think of the fact that the russians attacked our elections in 2016. The two years after that, the house was controlled by republicans. The senate was controlled by republicans. Donald trump, a republican, was in the white house. They had unified government. The house, the senate and the presidency. And all of our intelligence agencies said that russia interfered in our elections. They atacked our democracy. Not only the obama administrations intelligence officials, but the Trump Administrations intelligence officials. And what did my republican friends do . In the aftermath of this attack on our democracy by a foreign adversary . Nothing. Nothing. You hear all these great ideas but while they had unified government, they were in control of everything, they did nothing. I recall sitting here on the house floor listening to republican after republican after republican basically say that this was much ado about nothing. In fact, trying to deny that russia attacked our elections. Now the evidence is so overwhelming you cant deny it anymore. But yet, they had this opportunity. And now they say we all want to protect our elections. Well, two years prior to this i dont know where you were. But you werent working trying to protect our elections. People were working instode try to cover up for what a foreign adversary did to our elections. So here we are coming forward with a bill that we believe will provide security for our elections. So that people believe that the elections have integrity. They believe the results. And were told, you know, we disagree with you, we have better ideas, on and on and on. Bottom line is, we are acting. My friends had two years to act, they did nothing. I mean, our democratic majority went through regular order on this. We had the committee on House Administration held three hearings on Election Security. In case anyone forgot, they were on february 14, may , may 21. In addition to those hearings, the subcommittee on elections conducted field hearings in six states. While the committees on oversight, Homeland Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on intelligence held hear option the subject. You know. So experts testified. People offered their viewpoints. And after all of that, House Administration committee marked up this bill last friday, june 21, and here we are on the house floor. So i mean, give me a break. You know, i get it, some of my republican friends may be johnnycomelatelies when it comes to the issue of Election Security. We welcome you on board. Because our elections are important. And we need to protect them from interference from foreign adversaries like russia. But you had two years of unified government in which my friends did nothing. Nothing. So with that, madam speaker, i reserve my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. Mr. Cole thank you very much, madam speaker. To quote my friend, give me a break. The last Republican Congress appropriated roughly 300 million for Election Security. Point one. Point two. We have no evidence anybody hacked any election machines as my friend, mr. Davis, pointed out, in 2016 or 2018. You want to respond to the russians you ought to respond to what they did, not what they didnt do or didnt succeed in doing. Id argue that administration does that more than the last administration. We have a larger military partly because of what russia did. We have a reinvigorated nato. We have a president who sent lethal aid to ukraine. You want to get the russians attention . Thats how you do it. You lay down the red line in sir y and enforce red line. This administration has been tougher on russia than the last administration which knew this was going on, did almost nothing to alert anybody or stop anybody and now are trying to blame it on the person who was actually involved in the election, our current president , you know, for their lapse when they were actually in power in the executive branch. So this idea that nobody wants to defend our elections is not true. And frankly, i will take some offense because ive never said that the russians didnt matter or our election werent serious or werent threatened. I used to be a state election board secretary. I used to sit on the board of directors for the election board secretaries around the country. And oldest public body that there is. Our oldest association of Public Officials there is in this country. Very bipartisan, by the way. Extraordinarily well run. They dont agree with this bill. And i would just ask every member to call their local secretary of state or election administrator, whatever they have, go through the bill and say did you want to cede this much authority to the congress of the United States . Or do you think you do a pretty good job of running your own election . I know in my state we do a very good job running our elections. Thats been true under democrats and true under republicans. I think thats true around the country. The other thing is if you want to actually do something before the 2020 election, then whether you like it or not youre going to have to do something thats bipartisan. Because this will not get through the senate and this will not become law. That makes a rather pointless exercise. Sometimes in the legislative process you sit down and, mr. Davis, i would tell you, off willing partner and a person with a reputation in this body that i think is exceptionally bipartisan and who is working, i think, in good faith on this very problem, and you work through the problem. If its going to be a partisan my way or the highway approach, this is coming under a proposed rule, not even an amendment made in order here, then its not likely to get off this chamber. If youre serious about trying to protect the elections, you will, you may not get everything you want but in divided government, you have to Work Together to get things done, thats the problem with almost every Major Initiative that our democratic friends have brought to the floor since theyve been in the majority. The constitution is clear of the the senate gets it decide whether or not they are going to ack a except what we do over here or accept what we do over here. Or do something different. The president has a a part in the process. We had to endure this when we first became majority. We had a republican house, democratic senate, democrat president. I dont have any problems with my friends bringing their afwenda to the floor. I applaud them doing that. They ran on it, perfectly appropriate. We are going to do that a a the lot of times well bring it to the floor ill get it in this chamber but not all the way through the process unless i change it. What would he havent seen is any evidence the new majority has any ability to work with the current majority or current president. If thats what they want to do for 18 months, score political points as opposed to actually legislate something in a compromised manner, they are free to do that, too. Its not going to work. If the aim here is to make our i tions morer secure, then wouldnt bring a bill with a closed rule. I would work with the otherer side knowing their very concerns are probably going to be similar to the concerns expressed in the United States senate and the president of the United States. Thats unsolicited piece of personal and political advice to my friends, but i think if they follow it theyll actually have success legislatively and get some things done. We are going to disagree about a a lot of things. The American People will sort that out in rather short order. We ought to try to get to things we can do today done. This is an area we could Work Together if we approached it in a different manner. I would also hope we could do the same thing on the southern border, madam speaker. Thats an impending emergency right now. We are going to run out of money right now. Lets get that at a least taken care of while we sort out our differences in other areas. With that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. Mr. Mcgovern 00 i yield myself such time as i may consume mr. Mcgovern i yield myself such time as i may consume. Madam speaker, the gentleman has talking about appropriations that were aa proved in the last congress. Approved in the last congress. A lot of the ideas we were talking about today, including some ideas mr. Davis raised, are authorizations. They cant be taken care in an appropriations bill and thats why we are doing a separate bill in addition to the appropriations bill. The gentleman talks about the 300 million that were approved under the previous leadership. We are asking for 600 million. We are doubling that because we know how serious it is. Just forgive us if we are a little bit concerned because we have a president who continues not to acknowledge that the russians interfered in our election. He continues to refer to it as a russian hoax. He took putins a word for it rather than the word of our intelligence agencies. When we express concern about our election process and about the lack of attention given to this, we are responding to what the president of the United States, donald trump, says on a weekly if not daily basis. The fact of the matter is russia interfered in our election. Everybody knows that. The only person in denial is on 1600 pennsylvania avenue. So we need to respond, we need to respond appropriately. I say to my friend again we expect, hopefully today, to bring up a supplemental appropriations bill. To be able to deal with the what i would call the donald trump created crisis on the border. Y the way, as we provide funding, which i believe we will do, to deal with some of the issues on the border, let us be clear there is absolutely no excuse at all how this administration has allowed children to be treated in such an inhumane fashion under our custody. Children being denied soap. Children being denied toothpaste. Or toothbrushes. Children so young and separated from any adult who are being cared for by children only a couple can years older. Only a couple years older. Everybody should be horrified by that and there is no excuse, none at all, for that to be happening. At this time id like to yield five minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. Raskin. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from maryland is recognized for five minutes. Mr. Raskin thank you very much. I want to thank the chairman, mr. Mcgovern, for his extraordinary leadership on h. R. 2722, the securing mergs federal elections act, the safe act. Madam speaker, we were aa tacked as a country in 2016. We were not attacked as democrats or republicans or independents. Ouru our nation was aa tacked. Our nation was attacked. Special counsel mueller found that russia conducted a a sweeping and Systematic Campaign to subvert and undermine the u. S. Election. On behalf of one party and another can kate as opposed to one party or another candidate. That should make no difference to us today. It could have been the reverse. I would hope that all of us would be standing together as americans to reject foreign interference in our elections. What did the russians do . Well, they conducted cyber surveillance and espionage and sabotage at the Democratic National committee, the Democratic National campaign committee, Hillary Clintons a headquarters. They injected racial and ethnic propaganda and poison into our body politic through facebook, through twitter, through the social media. Then they directly entered into the websites of 30 different state boards of election across the country. With varying degrees of success, according to how well prepared the different election boards were. Now, in response to all of this, what do we get from the president of the United States, the commander in chief of the armed forces . We get denunciation of what he calls the russian hoax. He rejects the evidence offered to him by his own intelligence agencies and a leaders. He rejects all of the evidence compiled by special counsel robert mueller. He rejects the conclusion that there was a sweeping and systematic effort to undermine our election. So h. R. 2722 says, we need to protect our election. In 2020. It is precious. Our democracy is precious to us so we will promote accuracy, integrity, and security through voter verified paper ballots and provide grants to the states to carry out the security improvements that we need. It will establish cyberer security requirementser for voting systems requirements for voting systems and require testing of the existing hardware and software to make sure there is not mall wearer in there, to malwear in there. And it will implement risk limiting audits to assure accuracy of vote tallies in an efficient manner. Madam speaker, we have a philosophical a difference with our friends. Its not just that the president denied the existence of the aa tack. The Republicancontrolled Senate did nothing. They offered us no plan. They controlled the house and senate in the last congress, they did nothing. They offered us no plan for securing our elections against foreign attacks in 2020, which is why we have come forward with an attack with an a attempt to prevent the attack in 2020. Now, we have a philosophical a difference with them because when we say that America Needs to act, they say federalism. Let every state work it out on their own. I heard one of my colleagues say, they are doing a great job at the local level running the elections. But we are not talking about running the elections, we are talking about protecting the security of our elections against a foreign attack. Its like we are saying, we need to defend the country, and they say we have great local Police Forces all across america. The Police Forces may be great, but we still need a national defense. The election boards might be doing a good job in someplaces, maybe less so in others, running the local elections, but we still need to protect all of our elections against a foreign attack that was described in detail by special counsel mueller. There is a constitutional basis and imperative for doing this. I direct my friends to art aicle 4 of the constitution article 4 of the constitution, the republican fwarne tea clause, which my good friend from illinois suggested may have been the Republican Party garne toe clause. I know he was kidding when he said it. Its not the Republican Party guarantee clause. Its a guarantee of republican form of government. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government. And shall protect each of them against invasion. That is a constitutional command we must protect every state in the unions republican form of government. What is a republican form of government . A republican form of government is a representative form of government. Where the voters vote for their leaders. It is republican only if the will of the people is properly expressed through an a election. We get the will through an election. It has integrity and accuracy and safety. Thats what this bill is about. We urge everybody to support h. R. 2722. Yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. Mr. Cole thank you very much, madam speaker. I want to quickly yield myself such time i may consume to make a quick point. I want to move to my friend from illinois. Madam speaker, we dont argue about constitutional power, but i argue about process. Look, i seriously doubt my friend spent very much time talking to election board secretaries and Election Administration officials around the country. Had they done so, they would have heard, im sure, uniformly, that they dont want a onesizefitsall made system from washington, d. C. They dont want to throw away equipment that they think is better than what we are offering them. They are happy to work with us. They are happy to inform us and testify. Thats not whats happening. All wisdom is in this chamber, evidently, because its not going to get through the senate, not going to get signed by the president. We havent talked to the people that are the frontline people in defending us in this process and thats the folks at the state and local level. With that, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to my good friend from illinois. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from illinois is recognized. Mr. Davis thank you, madam speaker. Im always glad to be here with with my good friend from the House Administration committee, the gentleman from maryland, mr. Raskin. He was right in committee during the markup of this bill posted late last week, we marked it up earlier this week after the rules notice was already posted, it just shows you how rushed this process is. The gentleman erroneously, i know because i made a quick joke about it afterwards, mentioned we ought to have a mandated republican government or Something Like that. Thats one mandate i can be for in our state and local authorities. I knew what he was talking about. He knows what hes talking about when it comes to what we all have the same interest in doing. That is protecting our Election Security. My colleague mentioned about standing together. We were trying to stand together, madam speaker. We were working in a bipartisan way to put together a bipartisanner Election Security bill. Bipartisan Election Security bill. And the democrat majority walked away. They forced this vote. These are areas that we can come together and find common ground. I have been asked, what did the republicans do when we were in the majority . We not only did 300 million in Election Security upgrades, and Cyber Security protectses protections, we had 380 million. We were working the last two years with d. H. S. Officials and local Election Officials to assure 2018 didnt suffer the same consequences as 2016. It worked. Even in an extensively high midterm turnout. What else did you do . You know what we did . We waited for the 35 million Mueller Report to come out and tell us what else we could to. Now we are here today. We arer herer today. Here today to ensure we put together an Election Security bill, not one the democrats want, not one thats going to be a topdown aa proach, its not what our local secretaries of state want, its not what our local Election Officials want. They are on the ground. Lets listen to them. But lets make sure we dont take away our ability to address Cyber Security concerns. The speaker pro tempore the gentlemans time has expired. Mr. Cole yield an additional minute to the gentleman. Mr. Davis its been mentioned the russians used social media to strike at our election process in this country. Thats true. This bill cost nothing to aa dress this problem. The majoritys bill does nothing to address this problem. Hats something we need to address. Lets not listen to the rhetoric that one party wants to be more offensive against nefarious actors. None of us, republicans or democrats, want anyone to attack this country, let alone attack our election process. But the answer to making sure that our elections are safe are in our bill, the previous question. We are the ones that ensure d. H. S. Can talk to local Election Officials. Their bill doesnt do that we are the ones who make sure we create a Cyber Security unit and the ability to address ongoing threats. Their bill does not do that. Thats why i would urge a no vote on the previous question. Lets come back to the table, lets get something done. I yield back. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. Mr. Mcgovern i yield myself such time as i may consume. I appreciate the gentleman trying to articulate the best he can all the republicans did on this issue when they were in the majority. But ill be honest with him, im unimpressed. So are the American People. Bottom line is, my friends had unified government, republican control of the house, senate and white house for two years and basically they did nothing. The president , the leader of their party, routinely and continues to do so today refers to russian interference in our election as a russian hoax. The leader of our country says that its a hoax. So i understand why there was inaction for the previous two years. But that ends because democrats, republican, independents, people of all political persuasions, deserve to have an election system that has some integrity. And we look forward to passing this bill and urging the senate to do the same. With that, i reserve my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman reserves. The gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. Mr. Cole could i inquire of my friend, im prepared to close whenever anymy friend is, if he has additional speakers ill reserve. Mr. Mcgovern im prepared to close. Mr. Cole in that case, i yield myself the balance of my time. Id like to begin by submitting for the record the view os they have National Disability Rights Network which actually came out against this legislation because they believe it will make it more difficult for people with physical impairments to actually get to the polls and vote. I know thats not the intention of my friends on the other side but thats the effect of one size fits all voting. Madam speaker, my friend is not impressed and thats a fair statement. I dont question my friend, ever. But im not impressed with legislation that cant become law because its futile. We come down here with a lot of sound and furry but dont get anything done. In close, i urge me opposition to this rule. This rule will make in order for consideration two bills, h. R. 3351 and h. R. 2722. The first is a partisan appropriations bill thats marked to an unrealistic number that does not reflect agreement with republicans or the senate. And that includes partisan policy riders that must come out before this bill can become law. Not to be outdown, h. R. 2722 is even more partisan. Throwing out the traditional bill of states and localities to manage their own election procedures and instead imposing a onesizefitsall Regulatory Regime direct from washington, d. C. Like h. R. 1 before it this bill was produced without republican input and instead reflectsle on the partisan motivations of the current majority. Madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote on the previous question, to vote no on the previous question, no on the rule, and no on the underlying measures. With that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back. The gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. Mr. Mcgovern i urge obviously support for this rule. And the underlying bills that will be debated. I as were sitting here debate, we just got some news that acting commissioner of customs and Border Protection agency, john sanders, has submitted his resignation. I guess the public pressure is so great that it is untenable for him to continue in that position. And im sure the president will replace him with somebody else. But the problem stherk president keeps on replacing individuals with people who continue to enforce policies that are cruel. Policies that separate children to their parents at the border. Policies that treat children worse than animals in our custody. But i thought it would be interesting for my colleagues to note this breaking news. Madam speaker, it is true that we have an ambitious agenda before us this week. We believe in doing our job and holding the administration accountable. We arent going to leave the threat of another shutdown for another day. Maybe thats what my republican friends did when they were in charge. But thats not how thats not how we ended up but thats how we ended up in one shutdown after another. We wish we had an agreement on the caps. But its not for lack of trying. We have been trying to fwoshte with the senate since we took control of the house of representatives. Weve been trying to negotiate with the president since we took control of the house of representatives. But every time we sit down with the president he has a temper tantrum, you know, or he behaves in an erratic way and leaves the roomful we cant wait so were going to lead. Hopefully they will follow. And were not going to ignore the threats posed by russia and others to our elections. The president wants to cozy up to putin instead of defending this nation but this majority doesnt believe in prioritizing the egos of dictators. We believe in accountability and restoring the integrity of the vote. My friend says this isnt going anywhere. Were happy to negotiate with republicans in the senate. But where is their bill . Basically, the republicans in the senate are following the lead of the republicans in the house. And the previous congress. And doing nothing. We dont believe in doing nothing. We think our elections are important. That theyre worth defending. So we are acting. These are serious matters, madam speaker. And this is what we were here this is why we were sent here and this is what we intend to tackle. So i urge all my colleagues to vote yes on the previous question. I urge them to vote yes on the rule and the underlying legislation. With that, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman yields back. Members are remined to refrain from engaging in personality comments about the president. The question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Mr. Cole on that, i request 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 this uestion will be postponed. Pursuant to clause 12a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess for a period less than 15 minutes
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.