I have a letter here that is request from congressman gary palmer to be put in the record. Without objection, ill have that. What did he say . He said, i think Louise Slaughter is awesome. Oh, good. It is simply, if you would like a copy but it is about amendment 33 division d. Nonspecific. And i would like to read into the record, i spoke with steven hadley, member of the board. [ inaudible ] and that would be correct. We enter those into the record without objection. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Rule provides consideration of rule 3354, department of interior, environment and related agencies appropriations act 2018. Under obstruction rule. Rule provides no further general debate shall be an order. Rule makes an order only those further amendments in the rules Committee Report and amendments unblocked described in section 3 resolution and available pro forma amendments in House Resolution 500. Each session amendment printed in your report may be offered only in order printed in the report and may be offered only by the member designated in the report shall be considered as read, shall be debatable, time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by an opponent to be withdrawn by proponent at any time before action there on shall not be subject to amendment except amendments described in section 4 of House Resolution 500. And shall not be made subject to demand for division of the question. The rules provides it shall be in order at any time for the chair of the committee on appropriations for designee to offer further amendments on block consisting of amendments printed in the report not earlier disposed of. Amendments shall be considered as read, debatable for 20 minutes equally dividing and control by chair and ranking minority member of the bill of appropriations and respected designee shall not be subject to amendment except amendment in House Resolution 500 an not demand. One motion to recommit with or without instructions. You heard the instructions from the gentleman from oklahoma. Any discussion to that . Yes. I havent had time to check to see what was in here, i was wanting to put have a vote on rosa deloris. You know, i havent counted, but if you want we can take the time now. Tho. No. I will just dot best i can. No. I will just dot best i can. No. I will just dot best i can. No. I will just dot best i can. No. I will just dot best i can. We would be so happy to have these to us before we get up here, wouldnt we boys . Okay. Hr 334 054 by representative maloy, myself and others, 10. Removing prohibition on title 10 Family Planning funding. 054 b maloy, myself and others, 10. Removing prohibition on title 10 Family Planning funding. 054 by maloy, myself and others, 10. Removing prohibition on title 10 Family Planning funding. 054 by maloy, myself and others, 10. Removing prohibition on title 10 Family Planning funding. 54 by r, myself and others, 10. Removing prohibition on title 10 Family Planning funding. Okay. Discussion. Those in favor, say aye. Aye. Stop the war on women. Those oppose, no. No. Nos have it. Roll call . Mr. Cole. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Woodal. Mr. Woodal with be no. Mr. Collins, no. Mr. Burn, no. Mr. New shs house. No. Mr. Buck . Mr. Buck, no. Mrs. Cheney. No. Ms. Slaughter. Yes. Aye. Mr. Mcgovern . Aye. Mr. Hastings aye. Mr. Polis aye. Mr. Chairman, no. Four yeas, nine nays. Not agreed to. Further amendment for discussion . Yes. Amendment to the rule i move the committee make an order and give necessary waivers for hr 3354 by representative waters under 57 to strike provision severely weak y weakening and removing Consumer Financial protection bureaus authority to protect consumers from unfair practices. Surely would like a yes on that. Thank you. Discussion . Good debate on at the table when that occurred. All right. Vote. Signify by saying aye . Aye. No . No. Nos have it. Roll call please. Mr. Cole, no. Mr. Woodal, no. Mr. Collins . Mr. Collins, no. Mr. Burn, no. Mr. Newhouse, no. Mr. Buck, no. Ms. Cheney, no. Ms. Slaughter aye. Mr. Mcgovern aye. Mr. Polis, aye. Mr. Chairman. No. Clerk will report the total. Four yeas. Nine nays. Agreement is not amended. I move the committee grant hr 3354 open rule so all members have opportunity to offer amendments to the bill on the floor. Discussion . Those in favor significay wi aye. No . Roll call. Roll call vote. Mr. Cole, no. Woodal . No. Burgess, no. Collins, no. Mr. Burn, no. Mr. Newhouse. No. Mr. Buck, no. H is cheney, no. Ms. Slaughter, aye. Mr. Mcgovern, aye. Mr. Hastings, aye. Mr. Polis, aye. Mr. Chairman . No. Clerk call the vote. Four yeas, nine nays. I have an amendment that the committee make an order and give necessary waivers by hr 3354 by representative rounly. P prevent those being used under the daca program. Discussion . Vote now on the amendment. Those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed . No. Nos have it. Roll call. Gentleman asked for roll call vote. Mr. Cole, no. Mr. Woodal, no. Mr. Burgess, no. Mr. Collins, no. Mr. Byrne, no. Mr. Newhouse, no. Ms. Cheney, no. Ms. Slaughter, aye. Mr. Hastings, aye. Mr. Polis. Aye. Mr. Chairman, no. Clerk report the total. Four yeas, nine nays. Not agreed to. Move the committee make an order and give necessary amendments for 3354 by representative. Number 56. Which would provide funding for grants by the attorney general to state local, and triable Law Enforcement agencies to assist with the expenses associated with investigation and prosecution of hate crime. Thank you, very much. Discussion. Very briefly. Mr. Chairman. I dont know about in your areas, but in mine, all there has been a substantial increase in identifiable hate crimes. I believe thats true around the nation. And in an effort to tamp is down, i would home or that the attorney General Office would have the necessary funding, but in order to get it really done at the state local, and level. Wed be better if we were to allow for grants to be provided. I have seen an awful will the of very bad things in the last two years. In the congressional district. Not to mention elsewhere around the country or tax on synagogues, mosque, schools, nooses at colleges and what have you. It makes no sense. We need the resources to do that. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, sir. Further discussion . Vote will be on the hastings bill. Signify by saying eye. Those opposed no. Mr. Coal, no. Mr. Wood all, no. Mr. Kolens, no. Mr. Burn . Mr. Burn, no. Mr. New house no. Mr. Buck, no. Mr. Chany, no. Ms. Slaughter aye. Mr. Hastings aye. Four yay four nay. This amendment to a rule. Would move the committee to make an order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment to hr 3354. By representative price. Is number 78. Which would prohibit funds for the president ial Advisory Commission. On election integrity. Discussion . Yes, mr. Chairman. If there was ever a real joke, then this so called president ial Advisory Commission on the election is this, this man the former attorney general out in kansas or missouri, i forget which one. He has spent a career tamping down the vote doing everything he can to stop people from voting. Hes made the chair of this Advisory Commission and the very first thing they tried to do and im real proud of those supervisors republican and democrat who told him they were not going to comply. He wanted all data of our information with reference to voting information at places where we register to vote. This is not intended to determine election integrity. It is an effort to continue the assault on voting. Every one last one offous ought to hope and try to make sure everybody in america that is eligible to vote, votes. We have people in this country that made it a career out of trying to stop people from voting. This is the same man that came up with the scheme that said that if people had the same name of somebody and used james brown, and there were x number of them in georgia and north carolina, and then they removed those people from the voting role. Thats unheard of. In terms of assault on our election process. Its nothing but a joke. And it needs to be gotten rid of. Thank you. Thank you, very much. Further discussion. Vote will be on, those opposed, no. Roll call vote. Mr. Coal, no. Mr. Wood all, no mr. Burn, no. Mr. New house, no. Mr. Buck, no. Miss slaughter, aye. Mr. Mcgovern, mr. Hastings. Mr. Chairman, no. Four ya four nay. Amendment is not agreed to. Further amendment or discussion. Gentleman from colorado. Mr. Chairman, i have an amendment to the rule. I move the committee move the order and give the necessary waiver to hr 3354. Representative king, peter, myself. A number 54 which prohibit the slaughter of healthy wild horses in burros. Discussion . This is really the last chance we have as a committee to allow the house to continue language that would prempbt the slaughter of healthy wild horses. In burros. There are proven more humane, Cost Effective, ways and more effective ways of managing horse population. Darts with contraceptive are among them. The incredibly costly, and inhumane slaughter of health and wild horses in burros which could commence immediately october 1. Without this language to protect an important part of our colorado heritage, our western h heritage, the beauty of which has inspired millions. And also generate recreation and tourism opportunities in western colorado for our five herds of wild horses. So i hope that this committee will make this by partisan amendment in order to allow for more humane, and Cost Effective ways of managing the population of wild horses. Which are iconic in the american west. Yes, sir. Additional discussion. My cochair of the florida delegation had a measure that was also by partisan. That dealt with the slaughter of horses. It proves to me that you dont have the nerve to put the things on the floor that could be voted on in a favorable way. It kind of denies a reason to have something that aside from what mr. Pole said. We spend a lot time and effort in collecting a number of by partisan members to allow for this measure. I tell you what, my hope would be that all yall that vote we should have horse slaughter, thats what youre voting for. I hope you wind up having to eat horse. And i mean that. Because its just rude, for us to put ourselves in that position. Aside from the cultural aspect. We know dog gone well none of us are sitting down to a meal of horse at any time. And it serves no useful purpose to do that. I also mention that time about people in certain areas of the world that are eating dogs and cats. Someone said to me that china wasnt the only place. What i said was show me any place else. And they did. And then i found a measure that pointed to other places in the world where they eat dog and cat. Thats wrong, and i just for the life of me do not understand why we cant have a measure like this on the floor. You put a whole lot of silly stuff in here on the floor. And you ignore a whole lot of sensible amendments. That could have been made in order. And the reason that you did it was because they would pass. If you put this horse slaughter bill on the floor, i promise you it will get more than 218 votes. Thats wrong. I hasten to add anything to this. But im going to. The issue hasnt gone away. It has gotten worse by doing what was allowed. What was allowed, judge hastings, was the government and people did manage these. And we have horses not to take on mr. Pole is. Its the sick horses that an elderly horses that is the big issue. It is not the healthy ones. A horse i am not a horse person, i have only studied this and tried to be around it. A horse that is old or sick literally mutilates itself. And cannot take care of it. And we are spending i allowed you an opportunity. Youll let me have mine. I dont claim to be the expert. Im not vet. There are veterinarians who say it must include a healthy way to deal humanely. And i think they would say give that a chance because what we have been through i think since 2002 where we had the same policy that you want to keep. Its not working in the federal government is spending millions and millions of dollars and we do seemingly difficult things to try to help these herds. So well try Something Different for a while. Were going to try this and its based upon people who believe that dealing with unhealthy elderly, horses. They now have another way to deal with that. Hold on a second. Judge, you said you want to i did, mr. Chairperson. Its not only the sick horses that are slaughtered. I used to go to horse races and occasionally, im sure all of us have had an opportunity to witness a horses that belmont went down. And the kentucky derby. And you put the horses to sleep. To put them out of misery. What were talking about is not just, this is one aspect of it. Horses are rounded up and are killed for selling their meat. Thats the problem im trying to address. And i dont think thats right. Just like i toent think its right about dogs and cats. I want to be clear that this amendment refers to the prohibiting the slaughter of healthy wild horses and burros. Not the humane putting down of sick or elderly horses. It just applies to healthy animals. First of all i want to say i agree that what the way the blm handled this. Has been full of error. Overly costly. Bad deal for taxpayers. And they handled it poorly. And this would make it worse. This is more costly. And more. Than previous methods. Again if theres a discussion to be had, it should be done by the over Sight Committee on an authorizing basis and figure out a better way to do it. Not by entirely new and more costly practice into appropriation bill. This is more costly to be clear. Its much more expensive. And many of us believe this will be less effective at managing herd health and size. Than other techniques. I want to be clear this is just, were trying to prohibit the slaughter of healthy horses. Quickly. Im always reluctant to engage in this debate. I recognize the emotion. And the legitimacy on all sides. Im in a state. We have 20,000 horses. That arent from oklahoma. From out on the plains. I would urge my colleagues to talk to chris stewart. Look at the photos will show you the conditions of horses tla he has in his area and what happens to the environment. I would ask my colleagues for to remember that honestly, historically these are not indigenous to the plains. They are an invasive specious. They werent there for thousands of years. To my friend from colorado, i have to tell you there arent better measures. There really arent. I have the horses in my district. By the thousands. I go and talk to the people. That look and love horses. And they will tell you you have to manage these hrds. I sit and the interior subcommittee and listen to successive managers including those from Democratic Administration will tell you. We dont know what to do. Nothing we do is working. You cant adopt them all. You really cant frankly make it where male horses dont make female horses. And vice versa. It doesnt work. So we have not found a way. It costs in oklahoma theres 20,000 plus animals it cost about 8 bucks a day to feed them every day. Theyre not from there. They will live a long time. They are healthy. Theyll live 25 years. Count what it cost to lease the land. The people lease it are very happy to do it. Will show you whats happening. They have horses released in their yaifr all the time. They try to look after them. They theres no profit in it. People think horses are profitable. Theyre frankly not. Not most horses are like us. Were all perfectly fine. None of us are o limbic athletes. Most are not olympic athletes either. They cant go race. We dont have the same economy that we can use them in the way we did 100 years ago. 70 years ago. Im not arguing against my friend. I feel it too. Most people do. They are a special animal. But, im just telling you the expense is getting out of control. The damage to the terrain and the environment in the west is incredible. The horses themselves that are out there that we dont capture and bring to places like oklahoma are living terribly. So im sort of like the chairman. Im going to try Something Different. Very quickly. Do you believe or do you not know that some of when you said theres no profit in it, some people slaughtering horses for the purpose of selling the horse meat. Again, i would argue when i said theres no profit, theres no profit in maintaining the herds. Its beginning very expensive from a federal standpoint. It is. To the point it is i sit on imperial folks. Its a relatively Small Committee in terms of financial jurisdiction. Were going to be quickly spending about a billion of that on maintaining horses. It doesnt get less. If im willing to look at other techniques if there there. Im looking so far, individuals cant find them. Adoptions are going down not up. Horses are expensive to maintain. They stay around for a long time. We really cant we have not found them the means so far to make sure they cant reproduce. So im just, again i respect my friends on this on both sides. I guarantee i know how deep the emotion is. I live in horse country. I get the letters too. I talk to people that actually deal with the problem. And their view is fundamentally different. For that i yield back. Look, tom. You helped me out with a better at tribute. That is well in your district. I have tried to study this issue. I do not want to take you on judge. I do not know the common sense answer. I really do not. I would like for the position thats been taken comes as a result of a lot of feed back. Im not going to call it sound science. A lot of feed back. It is a bigger problem in getting bigger every day. Mr. Mcgovern. I have a point to make. Appreciate the time. Just, so, so yes the horses have been a feature of our western lands since the 16th century. And they have occupied the niche taken up by by son. Which are no longer wild in the west. Oklahoma well show you some wild bison. We dont have any in colorado. We have managed herds. Some in the crow nation and montana. They used to roam across the west. And they dont now. We have several horse herds. So again, they have been a feature who hasnt played cowboys and indians as kids. This is a feature of the american west. Horses. Wild horses. People imagine the native american war wor on a horse back. Horses were not indigenous. But became so iconic. Their presence. We visualize native american friends on horse back. As ta were in the 17th century. So again. And the niche they occupy is one that was previously occupied by. Sustainable and traditional part of the ecology. I would finally add. At a cost of 25 per dose. Keeping a male horse infer tile for a year. Far more Cost Effective than slaughter. St mated to cost a thousand dollars per horse. You have the question are they going to recoup that by selling the meet meat. You wind up in the controls are poor on that. There are more Cost Effective methods that are proven. We agree that there needs to be better management practices. The key is the population control. I also oppose the neutering of the male horses. The behavior in the wild is very different. They are no longer wild horses after the neuter. We can control it much more Cost Effectively through darts and other mechanism. Its an appropriate discussion. To put an amendment in a an appropriation bill buried under thousands of pages, that allows for the slaughter of horses and burros. Is not the way that congress should go about it. We need to have a deliberate and thoughtful process. As tours of the taxpayer money. Not the most Cost Effective ways to manage. Thats how we stopped in the first place. Stopped what . It was stopped. Right. That way. You start that way. Its very ineffective from a cost perspective. I wasnt talking about money. I was talking about doing it in an appropriation bill. This is a fundsing bill. We have a long standing language that has prevented the slaughter of horses. Thats what. If you stop it that way well, a way to approach it would be thoughtful by partisan legislation about Wild Horse Population control. Congress giving a directive about how to do it. As opposed to allowing the most blunt instrument. Which is a misuse of taxpayer funds and inhumane. Ill yield back. The only point i want to make. This whole debate i think illustrates whats wrong with the process. You have a by partisan amendment, to prevent horse slaughter. Im not an expert on horses, may you are. Im not. But the issue is whether or not it should be heard on the floor. Whether it should be debated. Youre making a unilateral decision it shouldnt be. By partisan group of members that think this is an issue that ought to be debated. Mr. Coal wants to make his point on the horse floor and debate. Thats fine. I dont know where the vote will be. Lets have the debate. But this is the rules committee. Were the process committee. And were denying by partisan amendments on a regular basis. And i think its wrong. It shows that this whole process has been is broken. And we talk about regular order. Were talking about allowing these ideas whether you agree with them or not to be brought to the floor. Debated and had people can vote on them. If you have a better case to make, this will go down. If not, it will pass. All were asking for is to allow this to go to the floor, be debated and voted on. It should be an open rule. Thats different. I was saying theres common sense. Theres not common sense. This is a difficult issue. This is not lets bring it to the floor. Let the members. Im trying to provide the standing on this side. Perhaps toms. Your time. So again in conclusion, i think that if we allow the slaughter of healthy horses and burros, it would be a misuse of taxpayer funds and it would be inhumane and ineffective. To get at the problem i would encourage a thoughtful approach by congress. And frankly more creativity from the blm about how to handle an iconic part of the western and american heritage. I yield back. Thank you, very much. Further discussion. Vote now on the. Those figure saying. Those opposed no. Roll call. Mr. Coal, no. Mr. Wood al, no. Mr. Burr jes, no mr. Kolens, no. Mr. Burn, no. Mr. New house, no. Mr. Buck, no. Ms. Slaughter, aye. Mr. Hastings eye, mr. Chairman, no. Report the total. Four yay, nine nays. I have amendment to the rule to move the committee make an order and give the necessary waivers for the following amendments to hr 335 had. Permitting Financial Institutions to serve legitimate marijuana businesses. Offered by mr. Hack of washington. Discussion . If i may, mr. Chair. I thought mr. Heck made compelling argument. It hits close to home because it was somebody from my district that was killed because this congress has not acted. Regardless of where one stands on the legalization of marijuana, this amendment has nothing to do with that. Its simply makes sure that we have a it banked through the regular system. And in the interest of Public Safety, we dont have people moving around with bags of money and cash. Even if you want to ban marijuana, you want it to be traceable through the Banking System so you know the criminal charnls to bring. Thats not my position. If somebody wanted to bring criminal charges you want that paper trail. Even if that was your goal. You want the paper trail. So, we can act very simply to permit Financial Institutions to serve legitimate marijuana businesses without effecting the federal legal status of marijuana. Without effecting the state status of marijuana. Simply improving the Public Safety in of my constituents in my district and 95 of the country. Where there is some form of legalized cannabis. I would encourage colleagues to vote yes to allow the votes in the amendment. Which im confident would pass on the house floor. If we can move it out of the committee. I yield back. Further discussion. Vote on the postman. Opposed, no. No. No have it. Roll call. Mr. Coal, no. Mr. Wood all, no. Mr. Kolens, no. Mr. Burn. No. Mr. New house, aye. Mr. Buck, no. Ms. Slaughter, aye. Mr. Mcgovern aye. Mr. Hastings eye. Mr. Chairperson, no. Five yay, eight nay. The amendment is not agreed to. Further amendment or discussion. The vote is now on the motion from the gentleman from oklahoma. Those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed say no. No. The eyes have it. Roll call, please. Mr. Coal, aye. Mr. Wood all. Mr. Kolens, aya. Mr. Burn, aye. Mr. New house aye. Ms. Slaughter, no. Mr. Mcgovern, no. Mr. Hastings, no. Mr. Chairman, aye. Report total. Nine yay, four nay. The motion is agreed to. I have the honor of. Mrs. Slaughter will handle this for democrats. So we know what we have just done. We made an order 224 amendments. 224 amendments. Motion to recommit. We currently the question will be asked, judge, and so ill try to give the answer now. We do not have any other meetings scheduled, however, its been very clear to me that we need to remain flexible to ensure that the Hurricane Harvey response funding makes it to the president s desk. So, it might be that an additional meeting would be necessary to move that piece of legislation. I believe youve heard the same thing i believe and i think you do, i do not intend to go home until this gets done. I believe its so important, i would end today by saying judge, we had people in our territories today who came under intense hurricane damage. Including the virgin islands, including puerto rico, and it is headed for florida. Our prayers are with you. And we know that included in this money is, i believe, dont quote me. About a billion dollars to prepare for florida. Difficult. Difficult. I intend to stay here and i hope you will too. Until we get this done. Further business. We all pray for florida. For texas. But i think the records should reflect that i think over 600 amendments were not made an order. And i think that should be reflected in the order as well. Open roll all the amendments would be made an order. But. Well, im sure somebody here is going to add up all the totals. About half of them had points ordered against them. Points that were against them and we accepted them. The rules committee we have waive points of order. We would all feel better if we had regular order back. We are very disstressed by it. I have to be honest. We havent had an open rule in, what a year and a half . I actually paul ryan. Happy birthday, judge. Again . He turned 82. At least 81 and a half. Were going to do a coo next week. The rules committee has finished its work for the day on fiscal 2018 spending bills. The amendments they approved today will be taken up by the full house tomorrow. Well have live coverage on cspan. This weekend on cspan 2 book tv. Saturday at 7 30 p. M. Vermont senator and former president ial candy at a time Bernie Sanders offers his thoughts on how to bring about change in america. What is the agenda, what should we be doing as nation . Well if you have a middle class which is splihrinking, millions liing in poverty and sometimes desperate poverty. The first thing we have to do is demand that if you work 40 hours a week in iowa, vermont, or in america, youre not living in poverty. Then at nine. Fox news contributor and pollster douglas shone discusses his book. America and the age of trump. Opportunity and opposition in an unsettled world. My book tries to forge common sense by partisan solutions to the problems we are facing. And i would argue that those problems are getting worse and theyre being to a great degree made worse still by our political leadership. Sunday at 9 00 p. M. On after words. Examine the issue of mass incarceration in her book, kuz. Interviewed by author west more. 25 of the worlds prison population in our prisons despite fact we have 5 of the world population. It touches everybody. Theres a lot of stories out there that were not telling. By not telling those stories were letting this live. We have to get the stories out. So we can see the damage that were doing. And fix it. For more of this weekends schedule. Go to book tv. Org. Cspan. Where history unfolds daily. In 1979, cspan was created as a Public Service by americas Cable Television companies. Brought to you by today your satelli satellite or cable provider. At this house hearing on social security. The social security
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.