tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN February 13, 2020 9:00am-1:27pm EST
you think of it as being a football field, the amount cut was less than a six inch strip off football field. you have more natural mortality taking place in a forest like that then what you will ever cut out of it. we have plenty of trees in the tongass and areas like that. we can do a lot better job of being sustainable with the working force across the country. host: hate to cut you short, but you got to get to work. bruce westerman, congressman of arkansas. "washington journal" back tomorrow at 7:00 eastern. we take you live to the house next.
the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. merciful god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. as members prepare to return to their home districts endow them with ears to hear, voices of their constituents. those who voted for them and those who did not. it is the strength of our representative democracy that all have a voice in the governing of the nation. our nation will soon be remembering presidents washington and lincoln, giants of america's history. one presided over a nation united in its inception behind their president. the other over a nation divided soon after his election. may each of their examples be
inspiration to all americans that faithfulness to the constitution and all the laws of our land and the hope of our founders is the responsibility of us all to bring our political discourse. bless us this day and every day . may all that is done be for your greater honor and glory. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house her pproval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from ndiana, mrs. walorski. mrs. walorski: 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: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minutes on each side of
the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, president trump stood in this very chamber last week promising he would protect medicare and social security. like so many things with this administration, that empty promise didn't even last a week. in fact, when he sent his budget proposal to congress on monday, it cut more than $1.6 trillion from medicare, medicaid, and other health care programs. he cut another $24 billion from social security. as the top 1% and wealthy corporations continue to benefit from the president's tax cuts, he's now asking for you, the american people, to pay for t he likes to brag the stock market is up and unemployment is down, but what he refuses to acknowledge is the economy isn't working for most working folks. health care costs are rising as his administration sues to eliminate the a.c.a. in its entire. the cost of living is increasing as he tries to cut funding for affordable housing.
and prescription drug prices continue to climb despite our passage for h.r. 3 which is collecting dust on mitch mcconnell's desk. the president's budget is nothing but an assault on hardworking families trying to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table. the american people deserve better. house democrats are going to continue pass legislation that gets government working for the people again. and the president and mitch mcconnell should get off the sideline and join us in this effort. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? mrs. walorski: 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. walorski: madam speaker, i rise today to honor the 2,411 unborn children whose remains were finally laid to rest with dignity yesterday in indiana. these victims indiana's most prolific abortionist would be in their late teens now. graduating from high school and entering college, but their innocent lives were cut short and they were denied a proper burial. instead, their remains sat for
almost 20 years in a garage, car trunk, moldy box, and styrofoam coolers. such callous disregard for human life should take sheik us to the core. these children deserve justice and dignity. to ensure this never happens again, the house must pass the dignity for aborted children act to build on indiana's law upheld by the supreme court that requires dignified treatment of abortive fetal remains. madam speaker, i ask my colleagues to join me in observing a moment of silence for the thousands of innocent victims that were laid to rest yesterday. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. walorski: thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> one year ago saturday, five
people lost their lives and many more were injured when a gunman enter an aurora illinois warehouse and started shooting. if we want to stop people getting shot we have to politicize this and take legislative action. illinois has some of the strongest gun laws in the country, but our neighbors don't. in chicago, 60% of the guns recovered from crime scenes were trafficked in from out of state and worse, we have never had the courage to regulate guns the same way we regulate cars. my daughter took my car out and crashed into my neighbor's garage i would be libel. that's why yesterday i introduced the drug trafficker act. it requires gun owners to report if their gun is lost or stolen and imposes penalties if they fail to do so. it would allow victims of gun license to hold the people caused by the guns regardless of who pulled the trigger. people who don't like this bill? gun traffickers. i encourage my colleagues to
join me and support this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. advancing the cause of our constitutional republic by adopting policies that restore the confidence of the public in the u.s. congress is one of the goals i have had since my election last november. the current lack of confidence is largely due to the dysfunction partisanship and distrust that's prelfyeant. mr. cline: that's why i'm proud to work with my colleagues on the republican study committee task force to help reform our bloated federal government. congress was established through article 1 of the u.s. constitution and as such our founding fathers put the utmost responsibility in lawmakers to uphold their unalienable rights and maintain proper transparency while doing so. sadly today's congress has strayed far from that through federal overreach. this makes the task force even more timely and important. the three main focuses of this
task force are reforming government power structures, practices, and personnel policies. each of these categories has a considerable amount of reform that would be meaningful and effective if enacted. i'm committed to ensuring the beliefs of our founding fathers live on today through congress' actions by reforming government so it truly serves the people for whom it was created for and by whom it is empowered. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek wreck -- recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> pfos water contamination continues to threaten the purity of our drinking water and health of our communities. pfos contaminants exist on more than 00 military bases nationwide and threaten the health and safety of those who live nearby. ms. dean: this public health crisis demands our full attention and requires a farble solution. this 116th congress has prosed and passed pfos legislation,
more pfos legislation than any previous congress in history. including the pfos action act which would require e.p.a. to enforce cleanup of contaminated sites and require a nationwide pfos drinking water standard. still much work remains to be done. we must stand up for stronger regulations, cleaner water, and healthier communities. clean drinking water cannot be another issue that the senate majority continues to ignore and add to their graveyard. we have an obligation to address this national health crisis. i urge the senate, including my own senators, to prioritize the well-being of our communities and to act swiftly on the passage of pfos action act. thank you, madam speaker. i yield the remainder. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, in advance of the fifth annual missing and
murdered indigenous women's memorial march that is taking place in my hometown of duluth, minnesota tomorrow i rise to bring attention to the violence facing our native american communities. everyone has a right to live safely in their communities, but the murder rate of native american women is currently 10 times the national average. more than half of native american women have been sexually assaulted and thousands of native american women and girls have gone missing. this national crisis has been ignored for far too long, and it is time that congress acts. mr. stauber: that's why i co-sponsored savannah's act, legislation that would better prepare tribal law enforcement to respond to these crimes. i believe that this should be one of the easiest bills that we pass this year and call for its quick passage. madam speaker, i will be proud to march with our native american communities this friday and honor those we have lost. i believe that together we can bring justice to the missing and murdered indigenous native
american women and hold the individuals who commit these acts of violence accountable. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today in opposition to the irresponsible and immoral budget request proposed by president trump. the president's shameful betrayal of americans most in need of vital service comes days after he stood in this very chamber and promised he would protect them. mr. schneider: a budget rebuilds our priorities and this document makes clear president trump does not prioritize hardworking americans and their families. once again the president goes out of his way to target americans' access to health care and affordable education. in the president's upside-down budget, $500 billion is stripped from medicare. $900 billion from medicaid.
student loan funding is cut by $170 billion. public service loan forgiveness ould be completely eliminated. more than $200 billion would be cut from the snap program. the safety net for families facing temporary challenges putting food on the table. these cuts are wrong and the house must not let them go forward. i will continue to work with my colleagues in congress to protect these critical programs that our seniors, working families, young people, and children depend on. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to speak for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to recognize my home state of arizona's birthday and our 108th anniversary of statehood. mrs. lesko: since february 14, 1912, the great state of arizona has welcomed those who wish to experience a life of
prosperity, opportunity, growth, and culture second to none. every year people from all over the world come to arizona to experience our state's treasured beauty and of course the five c's. i know i speak for all of us who live in arizona when i say, we are incredibly grateful to call the grand canyon state our home. our state motto means, god enriches. arizona is proof of that. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to recognize tribal leaders from around the country gathered in washington, d.c., this week for the national congress of american indians
2020 winter executive session. ncai was founded in 1944 with the mission to protect and enhance the sovereign rights of tribal nations and secure a prosperous future for native communities. mr. ruiz: in fact, initially ncai had a fight against many restrictions and injustices perpetrated by this very body. it is this complicated and challenging history that is the backdrop of the work we do here today. it is important that the united states government works to honor tribal sovereignty, promote self-determination, and fulfill the trust responsibility to native tribes. we must also pass advanced appropriations for the indian health service and provide resources to upgrade the roads, schools, and internet access across indian country. i urge the house to take up these issues immediately and do our part to support our tribal partners. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask
unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to recognize and honor joe, one of the most gifted, talented, and accomplished singer, songwriters and guitarists in modern day blues music. mr. griffith he works incredibly hard to give back. he has founded the keeping the blues alive foundation. this foundation fuels the passion through music by funding projects and scholarships to allow students and teachers the resources and tools that they need to further music education. . joe also gives back in other ways. of as a vast collection guitars that he uses to extend music history and he allows the e come and visit collection of guitars and mplifiers there and play what he calls nerdville california.
advance the ot to ause of having music impact in an increasing number of people's lives. i ask my colleagues to join me joe cognizing and honoring for his contributions to the world of music. ith that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman new york seek recognition? mr. nadler: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution call up house resolution -- 899 and ask for its immediate consideration. the clerk: house calendar number 0, house joint resolution 79, removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. the speaker pro tempore: to house resolution 844, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by judiciary ee on the printed in the joint resolution is adopted and the joint resolution, as amended, is
read.ered as the joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary. the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, and the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and and insert remarks h.j.res. material on 79. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: jaed. mr. nadler: madam speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the recognized.s mr. nadler: madam speaker, this is long overdue resolution to ensure the equal rights amendment can finally become the 28th amendment to the united states constitution. this year we will celebrate the 00th anniversary of women gaining the right to vote. despite the century that's apsed, our constitution still does not recognize the guarantee protection of the law for women and gender minorities but h.j.res. 79 would bring us
step closer. it removes the previous deadline congress set for ratifying the and ensure recent ratifications by nevada, givenis, and virginia are full effect. basic and offers a fundamental guarantee, equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the or by any state on the account of sex. that's it. very simple. years since it was passed by overwhelming bipartisan majorities in the house and enate, we have made great strides to secure that equality, including through existing case aw decided under the 14th amendment. the e.r.a. would enshrine those rinciples and take the final critical step of ensuring that laws disadvantaging women and are subject toes the most rigorous form of constitutional scrutiny. we have seen a series of breakthroughs for women's rights and gender
equality. we've seen women march in support of their rights and dignity as equal citizens. through the me too movement we have had painful conversations about the violence and that women and gender minorities experience, whether in the workplace, at home, or in frt.ls and universities we have seen -- universities. we have seen women get elected numbers.ss in record virginia became the necessary 38th and last necessary state to ratify the equal rights amendment. making n the brink of history, and no deadline should stand in the way. the constitution itself places for adlines on the process ratifying constitutional amendments. making it doubtful whether to ress had the authority impose such a deadline in the first place. ut if it had such authority, then congress clearly also has the authority to remove any it previously chose to set. i want to thank representative ackie speier for introducing this resolution which takes that important step. this resolution will ensure at
that the equal rights amendment, having been proposed years ago, having been ratified by 3/4 of the rightful n take its place in our nation's constitution. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. 3/4 of the states failed to ratify the equal rights by 1979 deadline set by congress. yet, house democrats are trying retroactively revive the failed congress. the right esn't have to do it. it did not pass. it did not get approved. go there is an end run to around that. the united states supreme court recognized this in 1982 when it stated the issue was moot the deadline for the e.r.a. ratification expired requisite number of states approved it. the leadership in the united states house of representatives entire process of e.r.a. approval over again. hat new e.r.a. failed to cquire the 3/4 on november 15,
1983. today in defiance of the reality relevant participants in the original debate, the to convince nt their base if both houses of congress pass this joint signed into d is e.r.a. 1972 -- the 1972 will control. current supreme court justice ruth bader ginsburg, and she's taking a lot of heat for e.r.a. supporter of the since its beginning, has said a ew months ago, i hope someday we will start all over again on e.r.a., collecting the necessary states to ratify it. monday, justice ginsburg said the e.r.a., i would like to see a new beginning, i'd like to see over.rt there's too much controversial long newcombers, virginia, before it passed. how do you disregard states that said we change our
minds? congress does not have the to titutional authority retroactively revive the failed constitutional amendment and 50 d be subject to all states to what may be the current political trends in one state. supreme court has already recognized that. the house of representatives recognized that. recognized burg that. the current democratic eadership is intent on rewriting history. i will show and our speakers will show what the real intent about this is and it has nothing rights.th equal it has a lot to do with other issues that will be exposed today. reserve. i the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. r. nadler: i now yield three minutes to the distinguished lady -- the gentlelady from california, the chief sponsor of bill, representative speier. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for three minutes. madam ier: thank you, speaker. i thank the chairman for his extraordinary leadership on this issue. simple, members. women want to be equal and we constitution. i am equal on this house floor
colleagues, y male but when i walk out, i have fewer rights and protections them. i rise today because the women f america are done being second-class citizens. we are done being paid less for our work. one being violated with impunity. done being discriminated against pregnancies. done being discriminated against simply because we are women. the e.r.a. is about equality. the e.r.a. is about sisterhood, survival, dignity and respect. the world recognizes this. 193 countries in the united nations, 165 have put in their of language constitutions. but not the united states of america. march to the me too movement to the pink wave, the outrage we've seen among we have been se isrespected, devaled, and diminished -- devalued and diminished in our society and we
are fed up. wonder recent votes to ratify the e.r.a. came in 2017, 2020, because we want the e.r.a. now. we've waited for almost a for the e.r.a. i want to thank my republican co-sponsors, including reed, fitzpatrick, van drew. i know most of you recognize you is the right thing for to do for your wives, daughters, granddaughters. 94% of americans already support e.r.a. in fact, they're surprised it's not already in the constitution. say, just of you will restart the process. but you're the same people that it.it you won't vote for some will say, women already have equality while they vote re-authorization, vote against paycheck fairness, 9.p away title for too long, women have relied quilt of lives and precedent. we have been forced to take our cases all the way to the supreme often there we lose. for my colleagues who think we already have women's equality,
to christy who was raped by two football players at virginia tech. she sought justice under the violence against women act, but the supreme court struck down suit provisions claiming congress lacked the authority to pass it. ledbetter who had to to known anonymous note she was paid less at goodyear. paid less for was her work at wal-mart. eggy young, who was placed on unpaid leave, losing her health insurance while pregnant at u.p.s. all the while men were granted the exact accommodation that she was denied. e.r.a. is about building the america we want. t's about forming a more perfect union, because simply ut, there can be no expiration date on equality. i urge my colleagues to affirm women's port for equality and vote for this resolution.
back.d the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. you, madam : thank speaker. at this time i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from mrs. lesko. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for three minutes. mrs. lesko: thank you, madam speaker. i am a woman so i obviously care and support equal rights for oppose this bill for three reasons. irst, the bill is not constitutional. when the e.r.a. originaled assed -- originally passed congress, explicitly set a deadline for ratification. 1979, almostwas in 41 years ago. 35 states of the 38 needed had ratified it. unratified.ates so the count's down to 30. equal rights amendment was dead. u.s. department of justice issued a legal opinion just last
e.r.a.'s erating that ratification timeline is expired. justice ruth deadline aid, the passed. i would like to see a new beginning. over.ke it to start secondly, the e.r.a. amendment is not necessary. women's equality of rights under the law is already recognized in in the fifth on and 14th amendment. directors women rights wrote, it has been clearly understood that the 14th prohibits discrimination based on sex. federal, state, and ocal laws already prohibit sex discrimination. third reason i oppose this bill, e.r.a. would bee sed by pro-abortion groups to undo pro-life legislation and ead to taxpayer funded
abortions. don't take my word for it. let's look at pro-abortion roups have done and what they say. in 1998, the new mexico supreme court ruled unanimously that the state's e.r.a. required the abortions.nd pro-choice america, which supports abortions, asserted hat the e.r.a. would reinforce the constitutional right to abortion and would require udges to strike down anti-abortion laws. in a 2019 letter to house committee, the aclu stated the equal rights amendment could provide an of protection r against restrictions on abortion. n conclusion, this bill is unconstitutional. the e.r.a. is unnecessary. since constitutional, federal, state, and local laws already protections, and the e.r.a., if ratified, would e used by pro-abortion groups to undo pro-life laws. madam speaker, i yield back.
mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. nadler: again, the deadline amendment.rt of the there was a resolution by congress. if congress can set a deadline, can remove a deadline. i recognize the distinguished ajority leader of the house, representative hoyer, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous extend. to revise and the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, irst, let me thank representative speier, representative maloney, and all hose who have been such warriors on this issue for such a long period of time. the faith.eping constitutional amendment was proposed in -- and passed in 1972. to be specifically, in the early part of 1972. member of the maryland state senate in 1972.
honor of shortly after 1972, juste spring of months after the e.r.a. had been ratify of voting to that. now, the previous speaker said, states -- that's 70% of in a ates ratified that timely fashion. imely in the sense we set in a resolution, as the chairman date.d out, a 70% of the states of this nation. . it need ed three more states. it has now received three more states. so i have been an advocate for the equal rights amendment for essentially four decades. actually longer. i will be proud to vote for it today. just a few months as i said after congress adopted the e.r.a., maryland voted for
ratification. i thought that it was long overdue even then in 1972. ere we are some 48 years later and it still is. ur founders declared all men are created equal in their declaration of independence. surely no founder, if they were writing that document today, would have said men, when men meant white, property owning men, surely they would not have written that. surely none of us would have supported that. since the very beginning americans have been taking steps, therefore, to define that in a more expansive, inclusive term representing our
universal values. we amended the constitution to ensure african-americans and women could not be denied the right to vote. took a long time. particularly i hope the women in this body will think of the suffragettes who were extraordinarily active and involved in our community and making decisions in our families and in our communities and country, but who could not ote prior to 1919. 789 to 1919, women could not vote. i'm the father of three daughters. the grandfather of two granddaughters. and the great grandfather of three great granddaughters. for me to go home to them onight and say i voted against .our being equal in america
my wife passed away, if i wept home to her tonight and said i voted against your being equal in america. or those grandchildren and great grandchildren who happen to have been born as women and say to them, i voted against your being equal in america. we passed the civil rights act to make clear that all must be treated equal regardless of race. we passed the a.d.a. which i co-sponsored 30 years ago to ban discrimination against those with disabilities. but still nowhere in our constitution does it state clearly that women must be treated equally and that one must not be subject to discrimination because of their ender. the e.r.a. would ensure that basic tenet of our democracy in
our constitution at long last. 70% of the states and then three more said that ought to be our constitution. 3/4 of the states have voted to ratify this amendment. discrimination against women has through our history kept bright and talented americans from achieving their full potential in our economy. because of their hard work, the sacrifices, the leadership, and perseverance of trailblazing women we have seen barriers come down. doors of opportunity open, and glass ceilings shatter. but discrimination, inequality, and injustice persist, and we will hear arguments on this floor rationalizing why discrimination ought to still exist. and as long as our constitution does not explicitly ban discrimination based upon gender, as it does based on race, we will continue to see
forms of legal discrimination against women linger in our country. taking this step to add the equal rights amendment to the constitution is one of the many that house democrats are taking to combat discrimination against women. simply because they are women. last year we passed the paycheck fairness act. not everybody voted for that. with you in my opinion everybody voted for that who thought equal pay should mean equal pay irrespective of gender and based upon work performed. that built on the lily ledbetter fair pay act of 2009 to ensure equal pay for equal work. we also passed a re-authorization of the violence against women act. most of us on our side voted for that. but there was a rationalization why some thought, no, we will not protect women against violence.
we have continued working to protect women's rights to make their own health care choices and to access quality, affordable care. who said that was part of the constitution? the supreme court of the united states. they said that was a constitutional right. and we see effort after effort after effort to erode that constitutional right. i'm proud that the democratic caucus in the 116th congress is not only the most diverse in american history but also includes the greatest number of women. in virginia it was an election that saw the house of delegates reach 30% women. and the state senate reached 28%. and once it got there, the women of virginia stood up and said, this ought to be in the constitution of the united states and they voted to do so. virginia now has a woman as speaker of the house as we do
in our u.s. house, and as my home state of maryland has in our house of delegates. it is because more women are stepping up to run for office and winning election that more women's voices are being heard in our democracy. that is why this resolution is on the floor. that's a wonderful thing and i have been proud to help recruit talented women to run for the house as democrats and very frankly, we need more women as republicans. a diminishing group, i might add. i urge my colleagues, men and women, democrats and republicans, to join in supporting this resolution and finally, is it too late? it is too late, but it is never too late to do the right thing. make this part of our constitution. stand up and say yes, women should be included as all humankind who are endowed by their creator with certain unalien able rights. that is the principle --
unalienable rights. that is the principle we are articulating tate. alice paul for most of her life was once asked why she kept all her focus on getting the job done, she said this, quote, when you put your hand to the plow you can't put it down till you get to the end of the row. we are not at the end of the row. but this is a way upon that row to make it complete, to make our constitution protect all people. male or female, black or white, all people. at long last let's hold firm to that plow. let's get the job done. vote yes on this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: at this time i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from missouri, mrs. hartzler. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized for three minutes.
mrs. hartzler: thank you. i rise today to commend the women who have gone before us to celebrate the achievements that women have made and to reaffirm the fact that we are equal in the eyes of god and in law. women make up 51% of the pop pew, depries over half of the college students, make up most of today's medical and law school students, and own the majority of new businesses. women are not victims in need of validation. little girls can be whatever they want to be whether that be a astronaut, doctor, full-time mom working at home, or a member of congress. in addition, federal law and court precedent uphold our rights. that is something to applaud and i do. however, today's legislation is problematic on several fronts. first, the resolution is unconstitutional. the time limit to pass the e.r.a. expired decades ago. congress can't go back and
remove a deadline from a previous constitutional amendment initiative. the supreme court has recognized the 1972 e.r.a. expired and the department of justice issued a ruling saying, congress may not revive a proposed amendment after a deadline for its ratification has expired. pretending that we can remove the time limits for passage is both footal -- futile and deceptive. secondly, if the time limit could be extended, the e.r.a. would not bring women anymore rights than they currently have right now. but it would entrench the legality of abortion. we know this from court precedent by listening to those who have the most to gain from actually protecting abortion on demand. in 1998, the new mexico supreme court ruled that the equal rights amendment in their state constitution requires state funding of abortions. federal courts are likely to do the same. perhaps that's why every pro
abortion organization is endorsing passage of the e.r.a. naral pro-choice america says with the ratification the e.r.a. would reinforce the constitutional right to abortion. national organization for women says an e.r.a. properly interpreted could negate the hundreds of laws that have passed restricting access to abortion. but that's not the only concern with passing this resolution. besides being unconstitutional and shredding state and federal pro-life protections, the e.r.a. would also erase decades of progress which have provided opportunities for women, advance women's progress through federal programs, and secure necessary protections for women and girls. how? by incorporating gender identity in the definition of sex jeopardizing private spaces for women, girls, sports programs, and women's educational institutions. the e.r.a. endangers laws, programs, and funding designed
to benefit women. providing a pathway for legal challenges to welfare programs, grants for battered women's shelters, efforts to bolster women, participate in stem programs, as well as state laws governing child support, alimony and custody. these outcomes are anything but pro-women. i urge my colleagues to vote no. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from tennessee, mr. cohen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. cohen: thank you, mr. chairman. rise in strong support of h.res. 79 which takes a step-to-sure the equal rights amendment will become part of our constitution. nearly 100 years after women gained right to vote it's difficult to believe we still haven't given women equal rights. it's hard to believe it's a serious disagreement in this chamber. in the year 2020 it's unacceptable that women still make 80 cents for every dollar by men and women still subject to violence, harassment, and attacks on freedom to control
their own bodies. in the judiciary committee committee this morning a billian female law clerk is describing a has rassment by a respected ninth circuit judge. ongoing efforts to undermine the progress we have made the equal rights amendment is more important than ever. it took over 130 years to give him the right to vote. teams time to give women their proper place in the constitution of the united states which most modern constitution have, equality regardless of sex. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from indiana, mrs. walorski. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mrs. walorski: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in opposition to h.j.res. 79 and of course i believe in equal rights. women should never face discrimination and harassment. i believe we should be empowering women and girls to achieve their dreams. so it's disappointing today to stand in this chamber and see this important issue turned
into some type of political stunt. the deadline for states to ratify the e.r.a. passed nearly four decades ago. even justice ruth bader ginsberg has stated the only path forward is to start over. so let's be honest. this is not about equality. or women's rights. this is about enshrining unrestricted abortion in the constitution and allowing full taxpayer funding for abortion. now is not the time to be weakening pro-life protections. yesterday in south bend, indiana, in my district the remains of 2,411 victims abortion were finally given a dignified burial. after spending 20 years in moldy, styrofoam boxes in the back of a doctor, abortionist himself, in the back of his car and basement. these unborn boys and girls would be young men and women
today entering college. moments ago we stood on this house floor together and we offered a moment of silence that these innocent lives were victims. they were i would ask together we stand again to defend the rights of the most vulnerable among us. that we stand together today for the sanctity of life, to lift women up, to protect women. and to strengthen families. . i urge my colleagues to vote against this misguided resolution. back.d the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. loridaed ndaa -- mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield the distinguished gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, the 38th nia becoming
state to ratify the equal rights amendment, today we make it lear that congress never intended the arbitrary deadline to act as a barrier to atification of this vital amendment. ratification of the equal rights amendment affirms our nation's expressedcodifying an prehi bigs of -- prohibition of in our rimination nation's founding documents. have states say that women the equal rights, we need to guarantee regardless of sex, all same.ans are treated the every aspect of their lives including obtaining health care, public services. ideology.e swayed by equality is a founding value of this great country and more than other word describes the very idea of america. a vote for house resolution 79 for equality. i urge my colleagues to support back. 79, and i yield the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. collins: madam speaker, i
yield two minutes to the mr. eman from wisconsin, sensenbrenner. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized for two minutes. mr. sensenbrenner: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to this resolution. listening to people on the other side say that there is a cornucopia of benefits awaiting should the e.r.a. become a part of the constitution, i'm ere to ask members on both sides of the aisle to look past what looks nice on a bumper a 42-second sound bite to realize there will be will hurtquences that women should this be ratified. i'll just talk about insurance, insurance is regulated by the states. lower et substantially rates on auto insurance because they're better drivers. the state r.a. and regulation, that would become unconstitutional and girls are have to pay boy driver rates for auto insurance, which does not reflect the
ctuarial exposure of that at all. secondly, look at life insurance. women live longer than men. and as a result, in life insurance, also regulated by the women's rates be lower than men's rates becoming are stitutional and women going to be paying more to life insurance companies for the desire. that they i can go on and on and on. we had a lot of hearings on this in 1973. i'm here to say when the e.r.a. passed in 1972, were not ghts enshrined in a lot of state laws. has been tremendous progress in this area, both at the federal level and in states. the proponents of this resolution completely ignore happening. we don't. we think that the statutory protections that have been around the country in
the last almost 50 years have dvanced women and have addressed a lot of the complaints that we hear from that side of the aisle. going to unleash pandora's box of lots of raisedion that have been by this. some of which have been brought up by my colleagues on this side. let's not enrich the lawyers. let's do the right thing. pass this resolution and enforce the laws that have been here and the state capitals. -- capitols. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i yield one minute distinguished gentlelady lee.texas, ms. jackson the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: i thank all women of america. thank the sponsor of this bill. i thank the chair of the judiciary committee and the ranking member for being on the thank him. i ask the question -- does anybody see the sense of women powerful in the most
document of laws and power of the american people? of the words nded of abigail adams. i long to hear that you have independency, and by the way, in the new code of laws, which she sang to her i suppose it will be necessary for you to make a i would desire you to emember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. unlimited power in the hands of husbands. enthusiastically to support h.j.res. 79 and to say is no olleagues, there constitutional prohibition for passing this. involved, because this is the 1972 passage by the tate of texas of the equal rights amendment and here, 1977, houston at lla in he 1977 national women's
conference. 79 because h.j.res. abigail adams said, let's remember the ladies. i yield back. tempore: the o gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. the ld three minutes to gentlewoman from texas, ms. granger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for three minutes. speaker, we madam heard my democratic colleagues aying that passing the environmental protection agency is -- passing the equal rights amendment is necessary to secure basic rights under the law for women. not only is it untrue, it fact, s a fundamental this denies the most basic human life. the right to this e.r.a. uses gender equality to create an en unlimited constitutional right to abortion. instead of working to craft protects n that women's rights without trampling on the right to life, democrats forward today an unconstitutional partisan measure. only would this result in an
across all ortions 50 states, but also clear the ay to provide taxpayer funded abortions throughout all nine months of pregnancy, costing year.ns of dollars every above asure is not about -- measure is not about advancing women's rights. alike cans and democrats are increasingly horrified by the practice of late-term and by recent comments made in new york and virginia shouldfesaving treatment be denied to some newborns. their g women to discard unborn children at the taxpayer xpense is not ensuring gender equality. it is not protecting women. empowering women. it is not providing women equal work.r equal it's simply another step down devaluing all human
life and dignity. i oppose this amendment and urge thislleagues to vote no on measure, and i yield back. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. is gentleman from new york recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the from guished gentlelady texas, ms. garcia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for one minute. garcia: thank you, madam speaker. thank you, chairman nadler. in texas, many years ago, i in support of the equal rights amendment. oday, i join my colleagues to reaffirm that support. women are behind some of this greatest achievements. we fought for civil rights, sent to space, and then went there ourselves. in ave forged our path history. yet, we're still not equal to the eyes of the law. we must remove this stain from constitution. today, we're voting to remove an arbitrary deadline so we can gender prohibit
discrimination under the constitution. favor of udly vote in the resolution and urge all my same.gues to do the and as many in my district would es hora. the e.r.a.o approve thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. he gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from west virginia, miller. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from west virginia is recognized for three minutes. mrs. miller: madam speaker, i house jointo oppose resolution 79. is ains me to say that life under attack in our nation. he pro-abortion discussions taking place around this country are sickening. n the last year we heard a infanticide.mote and we still haven't had a vote united floor, in the
states house of representatives, to protect babies that survive abortion. in committee, i even introduced legislation that who survivet babies abortion. it failed along party lines once again. we have millions of american families who would love to adopt. discuss that. i know women who have cried every month when they realize they had not conceived the baby they so desperately wanted. and women who have undergone multiple tests and conceive a ust to child. they would gladly adopt a baby else didn't want. instead, today, we are voting another piece of legislation that would protections educe for life. this bill would create the basis funded abortion at the federal level, and it would allow abortion until
birth for any reason throughout the nation. it would force government-funded health care providers and hospitals to provide abortions. that.nnot have we cannot bring abortion into health care in that debate not health care. abortion is murder. if we want to discuss protecting for all americans, it eeds to pertain to everyone, including and especially newborns. and while i always welcome a colleagues with my about how we can advance women's rights and the rights of all this is not the way to do it. t is not through thinly veiled messaging bills with nice names but radical policies. good, pro-woman, pro-family, pro-american egislation through bipartisan solutions. so if we're going to do it, et's do it, but today, sadly, we won't and that is so disappointing. i yield back my time. mr. collins: reserve.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now minute to the distinguished gentleman from colorado, mr. neguse. the speaker pro tempore: the is leman from colorado recognized for one minute. mr. neguse: thank you, madam speaker. today in strong support of the equal rights amendment and the resolution before us. together s body comes unabashed in our conviction for a future that expands the vision founders.by our together, we strive for a nation that advances the notion of that takes up the mantle of the unfinished works that's the american dream and the practice of government by the people, for all the people. my daughter, natalie, is just and a half old, and i look forward to telling her one day about today, how the house, led by the chamber's first female speaker, oted tone sure that the women of her generation will be the first to grow up knowing that he constitution truly guarantees equal rights. it feels fitting to close by shirley chisholm, the
first black female member lected to this body and the youngest until my good friend, lauren underwood, took office who said when congress sent the e.r.a. to the states for ratification, the ime is clearly now to put this house on record for the fullest expectation of that equality of our founding hich fathers professed. complete oo late to the work they left undone. i support the resolution and with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from north carolina, ms. foxx. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized for three minutes. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague from georgia for yielding time. speaker, i rise in strong opposition to h.j.res. 79. woman who has worked all her life, often in professions, i detest discrimination in any against any group, and i've
done -- always done all that i eliminate it. furthermore, i welcome any iscussion on how to root out discrimination against women where it exists. but do not be deceived. this is not what this legislation is about. he 14th amendment to the u.s. constitution already provides women and all americans equal under the law. but the goal of this legislation is different. is to expand access to abortion up to birth nd to overturn the broadly supported policies that protect taxpayers from being forced to abortions. as we know all too well, roe v. broadly legalized abortion in the united states, but the equal rights amendment this resolution tries to ratify goes much further. consensus that the e.r.a. could be used to overturn abortionlaws, legalize
up to birth, and mandate taxpayer-funded abortions. expanded -- the expansion of abortion is not the only harmful impact of the e.r.a. have a harmful impact on shelters that protect women eliminate ce, women-specific workplace protections, and destroy women sports. furthermore, were this resolution ever to become law, the supreme court would that it does le not ratify the equal rights amendment. knows, yone in this room when congress initially passed the equal rights amendment, it a entionally included seven-year deadline for the required 38 states to ratify it. which is long since passed. multiple states have also ratification.r as such, supreme court precedent equires that any attempt to ratify the e.r.a. must start at the beginning. -- even justice ruth bader ginsburg was recently quoted saying she would like the process to start over. .
to be clerl with this resolution the democrats are attempting to write into the constitution the right to an abortion in all three try midwesters, force taxpayers to pay for them, and eliminate all conscience protections for medical providers who wish to abstain from abortion. this resolution is not about protecting women. it's a partisan messaging bill designed to appease radical pro-abortion groups. if the majority were serious about the equal rights amendment, it would start the process anew and give all states the option to consider the e.r.a. again. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i would remind everyone that the equal rights amendment simultaneous pli says the quality of rights under the law shall not be denied on account of sex. if people on the other side want to admit that equality of rights under the law means there must be a constitutional right to abortion, that's
wonderful. of course the constitution right to abortion is already established under current law. i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from washington, representative jayapal. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from washington is recognized for one minute. ms. jayapal: thank you, madam speaker. what a glorious day this is. today the house of representatives will vote to remove the arbitrary deadline to ratify the equal rights amendment. and with our vote today, and with virginia's historic vote to become the 38th and final state necessary to ratify the amendment, little girls, their moms, and women across this great nation will know that, yes, our constitution can, will, and must enshrine a ban on discrimination on the basis of sex. equality of sexes is not debateable. it has no expiration date. first proposed almost a century ago and passed by congress in
1972, the equal rights amendment would be a momentous step forward for women to end unequal pay, pregnancy discrimination, and sexual harassment and exploitation. so today, to women across this country who are watching, let me say, and i say this as the first south asian american woman ever elected to the house of representatives, we see you, we stand with you, and we will fight for you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia reserves. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from georgia, representative mcmcbath. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman georgia is recognized for one minute. thank you.
i thank the gentleman for yielding. women have been fighting tooth and nail for decades to be recognized as equal under the eyes of the law. while we made significant gains, it is time for full constitutional equality. 1986, francis ellen watkins harper, a free born black woman, addressed the national women's rights convention in new york city. she said, i quote, justice is not fulfilled so long as a woman is unequal before the law. we are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity. society cannot afford to negligent the enlightenment of any class of its members. these words still hold true today. for our mothers, for our daughters, and for our future leaders, we must take up the mantle of the women who came before us and pass this amendment for a more just
future. thank you. i yield back the balance of my ime. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i now yield one minute to the distinguished speaker of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for one minute. the speaker: thank you very much, madam speaker. i'm so pleased that the gentlewoman from virginia is in the chair and grateful to her for her leadership and our other colleagues, elaine laura and abigail spanberger, as new members of congress who gave us the opportunity as the majority to bring this important legislation to the floor and thank them for virginia's leadership. it's so appropriate that congresswoman is in the chair for this because she was a leader in the state legislature on equal rights amendment when she served there. this is an historic day. a happy day. as the house takes action to
move our nation closer to the founding -- our founding ideal that all are created equal. i salute congresswoman jackie speier for her leadership on this resolution and her lifetime of work to advance equality in america. she quoted the late supreme court justice antonin scalia when she said, i think it bears repetition, certainly justice scalia said, certainly the constitution does not require discrimination on the basis of sex, the only issue is whether it prohibits it. it does not. end of quote. it does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. the lack of an e.r.a. has allowed the supreme court justice to have this interpretation. here it is, we say it over and over again, equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the united states or by any state
on account of sex. how can you have a problem with that? how can you have a problem with that? let me also salute chairwoman carolyn maloney long time sponsor of the equal rights amendment in the house for her great leadership, and to you, chairman nadler, the members of the judiciary committee, and all the members who came to congress, committed to finishing this fight for the equal rights amendment. i also want to acknowledge that yesterday at our press presentation on this in the audience was a republican from illinois who was responsible for illinois passing the equal rights amendment, steven anderson, he was with us at the capitol. we commend him for being a leader on the e.r.a. passing it through the illinois statehouse. what an honor and how clear
that this is not partisan. perhaps only in the house of representatives. but not in the rest of the country. let us acknowledge the millions of women in nevada, illinois, virginia, and across america who have raised a drumbeat for ratification and reignited a nationwide movement for equality. nearly -- nearly 100 years ago allies paul -- alice paul, a republican, introduced the equal rights amendment, the first proposed amendment to the constitution calling for women's equality in america. 50 years ago soon after becoming the first african-american woman to serve in the congress, congresswoman shirley chisholm stood on this house floor calling it, quote, one of the most clear-cut opportunities we are likely to have to declare our faith and the principle that is shape our constitution. end of quote. but today and this year that
marks the centennial of women having the right to vote, it is shameful reality that the equal rights amendment still has not been enshrined in the constitution. as a result millions of american women still face inequality under the law and injustice in their careers and lives. without full equality under the constitution, women face a devastating wage gap and this has an impact not only on the families, what families earn today, but women's pension and retirement in the future. this is wrong. women are facing discrimination as they raise families, 62% of pregnant women and new moms are in the work force, but current law allows pregnant workers to be placed on unpaid leave or forced out of their jobs. sexual harassment assault too often go unchecked. all leading to women's underrepresentation at the decisionmaking table. today we know what the
statistics, 33 c.e.o.'s of the fortune 500 companies are women. really? today by passing this resolution the house is paving the way to enshrining equal rights amendment in the constitution. achieve justice for women and progress for families, for our children, lowering wage disparity, increasing paychecks so moms can pay for their family's needs such as rent, groceries, childcare, health care. and strengthen america. it's not just about women. it's about america. the e.r.a. will strengthen america, unleashing the full power of women in our economy and upholding the value of equality in our democracy. i have four daughters, one son. two granddaughters. i can't even imagine how anyone could think of his or her daughter not having equality. . s or her sister, mom, wife
not having equality. what is that about? what is that about? women should not have the same status of equality as men. this has nothing to do with abortion issue. that's an excuse. it's not a reason. it has everything to do with the respect for women, your daughter, your sister, your wife, your mother. and you're saying by voting against this that your daughter, your sister, your mother, your spouse should not have equal protection under the law in the constitution of the united states. to those who say the e.r.a. is not necessary, let me quote from a recent statement from the american association of university women. it states, many americans
mistakenly believe that the u.s. constitution explicitly guarantees equality between men and women. perhaps you think that. the equal rights amendment would once and for all guarantee constitutional equality between men and women. its ratification would provide the constitutional guarantee that all men and women are truly equal under the law. i urge a strong bipartisan vote for this resolution. it would be bipartisan in the united states senate when we accepted it over there shortly. and so to ensure that women are truly equal under the law in america. because we know in america when women succeed, america succeeds. i urge a yes vote and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. can i request the time for both sides.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 11 minutes remaining. and the gentleman from new york has 15. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from pennsylvania, ms. dean. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. ms. dean: thank you, chairman nadler, for bringing this resolution to a vote and thank you to representatives speier and maloney for your work on this legislation. this is an historic day. it has been nearly a century since the first constitutional amendment to guarantee equal treatment for women was introduced in 1923. since then 37 states have ratified the equal rights amendment, including my home state of pennsylvania in 1972. virginia's ratification of the e.r.a. this past january brought us one step closer to this basic right that we will be held equal in the eyes of the constitution.
the motto of susan b. anthony's newspaper was, quote, men their rights, and nothing more. women their rights and nothing less. and today we again say that women will accept nothing less than equality. e.r.a. builds on the work of anthony and others like rankin, alice paul, ida b. wells, and this diverse congress. i have to tell you i am filled with joy today because i'm looking forward going home and telling my granddaughters that we are one step closer to a more perfect union. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentlelady from new york, representative maloney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: thank you, chairman nadler and jackie speier for your historic leadership on the e.r.a. madam speaker, first introduced
in 1923 the equal rights amendment is still as relevant and necessary as ever. because we know that equality for women will always elude us when it isn't etched into our constitution. we have seen it when the supreme court gutted the violence against women act. we have seen it when judges don't enforce equal pay for equal work. or when a federal judge ruled that congress didn't have the authority to outlaw female genital mutilation. but if your rights are in the constitution, they can't be rolled back by changing whims of legislators, judges, or presidents. . we will persist until it is firmly guaranteed. here is no deadline for equality.
we demand it be spelled out in the constitution and we spell it e.r.a. i ask you to support this important vote for equality. i yield back. reserve.ns: the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. speaker, i nowdam yield one minute to the istinguished gentlelady from michigan, representative lawrence. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan is minute.zed for one mrs. lawrence: madam speaker, i 79, in support of h.j.res. which removes the deadline for equal ification of the rights amendment. a woman's rights must be guaranteed by our government. about the members of congress ensuring that the ights and equality for women are part of our constitution. losesad to watch those who their way because they'll find any way to distract the issue of equality. the members on the other side are trying to interject abortion
into this. i want to say that even though women, a me so far as record number of women, lawmakers here in this house, we so far to go, and this corrects that injustice and equality for women under the law. as the great shirley chisholm and i quote, she was the of t african-american woman congress, the time is clearly now to put this house on record for the fullest expression of equality of opportunity hich our founding fathers possess. they possessed it but they did not assure it. do for s they tried to their sons. i encourage support of this bill. you. the speaker pro tempore: the georgia. from mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i still reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the
gentlelady from virginia, representative wexton. the speaker pro tempore: the virginia is rom recognized for one minute. ms. wexton: i thank the gentleman for yielding. speier forgresswoman introducing this important resolution. introduced ce paul the equal rights amendment to include women in our nation's founding document. later during my time in the virginia state senate, i sponsored the resolution for virginia to the e.r.a. but it wouldn't be until january historic with the number of women lawmakers serving in the state legislature that the great commonwealth of virginia became the 38th and equal tate to ratify the rights amendment. this was not simply a symbolic vote. equalitylly, affirming on the basis of sex in the constitution will strengthen tate and federal laws that protect women. we need the e.r.a. to ensure that equal justice under law is constitutional right for women, not just an inscription
supreme entrance of the court. finally, these words will ring true. equality of rights under the law be denied or abridged by the united states or by any sex. on account of today, i am proud to cast my vote in support of the e.r.a. of the ecognition tireless work of so many trailblazers and activistsing -- the years.ver i urge my colleagues to do the same. thank you and i yield back. the peaker pro tempore: gentlewoman from new york -- the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the reserves.from georgia the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now ield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from illinois, representative underwood. the speaker pro tempore: the illinois is rom recognized for one minute. mr. woodall: -- ms. underwood: thank you. i rise in strong support of h.j.res. 79, a barrel bill that moves -- a bipartisan bill that us closer to adopting the equal rights amendment. madam speaker, women are barrier breakers. we have broken down barriers and
ceiling in wn glass education, in the workplace, in military. women are leading in a way we before.d pay disparities and inequalities own.not go away on their that's why we need to ensure that women's rights are guaranteed by adopting the equal rights amendment. in 2018 when illinois ratified the e.r.a. at long last. later, i am here on the house floor because the women of northern illinois sent for them. fight i am here to fight for our right as women to equal treatment constitution of our great country. i urge all my colleagues to move closer to t step legal equality by supporting this essential bill. back. yield thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. he gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from
bonamici.. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from oregon is recognized for one minute. ms. bonamici: thank you, madam speaker. in strong support of this resolution to remove the thetrary deadline to ratify equal rights amendment. this year is the centennial of yet, women endment, are still fighting, fighting for the and equal rights under law. women continue to face many barriers to true equality, pregnancy and gender discrimination, unequal pay, and a lack of access to a full range reproductive health care services. the equal rights amendment to he constitution would provide for fundamental equality for women, regardless of who is supremet, who is on the court, or changes in federal law. congress first approved the 1972, and my home state of oregon was quick to year. it the following and now 38 states, the required 3/4 under the constitution, have ratified the amendment. and today, congress will stand ith our states and make it
clear that it is time, actually adopt the equal rights amendment. it's not too late to do the right thing. late for equality. i urge all of my colleagues to support this resolution, and i yield back the balance of my time. the peaker pro tempore: gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from the of virginia, representati representative buyer. beyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. been 48 since the e.r.a. passed the house and senate. i've had 8 years, three daughters and one granddaughter. those four young women are brilliant, precocious, accomplished with strong great noebt. and -- know built.
built. -- nobility. i'm very proud that the commonwealth of virginia was the 38th state to ratify the e.r.a. permanently remove the deadline for state ratification equal rights for gender. quote, women shall have equal in the united states and every place subject to its jurisdiction? abridged hould not be by the united states by any state on the account of sex. in the rds belong constitution. there's nothing partisan about recognizing men and women have law. rights under the i urge my colleagues to support this resolution and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now ield one minute to the distinguished gentlelady from illinois, ms. schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is one minute.or schakowsky: every single
constitution in the whole world 1959, including fghanistan, for example, has the equivalent of the equal rights amendment, but the united of america does not. hough my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and president trump's department of tell you otherwise, we need the equal rights we need it now. the requisite number of states ave now voted to ratify the equal rights amendment. last year, my home state of to nois was the 37th state ratify, and this year virginia 38.ght us to that number of and today, i will proudly vote
my grandchildren, my granddaughters, and my grandsons women are not only strong nd powerful and resilient but also equal citizens under the law. do -- to colleagues to stand with us and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, mrs. matsui. ms. matsui. the speaker pro tempore: the recognized.is ms. matsui: when i think about the future of our country and like for t it to look young women and girls, like my anna, i want equal society, fair play, equal
access to basic health care rights. is why the equal rights necessary.s for too long, our country's structural barriers have cast a rights.over women's with 38 states having affirmed their support for the e.r.a., we closer to p shattering those barriers. his resolution negates misguided arguments that because it's some arbitrary deadline, equal rights amendment is effectively dead. it's clear from the recent andons of nevada, illinois, virginia, and our collective voices, it's still very much untiland we will not rest it is engrained in the most sacred document of our nation's history. urge my colleagues to stand women and untry's support our right to constitutional equality. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: reserves. tempore: the o gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the
gentlelady from california, mrs. davis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is one minute.or mrs. davis: thank you. thank you, madam speaker. years ago, r, 244 women were left out of our onstitution by the men who drafted it. but since then, generations of have blazed a steady trail towards equality in country. but we still do not have constitutional equality. attended many e.r.a. events, representing the league of women 1970's, and if someone would have told me then we would still be doing this in 2020 i would have said of justice.lure why is anyone against rights for everyone? qual rights for women, they transcend your politics, your age, and your gender. continue his country
to receive unequal pay, suffer from harassment in the workplace, endure discrimination pregnancies and fight long legal battles over domestic cases.e a correction of our constitution is clearly long overdue. and justice for all must apply equally to women and men. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. mrs. davis: let's pass this resolution. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield one minute to the istinguished gentlelady from new york, ms. velazquez. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for one minute. you.velazquez: thank madam speaker, 28 days ago on jr.'s luther king birthday, virginia became the e.r.a.ate to ratify the after decades of struggles, 48 ears after congressional passage, 2/3 of states agreed to n amendment that secures equal
rights for all american citizens, regardless of sex. amendment will touch every corner of our lives. 24 words, our nation will asally fully recognize women equal participants in society. to my colleagues opposing the are you afraid of? how can you oppose this look women nd then in your district, in your churches, in your own homes in eye? today is your chance to stand on story.ht side of her i implore my colleagues, vote h.j.res. 79. finish this and at long last women and men are finally the law with the rights enshrined in the u.s. constitution. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves.
georgia eman from reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. nadler: mr. nadler: i yield 45 seconds to the distinguished gentlelady from california, ms. chu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for 45 seconds. ms. chu: since women gained the right to vote 100 years ago, we made incredible progress, rolling back laws like those that kept us from serving on juries, owning land, or even getting our own credit card. this congress has more women than ever. but true equality is still a goal not a reality. the fact is women are still paid less than men for the same work. and we still have men passing laws that dictate our choices about our bodies. it's clear if we want equality we need the e.r.a. and the people agree, we saw that at women's marches across the country and in the groundswell of the me, too movement. that energy is leading to
change. the people are speaking, it's up to us to listen. arbitrary deadlines are no reason to silence our voices. i urge my colleagues to vote yes and give women the same rights as men. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia, reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield 45 seconds to the distinguished gentlelady from california, ms. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for 45 seconds. ms. lee: thank you very much. i thank the chairman for yielding. madam speaker, i rise in strong support today of congresswoman ehr's -- speier's h.j.res. 39. i'd like to thank her for her consistent leadership. the e.r.a. would guarantee rights to all and would finally affirm women's equality in our constitution by removing this arbitrary deadline. and we know that too often women have been relegated to the silence and left out of the
constitution, especially black women and women of color. for example there are still rampant gender wage discrimination. discrimination against women must end. that's why the e.r.a. is so important. it would make sure that our government would ensure that women are treated equally. a right that needs to be clearly outlined in every aspect of our country. i want my granddaughters, jordan, a moan, and giselle, to know they are equal to men. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. lee: every girl and woman deserve equality in their country. they should know their contry, the united states of america, has finally joined the rest of the world to stand up -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield 45 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from
hawaii, representative case. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii is recognized for 45 seconds. mr. case: madam speaker, i rise in very strong support of this resolution to advance the cause of full and equal rights for all women. i do so for my 1-year-old granddaughter, for whom i deeply hope that when she reaches the age of understanding the e.r.a. will be as enshrined in our constitution as is the right to vote today. i also do so as a proud citizen of hawaii. on march 22, 1972, when the u.s. senate sent the e.r.a. to the states, it was early in the morning in hawaii. but by shortly after noon that same day, our legislature voted for ratification. the first state to do so. for my country and hawaii and for all of our women leaders who led this fight, past and present, i proudly join my colleagues in voting for the e.r.a. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: reserve.
the speaker pro tempore: reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield 45 seconds to the distinguished gentlelady from florida, ms. wasserman schultz. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for 45 seconds. miss bulls: thank -- ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, madam speaker. after nearly a cren transit equal rights amendment is on the cusp of ratification. america's founding, women were intentionally left out of the constitution. as second class citizens, we lacked the right to vote, hold most jobs, or even own property. today we still receive less pay for the same work, and we take advance and harassment for being a woman. but the e.r.a. will prohibit that. in the eyes of our most sacred document, we will finally be equal. women's rights should not depend on congressional whims or who occupies the white house. these basic fundamental rights must be guaranteed. but if we want to hand a more perfect union over to our daughters, and i have two of them, we must seize this moment to end sex discrimination. we owe it to the women who sacrifice before us and all of our daughters and sons who deserve a life of true equality. i urge my colleagues to vote
yes on this resolution to remove the arbitrary and outdated deadline for ratifying the e.r.a. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. one minute left. mr. nadler: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia -- mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. i'm confirming the chairman we are ready to close, is that correct? good. madam speaker, before i begin my close, i yield to the gentleman from wisconsin for parliamentary inquiry. mr. sensenbrenner: madam speaker, parliamentary inquiry. it is my intention to raise a point of order that this resolution requires a 2/3 vote. i will argue the point of order when it is made. but i need to know when the proper time is to raise the oint of order.
the speaker pro tempore: the proper time would be when the chair puts the question on passage. mr. sensenbrenner: before or after it has passed? the speaker pro tempore: before. -- at the time the chair puts the question. mr. sensenbrenner: i thank the chair. mr. collins: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, madam speaker. it has been interesting the discussion on the floor today. it's been interesting on both sides to hear the different aspects of why this bill is on the floor, why we are doing it, why we shouldn't be doing it, and many things. it's been interesting the discussion if you go from a strictly number of states category. what's been interesting is my colleagues across the aisle have talked about that there are now 38 states but they fail to mention five states who rescinded. five states would put you under 38, what is interesting to me in the rules committee the other night their argument was that if they rescinded it's not valid to rescind, but yet you
can add states after the time when it is up. that's an interesting argument to make if you are actually looking at it from the perspective they rescinded within the time frame, but yet passed it after the time frame that that's ok. then i actually heard of my colleagues actually mention the fact that if we passed it in here today, that this would now become part of the process along with the state of virginia ratifying it, it's now part of our constitution. i'm sure this was just a euphoric discussion about how this would actually go p about, but they were forgetting the senate is involved in this. it's amazing as we take down -- i was worried at one point, i turned to -- on the discussion that there -- it was said on multiple occasion that is there was no protection in the constitution for women. i was almost scared for a moment that the 14th amendment had been repealed and didn't know it. it is in there and still in there. checked just a few minutes ago. it's safe.
it is interesting to determine when ruth bader ginsberg, one of the foremost architects in looking at this bill even in the 1970's comer forward said, if you want to do this, start over. do it the proper way. as my chairman has said earlier, basically a deadline should not get in the way of what we want. a deadline should not get in the way of what i want to have happen. that's becoming more and more of a concern in this body. that the rules and parliamentary procedures don't matter. if it interferes with what we want. but at the end of the day the question really becomes is why are we doing this? why are we bringing this forward when there is absolutely no legal precedent, no constitutional precedent, no anything out there, including some of the founders who actually started this, whole process, 40-plus years ago, who say this is not the way you do it. and the reason i know that that is a concern is because some of
those who actually said this have been criticized in the media from the perspective of supporters of the e.r.a. to say they have now, ruth bader ginsberg's comments have killed the e.r.a. or effectively done it. the reason is because she's speaking the truth about this issue. we disagree on most everything from a legal perspective. on this one we happen to agree. she's laid forth clearly what should happen here. let me also say, it's been talked about a great deal, so i they we just need to come to the real scenario why this is happening. not that we believe it will happen for anybody here that believes that today is going to put it in part of the constitution, that's not going to happen. what is it? it's a political nod to the understanding of those who are speaking for this. as we have heard earlier, naral, pro-choice america with ratification of the e.r.a. reinforce the constitutional right to abortion by clarifying sexes either week wall rights which will require judges to
strike down anti-abortion laws. also naral, the e.r.a. will support protecting women's right to abortion with five anti-choice justices on the supreme court and row wade on the chopping block more important than ever, we codify women's bodily autonomy in our lives. co-director abortion restrictions amount to sex discrimination because they single out people for unfair treatment on the basis of sex. the senior counsel of the national women's law center, the e.r.a. would create a basis for challenging abortion restrictions. this is what this is actually about. this is what the basis is needed because there is has been shasting in this country to understand that in our opinion and many opinion that abortion is simply murder in the womb. it is not about life. it's interesting we are talking about the rights of women today which again this bill doesn't have anything to do with it, but we are not concerned if the young women in the womb are even to have a birthday. that's not a concern. so what would happen from these
votes who are supporting the resolution today? why do they want it? because it gives a claim to start to finish unfettered abortion. what does that mean? that means let's bring back partial-birth abortion, which if i have to remind anybody here, that means the delivery of the child all the way to the moment the chin almost out and then actually crushing their skull. that's what that is. if that's a right we are protecting, i don't want any part of it. neither does most americans. they don't want a part of it. that's one of those restriction that is will be paid -- laid back. it will also continue to allow unlimited abortions in any state for any reason including sex selection. it's interesting we would talk about this today, the e.r.a. and use this. yet a family could choose to abort a child because it's a male or female. let's be honest about this. but the bottom line for me, what really bothers me the most when it's unlimited, unfettered
access-to-portion this bill opens up if it was to pass was one that his close to home for me. you see aure peaian country recently stated -- a european country recently stated, geneticist in iceland said we almost eradicate the downs syndrome people. i thought to myself for a second. that would be great f we could remove down syndrome and help those and cure that, that would be amazing medical discovery for all people except there is one portion, you know how they have done it? through genetic testing and killing the children in the womb. they don't even let them have a birthday. one counsels mothers as follows, this is your life. you have a right to choose how your life will look. we don't look at abortion as murder, we look at as a thing we ended. you know why this has opened up, america? this is why. for those of us like myself who have a disabled child, i do not
want to hear that we are protecting disabled rights and other rights when we are not even allowing them to be born in certain arenas. every day i get a text on this phone. it's from my daughter. jordan is 27 years old. she has spina bifida. she cannot walk and has never took a step. and i believe probably given the medical condition will not happen this side of heaven. but she rolls and she smiles. she goes to work three days a week. she gets herself up early to put her clothes on and take her shower and get a bus she calls and goes to work. the folks in sweden, you know what they want to do, kill her, because she is not as valuable as a down syndrome child is not as valuable. you want to open this pandora's box of no abortion restrictions, own what you're doing. when jordan texts me, she texts
me good morning, daddy, i love you. how's your day? 27 years ago when we found out a week ago, 27 years ago, that spina as going to have bifida, we were a young couple just happy that god give us a child. and to find out that she had a disability only kept our hearts more in tuned to what god had given. but my wife went to school the next week and she was telling the teacher about what was going on, she said we are trying to figure out where we need to go to have jordan's help when she's born and get more medical attention. this person looked at her and said you know you have choices, correct? and my wife said, yes, there's north side hospital, no, no, dear. you don't have to go through with this. that's your choice. in other words, as my wife
looked at her and said, you're talking about my baby. you see, when we go down this path, don't flower this bill up. look at the ones who actually talk about it. and say this is an open door to abortion own demand with no restrictions, no government interpeerns, in fact government pay for t but before you do that, america, as we look around, i want you to think of the picture on the new gesher baby ad of the young person with down syndrome who is now the face of gesher baby food, if he was in ice lapd he would have been one of those that said oh, we end it. . think about my daughter, for and e who are struggling, to get a news that you have a child with disability, that's amazingly devastatingly things you can hear because you don't know what
the future holds but you do know life is a gift from god. and it is my joy to take care of her. 30 major surgeries before she was 5 years old. hree of which were nine hours in length. tell me her life doesn't matter. someone who doesn't have the possibility of understanding it and they're given a choice they have a disability and somebody tells and says, don't worry. disabilities are bad. just go ahead and end that life and go on with your life, this up.hat this opens so don't give me a bill that's nowhere for the reasons that's been given. the true reasons are found in your own supporters. reasons are found in true.e know to be isn you understand what this about. i will stand until i have no
for the th in my body right of those who can't speak for themselves. to me that it was what would i be saying to my daughter if i voted will be saying to jordan, jordan, the 14th amendment's still there. rotections in law are still there. and by the way, restrictions on bortion will not be done away with. and your life matters. so if you want a picture of picture jordan. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. yields.leman the gentleman from new york is recognized. r. nadler: madam speaker, once again, congress can enact a limit.ion putting a time it can enact a resolution to remove a time limit. when the senate passes it, the will be part of the constitution. i now yield the balance of our time to the distinguished from michigan, representative tlaib.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. ms. tlaib: thank you so much. i rise very proudly, the first ever elected in congress, in support of house 79.t resolution i swear what's even more interesting is what i've been obsession ut is this to control and oppress women in the united states of america. 2020, t believe it's we're still debating the merits of equal rights amendment. time.eyond i want you all to know this is about women of color, women with disabilities, transgender women, immigrant women. hese women are affected by issues like unequal pay, sexual violence, lack of access to poverty, so much of what we're doing here in trying to promote women's gender, is about racial, economic justice. so i would ask you all, know no vote today condoning oppression of women in the united states of america and i i yield back nd the balance of my time.
he speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman -- the gentleman yields. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to the house resolution 844, the previous question is ordered. the question is on engrossment third reading of the joint resolution. aye. in favor say those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. resolution oint removing the deadline for the ratification of the equal rights amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the resolution. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. sensenbrenner: madam speaker, i make the point of order, a quorum is not present vote is required for passage of this joint resolution it does have the effect of amending the constitution and the point of order, a quorum is not present -- and on the point of order, madam speaker, an extension passed in 1978 where this issue came up hich extended the deadline until 1982. equal rights
amendment deadline expired. 1983, chairman peter rodino of the judiciary committee introduce house joint resolution 1, which started the over again. the difference between what 1983 is in 1978 and those airman rodino and who supported reintroducing and attempting to pass the equal realized that t t expired and required a startover. i believe that this does fall nder that and that it does require a startover, and i would ask the chair to rule on whether not the point of order is well taken and this does require a 2/3 vote. the speaker pro tempore: the chair is prepared to rule. pursuant to house resolution 842, an affirmative vote of a majority of members present in
present quorum being is required on final passage of the pending measure. gentleman's point of order is overruled. mr. sensenbrenner: i appeal the chair.n of the the speaker pro tempore: the terms of the house resolution 842 are unambiguous and so consistent with the ruling of 16, 1977,on september an appeal would be tantamount to permitting a direct change in the order of the house. issued an as not appealable ruling and the chair is prepared to put the question passage of the joint resolution. mr. sensenbrenner: madam speaker, i appeal that ruling of as well, which i believe is appealable. the speaker pro tempore: that is not subject to appeal. the question is on passage of joint resolution.
all those in favor say aye. all those opposed. it.ayes have speaker.r: madam madam speaker. call.llins: roll the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests -- the yeas and nays are requested. the favoring a vote by yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: madam speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: madam, i deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition?
>> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today, it adjourns to meet at 11:00 a.m. tomorrow. madam speaker, i ask for one minute to address the address the house. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. >> today i stand here proud to say that i was one who cast my vote for the passage of e.r.a. in america and rise today to recognize a woman who was so very much an instrument to the
state of michigan -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman will suspend. the house is not in order. please take your conversations off the floor. the gentlewoman may continue. mrs. lawrence: i rise today to recognize a woman who was instrumental in the state of michigan in this fight for civil rights. ms. daisy elliott who was one of 11 women elected to the michigan elective commission in 1961 and was key in assuring that our state constitution established a michigan civil rights commission. with the authority to investigate charges of discrimination based on race, religion and color or national origin. daisy served in the state legislature for nearly 20 years in effective and influential
voice of equality and introduced 80 bills including the elliott larson civil rights act. she was a fierce advocate for workers, senior sitance and today in honor of black history month, i salute and honor ms. daisy elliott. i honor her legacy and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my marks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> february is national children's dental health month. this month is a time when health care professionals and priors and educators promote good oral health practice to children,
families and many others. tooth dekay is the number one chronic infectious disease among children in the united states still. throughout my career as a den at this time, i can attest to the benefits of proper oral health and focus on children from a very young age. brushing, flossing and rinsing correctly are important life lessons that should be learned as they are young. it would also like to recognize the american dental association for their strenuous work in this area. they have implemented the give kids a smile program. it provides hundreds of thousands of underserved kids with free oral health, education, screenings, preventive and and/or restoreative services throughout the year.
it is a much needed program and i'm proud of the american dental association for the work they do in this area. thank you, madam speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from oklahoma seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlelady is recognized for ne minute. >> madam speaker, i rise to speak on the issue of health care in oklahoma. i hear from far too many who can't afford the health care they need. today oklahoma has the second highest rate of unshurd people in the nation. our state ranks 48th for unshurd children. we can't let them fall through the action. the answer to solving our state's health care crisis is straightforward, we must expand medicaid.
by not expanding medicaid, oklahoma has lost up to $1 billion. seven hospitals across our state have closed because we did not accept the health care support. expanding medicaid in oklahoma would extend health insurance up to 200,000 who don't currently have insurance. it's the right choice for our state. but instead the administration and our governor are proposing an alternative plan to sooner care turning it into a block grant program. the plan would encourage cuts to health care services and restrict access and contribute to hospital closures. block grants have been misused for political pet projects and fill holes in the budget. we are still learning the specifics of the block grant plan. more than 500,000 children rely on sooner care and their insurance would be slashed. enough is enough.
thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise today to congratulate the dallas high school mountain ears football team on the championship season. it went undefeated going 15-0 and playoff wins and district championship. for the first time since 1993, they made it all the way to the pennsylvania state championship. back in 2016, dallas football freshmen on the team. under the leadership of the one and only coach and his greatest distant coaches, dallas was strong on all sides of the ball with a supersolid offensive line and passing game and backfield i
will never frget. the dallas parents, student band and cheerleaders were huge part of the friday night victories. the entire community, restaurants, fire department, were all part. we are going to miss these boys wearing dallas blue but we know the tradition will live on. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to recognize the 25th anniversary of the blue dog coalition. a caucus of pragmatic democrats i have the honor to help lead this congress. since february, 1995 the blue dog coalition has been working to bridge partisan divide and deliver bipartisan results. while the makeup and size of our coalition has changed over
the years, our focus on fiscal responsibility and strong national security has never waivered. blue dogs recognize that our constituents expect us to be good stewed warts of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars and that a sproketting national debt is a threat to our national security. mrs. murphy: over the last 25 years blue dogs have helped deliver balanced budgets, end government shutdowns, grow the middle class, and pass commonsense laws such as pay as you go. this congress, we are leading the fight on election security, infrastructure, and john creation. we are pushing congress to be better by ending partisan gerrymandering and proposing no budget, no pay. most importantly, blue dogs remain focused on our founding principles of fiscal responsibility and a strong national security. madam speaker, please join me in recognizes the blue dog coalition's 25th anniversary this month. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek wreck -- recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to
address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. today i rise to celebrate one of the most prominent african-american women in my community and our nation's history, dr. mary mccloud bethune. at an early age she took an interest in the power of learning and promoting civil rights. in 1904 she opened the daytona literary and industrial training school for negro girls in daytona beach, which later merged with the cookman institute for men in jacksonville to form ba tune-cookman college. now university where she served as president. as she worked to build the school she founded, she also became a national leader on issues related to civil rights, women, and young people, even providing counsel to u.s. presidents. in 2018, the florida legislature passed and the governor signed legislation to place a statue in her honor
representing florida in the national statuary hall collection here in the capitol. dr. bethune knew education was the key to a quality and better life and it's my honor to recognize her contributions on the floor here today. mr. waltz: with that, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. mr. engel: madam speaker, as chairman of the house foreign affairs committee, i rise to draw attention to the tragedy unfolding in syria. the regime backed by iran and russia continues to target civilians. they target hospitals and other sillian infrastructure. just dropped bombs. they are leveling whole neighborhoods which is indicative that the regime does not want people to return to
their homes. they are killing innocent men, women, and children for no reason. over half a million people have been displaced in the last two months. there must be humanitarian response from the world and it must start here in the united states. there must be accountability and we must show the syrian people we have not forgotten them. how can we stand idly by and allow this to continue to happen? i call on the president and all members of both houses to have a forceful response to the regime in syria to say that we will not tolerate the targeting of civilians, the wholesale killing of children, and women, and all civilians. we need to stand on the side of justice and we must show the syrian people that we have not forgotten them. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition?
>> to speak for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. walden: thank you, madam speaker. on february 14, oregon celebrates her 161st birthday. as a lifelong oregonian whose ancestors came there by wagon train in 1845, i may be biased but can i confidently say there is no place like oregon. she boasts so many sites from the powerful columbia river and the gorge to the majestic hills of the painted hills to the rugged landscape of the national forest, the clear deep blue waters of crater lake, deepest lake in north america, then think about the great cascade mountains, or the blues and then alt way down to the depths of hell's canyon. the late great republican governor mccaul said it it's, oregon is an inspiration whether you are come to it or born to it you become entranced by our state's beauty, the opportunity she affords
enindependence of her citizens. happy birthday oregon, you truly do fly with your own wings. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> it has been two years since the shooting of marjory stoneman douglas high school in parkland, florida n those two years, the surviving families and students have turned their pain into power. mr. deutch: they stood up to gun companies. they testified before congress. they helped craft and pass legislation. they worked with the federal government. they worked with the state government. they won school board seats. they made beautiful and moving art. students have lifted their voices, written songs, they walked out, and they have marched. that's what the survivors in my community are doing. but there is so much more that congress and the president can do to save lives from gun violence.
there is so much more that we can do to honor the lives that were lost in stoneman douglas. allissa, scott, martin, nichlas aaron, jamie, chris, luke, cara, gina, joaquin, elaina, meadow, helena, alex, caren, and peter. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek wreck -- >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for a minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to share one of fort wayne's great american success stories. sweet water sound. under and c.e.o.'s dream started over 40 years ago with a recording studio housed in a volkswagen van. it has since evolved into one of the nation's leading retailers of professional recording and music equipment.
madam speaker, sweet waters' total sales in 2018 were record breaking as $725 million. just recently we found out that in 2019 it was another record year with the -- sales of $805 million, up 11% from 2018. the total sales only tell part of the success story. sweet water has recently hired 159 new employees and has given back to hoosiers by providing middle school students with free instruments. mr. banks: hoosiers are thankful for sweet water sound's big contributions to northeast indiana and i look forward to watching them continue to succeed moving forward. in this record setting economy, i look forward to seeing more american success stories just like this one. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for
one minute. chairwoman. madam ms. waters: i stand today with the chair of our foreign relations committee who just spoke here, mr. engel, as he makes a plea to this house for us to take a look at, get involved with what is going on in syria. millions of folks are dying. they are being killed with the help of assad and russia. they are killing civilians, millions of civilians. they are killing the children. and for those who are injured, they find their way to the hospital, it does no good because they turn around and bomb the hospitals. this is an outrage. the united states of america cannot afford to turn a blind eye to this humanitarian crisis. we must get involved. we must pay attention. the families, the children, the
people of syria deserve better than this. i want to thank mr. engel for the attention that he's paying to this issue and the way that he's trying to educate us and get us involved in saving those poor people who are being overrun, who are being killed by assad, and of course with the help of russia. i yield back the balance of my time can. -- i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i rise today to recognize the abc life center, a pregnancy certainty in franklin, pennsylvania. the life center offers pregnant women a wide variety of resources, including no-cost pregnancy tests, consultations for women with unexpected pregnancies, adoption referrals, counseling for women who have had a pregnancy end in miscarriage or abortion, and
more. the life center recognizes being pro-life means supporting all life. the center itself encourages women by legget them know their story, life, and baby's lives matter. the center also dispels the notion that to be pro-life is to be anti-choice. in fact, pregnancy centers such as life center offers a great deal of choices and resources to women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant. pregnancies centers like abc life center enurge and empower women around the country. i'm proud of the work they do every day to enrich the lives of women and children. together they help spread the message that life really is a better choice. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states. section 202-d of the national emergency act 50 u.s.c. 1622-d
provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless within 90 days before the anniversary date of its declaration, the president publishes in the federal register and transmits to the congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date accordance with this provision i have sent to the federal register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to the southern border of the united states declared in proclamation 9844 of february 15, 2019, is to continue in effect beyond february 15, 2020. the ongoing border security and humanitarian crisis at the southern border of the united states continues to threaten our national security. including the security of the american people. the executive branch has taken steps to address the crisis. further action is needed to address the humanitarian crisis and control unlawful migration and the flow of narcotics and
criminals across the southern border. for these reasons i have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in proclamation 98444 -- 9844 concerning the southern border of the united states. the white house, signed, donald john trump, the white house, february 13, 2020. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on armed services and ordered printed. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. again it's an honor to be able
stand in this haloed -- hallowed hall and address some of the things that have occurred, worthy of attention, and of course there was applause in the gallery today on the passage of trying to restart the e.r.a.. it's an amendment to the constitution and it was started ack in the 1970's, and the amendment to the constitution had a deadline as part of the amendment. and the amendment did not get the required 38 states. the time lapsed. there was, as i recall, attempt to extend the time, but some states that had been in favor
and so .r.a. backed off it's very clear to anyone who pays attention to the onstitution that when an amendment to the constitution by its own wording has a time deadline, and that deadline is past, then that amendment has not been ratified, is not part of the constitution and any efforts to change the amendment itself, including the deadline for ratification would require beginning again and there is no more iconic liberal judge on the supreme court, not i history, as former, as
recall, the american civil liberties union, was back when the american civil liberties union cared deeply about civil liberties and even took on some clients and some causes of people that most of us thought a lot of orthy of attention, but they were so committed to civil liberties back in those days, they were more concerned about civil liberties than they were the client. and that was in the old days. now if it's not a liberal, then they are not concerned about civil liberties and abuses since the obama administration was the administration that so far appears to be the most abusive
of the fisa courts committing fraud upon the fisa courts. but in fairness to the administration, it appears the fisa court judges did not have sufficient integrity or pride in their position that they were offended by having frauds committed upon them because apparently the disdain for donald trump, then president trump and his administration was such that it was ok -- they were ok to be defrauded as judges, which sure brings the issue of the fisa courts into focus as that issue will be taken up, as i understand it, issues over the patriot act and other provisions that give the federal government
tremendous latitude to spy on american citizens. so it's an interesting time, though, you never where judges are going to come down. if someone was appointed by a liberal judge, they appear to tay liberal, disdain for conservativism and strict language of the constitution, wanting it to be a liberal, living, breathing document. on the other hand, chief justice roberts has pointed out he doesn't believe there should be obama judges or trump judges or bush judges, because you can't characterize them that way. and to an extent he's right about that, because there are some justices particularly on
the supreme court that have been appointed by conservative presidents who were liberals in conservative clothing and got on the court and became some of the biggest flaming liberals we ever had. so you can't tell that was conservative if they are apointed by a conservative president but you can tell someone if they are appointed by a liberal president, they will stay liberal and not change. so it has been interesting. so it appears pretty clear some of these justices, including chief justice roberts, began to care deeply what the media and others thought about things they were doing. with obamacare, he was apparently from the reports
concerned that he might go down in history as being too political as a chief justice if he struck down obamacare. and so, he took something that as clearly unconstitutional, rewrote, in effect, rewrote it, and had a very hypocritical opinion, page 14, i believe it was, he said clearly this is not he -- a tax, because if it were a tax, congress would have called it. only a penalty or fine if you don't conform your conduct to the legislation and therefore it's not a tax. nd since it's not a tax, any injunction law that prevents a
plaintiff from filing suit until the tax is assessed and keeps the court jurisdiction to hear it until the tax is assessed, that doesn't apply and now the court can take it up and 40 pages later, he said it is constitutional in effect because it's a tax. e had to go through mental gymnastics to prevent him from being classified as a political chief justice and he is one of the most political chief justices we have ever had, unfortunate for him and the country. who knows maybe there will be people on the supreme court that will decide to rewrite the constitution as he in effect rewrote the obamacare statute. but if you are actually going to follow the constitution the way
it's written and not going to rewrite the constitution at the supreme court level, then the truth is when an amendment fails by its own language and is not ratified, then anybody with any sense would understand, you have to start over. have plentyhy we'll of disagreements with justice ginsburg over some issues. she's tried to be a person of integrity and she says i would like to see a new beginning, talking about the e.r.a. i would like it to start over. there's too much controversy about late comers. virginia long after the deadline past and a number of states withdrawn their ratifications and if you count a late comer on the plus side, how can you
disregard the states that said e changed our minds? this legislation passed, jim sensenbrenner from wisconsin, appropriately brought up the point that this is actually amending the constitution. it's amending the constitutional amendment. so to be appropriate, it's going to require 2/3 vote in the house, 2/3 vote in the senate and then 38 states i believe it is, in order to have it ratified. that was overruled to reinforce the fact that what we did today is really not constitutional. if we tried to ratify it as a new amendment, like justice ginsburg is talking about, a new constitutional amendment, then just y you would as
ginsburg said have to start the process all over again and that here equire 2/3 of a vote and the senate. so what we did today made people feel good that support it. but it's not going anywhere. and if it were, even if it were pothetically, it just simply can't pass constitutional muster at the supreme court. majority of the court appears to believe that the constitution means what it says and therefore we had one vote today that was on the e.r.a.. so we didn't do anything terribly effective today as the house of representatives. also, i noted before i came over for a vote that apparently
chairman of the judiciary committee has reported -- i don't know if either members of the majority signed the letter, but a letter to attorney general barr and it expressed what sounded like the distress of the ommittee over attorney general barr's action in reining prosecutors who have simply gotten out of hand. attorney general barr has the distinct advantage of having a bigger picture than these four very politically motivated prosecutors that were pushing so hard for virtually maximum amount of time for roger stone
to serve in prison. and any way, if that letter was going to be truly accurate, it needed to say that this majority that's been trying to throw president trump out of office, been using taxpayer funds for a number of years now to try to defeat president trump in the 2020 election, which voted for impeachment, knowing that president trump was not going to be removed from office. so it would seem the logical conclusion is, again, using taxpayer funds to campaign against president trump hoping they could besmemp him sufficiently and slander him efficiently to help defeat him in november. whereas the minority of the
committee did not agree with the letter because it appears clear to all the minority i have talked to that attorney general barr is trying to do something and incorporate something called fairness in our legal system. because he has seen -- you had people in the previous administration that strong-armed gun sales or sales people into selling guns to people that they knew should not have them. and that they would end up in the hands of most likely mexican drug cartels. and that's what the administration wanted to do. they were assuring they would be able to follow the guns and intercede, but that's not what happened and we even saw emails
that after this was all exposed, an idea, that gee, maybe we can still use the fact that these guns went into criminal hands and even killed one of our own ited states' agents, brian terry, they were hopeful they could use that to get anti-gun legislation passed simply based on their criminal activity in trying to get these guns into the hands of criminals that shouldn't have them. so nobody was held accountable for that. nobody was held accountable for the guns that were forced into the hands of criminals ultimately one of which killed brian terry and nobody is held accountable for that. nobody was held accountable for
destroying evidence after it was subpoenaed even with a hammer, even with applications like bleach bit destroying subpoenaed evidence. nobody was held accountable for any of that. so across the nation, it appears maybe a small majority, but a majority understand and believe that there is two forms of justice in america. one for those high ranking democratic officials who were never held accountable at all and one for republicans whose lives are attempted to be destroyed and in some cases destroyed. some cases they did nothing wrong and other cases they agreed to plead to something
just because the bully federal prosecutors had threatened to go after their family and continue to that rass them. former member of congress from pennsylvania who had been blasting the f.b.i. 2005,uring my first term, 2006 and blasting them because and i didn't hear of it at the time, a program called able danger had been able to identify a majority of the 9/11 hijackers, the f.b.i. had that information and did nothing with it. w i didn't know kurt weldon, member from pennsylvania was ccurate but hearing him making
speeches, that the f.b.i. should have acted and prevented lives ing taken and those people taken their lives if the f.b.i. had stepped in and used the information they had to stop 9/11. i didn't know if that was true or not. . they have to respond to this, this is really serious stuff. i thought they would make a statement, they would come back with evidence to refute what he was saying. but they never did that. what mueller's f.b.i. did, though, had to be with his approval, going after a member of congress, it was believed they got a warrant because they raided his daughter's law office, they alerted the media for the early morning raid, so
it is plenty of media there -- so there was plenty of media there. plenty of media at his congressional office when people apparently were warned in advance by the f.b.i., because nobody else knew. they showed up with preprinted signs condemning curt weldon, caught red-handed, all this stuff. and it turned out there was nothing ever done. he told me that months later he was contacted by the f.b.i. and told, you can come get all this material we seized in the raid, but they did the raid two weeks before the election, as i recall. about two weeks before the election. and so the f.b.i. under mueller was able to single-handedly the curt weldon, help democrat opponent to defeat curt weldon. in a narrow loss he had. so the f.b.i. didn't respond with evidence, they just helped manipulate the election system
so curt weldon would lose. he did. and he said, they told him, come pick up all this stuff, we never did it present -- did present it to a grand jury anyway. that was kind of shocking. so clearly mueller and his f.b.i. was motivated by shutting him up, so he couldn't make speeches on the house floor anymore. and that's why the raid was conducted. but in this last most recent visit, curt was telling me that -- by the way, before i wrote about curt weldon, i had not seen him, nor talked about him well, ed with him for -- since 2006 when he left. i put that in the booklet i wrote about robert mueller unmasked. is what i titled it. and i wrote about what happened to curt. but this most recent visit this year, he told me that, as he
understands, turns out the f.b.i. never even got a warrant. hey just raided the office without a warrant. like any good dictator would have the -- have, the brown shirts -- would have the brown shirts law enforcement do. we don't need no stinking warrant, we'll just go harass and destroy. so that was really shocking. if there wasn't even a warrant. but mueller was irritated apparently with ted stevens so f.b.i. framed ted stevens and it turned out after he was convicted, right before his election, he lost narrowly, as a u.s. senator -- election he lost narrowly as a u.s. senator, an f.b.i. agent filed an affidavit and established how they had
created a case against ted stevens that didn't exist. actually ted stevens had overpaid for improvements to his home. it wasn't an illegal gift. he had overpaid. at one point telling the contractor, look, i know i'm overpaying, but i got people watching, i have to do everything by the book. o just cash the check. that kind of thing. but mueller and the f.b.i. helped defeat ted stevens by convicting him right before his election. but then that conviction was thrown out due to the prosecutorial misconduct. and i would say crimes committed by at least the f.b.i., one f.b.i. agent, if not more, and also by prosecutors. they should have gone to the president for what they did -- prison for what they did. but i can't help but think that between what the f.b.i. did to
curt weldon, what they did to ted stevens, what they've done to other people with whom they disagree, that it's become -- it had become a very dangerous in the re if you were right political persuasion or took the right positions on the right issues, then you could commit crimes and the f.b.i. and if you you alone were of the wrong political positions on the wrong issues, they would come after you, even if they had to frame you or set you up as they did ted stevens, and destroying curt weldon's political career. so we're at a very dangerous time in this country's history. it used to be the f.b.i. had the eputation that it was the most trustworthy, effective law enforcement agency, body, in the
world. but that has changed and unfortunately we have an f.b.i. director, article said at one time back in the bush administration he had told james comey, who has lied -- he's obviously committed crimes, we can debate about how high or low a level. but he told comey, look, if you and mueller are going to make a move, i want to be with you guys, i want to go where you're going when you're going. well, that guy that thought so was y of mueller and comey put in a place he never should have been and that is f.b.i. director at a time it needed cleaning up. so i'm hopeful in the days, weeks or months ahead, we'll get a new f.b.i. directer who will be -- director who will be serious about punishing wrongdoing in the f.b.i., which i believe will help them get back the reputation -- their
reputation. although the most christopher wray appears to do more covering up than he does making to untable, he really needs go sooner rather than later. and they are not going to get their reputation back simply by ignoring things. and of course the fisa court pointed out in an order after going for years without having any pride or integrity, enforcing their jurisdiction and being oifended by -- offended by fraud upon the court, they finally came out and said, ok this one guy, cline smith had changed the wording, basically going from saying he did work for the u.s. government or the c.i.a. to saying he did not. so clearly 180 degrees opposite of what the truth was. knowing it was false.
submitted to the court. but that had been clear for months, if not years. and the courts did nothing. it's what keeps compelling me to think, maybe we just need to get rid of the fisa court system and come up with a new way. because i'm not sure what the court, with the judges that have been appointed to be fisa judges, that we can save the system. that americans can feel comfortable that their privacy, their civil rights will not or are not being violated by an overzealous group. especially when you look at the thousands and thousands of fisa orders. think there was -- in 2018, seemed like there was only one out of mass applications for warrants from the fisa court, i
think there was only one they turned down. and some said, well, maybe if we have an amicus, a friend of the court who will stand up for the party against whom a warrant is sought, maybe that would help provide enough protection for american civil liberties. but then we saw in december, i believe it was, fisa court feeling the heat of all those who have come to distrust fisa courts appointed an amicus. and it turned out the judge appointed the very lawyer that for years had been trashing devin nunes and others who turns -- who it turns out now were 100% right in the things they said in their report.
so it appeared clear the fisa court was not serious about making fixes or changes or protecting civil liberties, but also had gone into the christopher wray mode of covering up, hoping people wouldn't notice so much illegality and impropriety had been going on. so we're going to be taking up these issues, the controversial section 215 from the patriot act, and other things. hopefully we'll take up the fisa court. i'm hopeful that we will have bipartisan action. because i know, from my time on the judiciary committee, there have been democrats, previously chairman nadler had been a staunch proponent of protecting civil liberties, but that onlyrs to be more nowadays protecting civil liberties if you're a democrat, but not so
much if you're part of the trump administration or a friend of the president. so hopefully we can get past some of that and do some good. and actually do the job of protecting civil liberties. i know i've talked to congresswoman zoe lofgren over the years, and including more recently, because she in the past has been quite zealous for civil liberties. and i understand she has a bill, hopefully that will be helpful in dealing with some of these issues, but i'm still concerned that the abuses may have grown so profound that we may not be able to fix the fisa court system, we may need to do as some, i think rand paul, has talked about, just getting rid of it, but we will see where we go. duality same kind of
justice or dual justice has raised its ugly head in the u.s. attorney's office for the district of columbia. jesse lu was the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia and -- jessie lu was the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia and she had some people who it turns out were extremely partisan. nd in fact in a case involving a man who was an i.t. technician here, involved with working with of uters for dozens democrats on capitol hill. , since 2004, had worked,
like i say, for dozens of democratic representatives and it's one of the things up here on the hill, if a member of congress tells you, oh, this is my computer person, he's great, she's great, then others say, oh, well, i need somebody. so i will hire them and normally somebody that does that, since you don't need them full time, they work part time, and under the rules they're allowed to work for multiple offices. as long as their income does not exceed the maximum amount allowed. i think it is around $170,000 or something like that, but you can work for multiple offices and accumulate up to that maximum and you can have multiple part-time employees. emranparently that's what
did. he had a brother. and if you do that kind of work, you have to file financial information, financial statement information, and turns out he didn't disclose about selling cars, some of the assets or business he had. and that is a felony, federal felony. but he also had filed, understand the requirements here, if you buy something -- under the requirements here, if you buy something, i think it's $500 or more, you have to have the serial number, you have to keep track of it, you have to be able to document where that item is at all times, if it cost more than $500. ,hen i came into office in 2005 there was some couch that was on my inventory, nobody had seen the couch in many years, but i was told, you can't take it off your inventory because, you
know, it's part of your office. . if it had cost less than $500 that would not have been an issue. don't know where that couch was, is, wasn't around here. to get around the requirement of keeping track of things that he purchased allegedly on behalf of congress members for whom he thatd, he would list ipads $499 and thatting an insurance policy for it and got around the information as to where those specific items were. it turns out from what i have
read, appears he and his brother owed six figures to somebody, foreign, i believe, and so instead of paying the person back, they put this guy who was not a computer technician, just had various members apparently told them, this guy is going to help with your computer system, so we need to put him on part-time for your office. and had the federal taxpayers .aying their debt to this guy turns out he had two wives and one was saying he had tremendous amount of money. he's from pakistan. when he goes back, he is treated like a king by the secret police there. but he is constantly sending all
kinds of computer equipment back national. , pakistan and any way, he had some ties with some very questionable people. sounds lying maybe the fisa court should have been issuing warrants to look at some of his stuff. he was arrested in july of 2017 over his alleged involvement and double charging house democratic -- house i.t. equipment and possibly exposing information online. found more than tens of thousands of dollars in computer technical equipment had been stolen. and indicted for quote conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud, making false
statements on a loan and credit application and engaging in unlawful monetary transactions, unquote. a cousinrecall, he had that worked at mcdonald's and got him listed on the payroll for different house members. i'm sure they didn't know that he wasn't working. but any way, helped out the family by bringing in extra income for family members. each one of those events would have been a federal felony. but evidence indicating that enron were copying computers from democratic house members to the house democratic caucus server and private dropped box accounts. totally inappropriate.
absolute wrongdoing. he and his associates were tossed off the house computer system because they provided false information to capitol police, being a fake copy of the democratic caucus' server. but none of that was used by jessie liu's attorneys against him. instead, u.s. attorney's office for district of columbia opted to let him plead to a charge of just making a false statement on a loan application disregarding the many, many felonies that could have been charged and pursued and just find out why are you such a hero back in pakistan?
what equipment are you sending back there? where are you getting it from? how come you didn't list your car dealership because our intelligence people will tell you, one of the ways money is raised for terrorist activity is through bogus car dealerships where cars are stolen and shipped. we don't know what the situation was with his alleged car dealership because he didn't have a dealer license. but it is handy, though, no matter who you are if you can have taxpayers pay back your loans by just listing them on the payroll of people you lied about whose doing the work. the problem, though, if jessie liu and these democratic
attorneys in the d.c. attorney's office had pursued him other than making a false statement on his loan, there would have been a lot of embarrassment to democratic members of congress because they had something like that cheating taxpayers, cheating the government, committing crimes, working for him. but in fairness, hard to believe they would have known the things he was doing and getting away with. federal judge he enced him -- oh, and filed saying he was broke and had no money. one of his wibes who was threatened, she said she was threatened by f.b.i. to keep her mouth shut, but she had indicated he had all kinds of money, he had gold, all kinds of
money he had been able to save while working for all these different members of congress but he said he was broke. he filed something saying he was broke, couldn't pay anything. but then when it came down to, in order to get probation, he had to pay back six figures to the government, magicically, he came up with it, paid it, even though he alleged he was flat broke. so when we hear about four federal prosecutors that worked for u.s. attorney of d.c., jessie liu being upset over the department of justice wanting fairness for roger stone and not political vengeance, all four of them quit. and in analyzing who it is and
what they were doing and why they quit, i think it is important to see who they are. and there have been some good articles written about these people just in the last week. jonathan kravitz appointed by president obama to be associate white house counsel where he served 2009 to 2010 and worked or a lobbying firm which kravitz worked and had a long history of employees donating to democratic candidates and causes. worked with adam jed to prosecute paul man forth and went after him. manafort was cleared of all charges except conspiracy to
defraud the u.s., which he is serving a five-year sentence. he and his wife are associated with code pink which is a far left. nd adam jed himself he apparently did work in 2002 or 2003 or fellow at the humanity in action group, a far-left-wing organization, blatantly against political diversity. affordable care act contraceptive mandate in the case little sisters of the poor versus sebelius and the federal government was going after these nuns who took a vow of poverty, but also a vow to help people and they believed it was against
their religion to help pay for abortions. nd mr. jed had no problem in pursuing these poor nuns. that's his choice. but it does give an indication of where he stood and it's certainly not anywhere close to the beliefs on donald trump. but adam jed presented oral arguments to prevent the defense of marriage act in the defense of marriage act versus windsor. he contributed $1,000 to just cause candidacy for wisconsin state attorney general. he was a lawyer for perkins cooley, whichp funneled money to christopher steele who was the
british spy who apparently utilized other foreigners to try effect the u.s. election in 2016. so, you know, adam jed would perkins supporting cooley and don't hear about it from the other side of the aisle, but the hillary clinton campaign, the d.n.c. actually paid foreigners to try to effect our 20616 election and i constantly hear about how outrageous it was that the now debunked allegations that the trump cam spain conspired with russia to effect our election, they don't want to what was slam dunked proved that the d.n.c.
did pay foreigners to try to effect our electric. one foreigner from italy was involved. one from australia. and i know people like to say that there were no ukranians involved that's totally debunked, but the fact that russia has tried to affect our election, china, does not mutually exclude the fact that there were ukranians that tried o affect our 2016 election and exhibit a would be you had the ambassador ukraine to the u.s. write an op ed trying to prevent donald trump from being president. that is foreign interference with an election. i don't know where they are going that stuff. the only russian propaganda that
has been the most effective is propaganda from russia that want to divide america and they have dividingrvelous job at america. one of the other attorneys who attorney general barr wanting to pull their fangs back in and not try to be so vengful simply because roger stone was a friend of the president, no indication president had hired him to do anything, but they sure went after him because of the connection. but michael morando. he's the guy that let the guy with all of this activity without proper investigation. and in fact, there was an
inspector general here, she ended up being president of some international technology organization. she was amazing. she had all kinds of evidence to en e felony cases against ron, but representatives from the u.s. attorney's office, i don't know if it was michael morando himself, the f.b.i. working, they ended up threatening her, don't you bring your notebook and then later reported, we interviewed her and she didn't have anything. when you are ordered not to bring anything. that is michael morando.
i don't know how you can find any other basis other than his political motivation. but he didn't pursue any of these other charges and the question still exists, as i understand, there was a lawsuit filed and appears his intention is trying to get back on the gravy train where he was here on capitol hill and getting people to sign him up. people got burned and probably hard for him to do. but a a lawsuit, that means discovery's in order and i'm hopeful that discovery will bring out all the lies and the crimes that it sure appears he's committed. but no thanks to michael mirando. he certainly didn't do anything that would have hurt democrats on capitol hill. but went out of his way to want
. destroy roger stone aaron zalinski started his career as a special assistant to koh who was in the state department's legal advisor in the obama administration. but he's also clerk for what i felt like is one of the most liberal judges ever, supreme court justice john paul stevens. but he played a key role in obtaining a guilty plea from a guy that was an advisor at one time, papadopoulos. this poor guy, he didn't have money when the f.b.i. and the d.c. attorney -- u.s. attorney's office came after him, mueller people -- he didn't have money to fight. he was being overwhelmed. they threatened and intimidated
him enough into his agreeing to lead guilty to a minor charge. but slinsky was hand-pickedmy -- zielinski was hand-picked by mueller are he was -- when he was finding people who hated trump. before joining the mueller team, slakinsky -- sla listenky worked for -- did he listenky worked for rod rosenstein. anyway. these people certainly had a lot of political baggage. they were clearly on a vendetta. they weren't pursuing justice. they were pursuing political vendettas. trying to get at president trump. there are tens of millions of dollars that were spent investigating what we now know is a russia hoax.
there was no collusion or conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. despite what people are trying to allude to now. there wasn't. the evidence wasn't there. mueller was disappointed, weissmann was disappointed. all of these left-wingers were disappointed that despite all the intimidation, all of the threats, they couldn't find somebody that could actually implicate any kind of collusion or conspiracy between the trump campaign and russia. but on roger stone's sentencing, you know, he was convicted, one of the charges was witness tampering. it sure sounds like he was kidding around by saying, hey, i may have to come over and kill your dog. i mean, who says that if they're not kidding? that's not all that of an effective of a threat.
but when you have a judge that can't stand the trump administration and you have a juror who gets on -- i'd really like to know what kind of questions the jury was asked . ring voir deer if roger stone's attorney or attorneys did not ask the jury panel about their feelings about donald trump, then it sure sounds like that would have been malpractice and roger should have a great case against his own lawyers. plus a great case on appeal for their impro pryity as his attorney -- impropriety as his attorneys. i feend it hard to believe they -- i find it hard to believe they wouldn't ask something about that. because there's clearly some type of trump derangement system. some very smart, well-balanced
people get so angry and frustrated over president donald trump that they don't think as straight as they normally would. but to have the foreperson of the jury, the head juror, who controls the discussions, shut people down, encourage other people to speak, the head foreperson hates donald trump, and so anyway. t's amazing the efforts that the department of justice, at least the u.s. attorney's office had, gone to to become a tool for injustice. they wanted to max this guy out. -- i mean, the poor guy unbelievable. i've sent people to prison for life. i've sent people to prison for
10 years, nine years. i've had to look people in the eye and order them taken to the texas department of criminal ustice and put to death. those are serious matters and you simply cannot let any type of vengeance or political persuasion affect you. i know in east texas, we got assistant u.s. attorneys, they vote democrat. but when it comes to enforcing the law, they enforce the law. they don't care what party you are. and it's just so tragic that right here at our nation's capital, in our own justice department, our own d.c. u.s. attorney's office, you have people that are not nearly as just and fair as you find all ver the country in most u.s.
attorney offices. another issue of the local d.c. u.s. attorney's office was a guy named james wolff. he was indicted by a federal grand jury on three counts of olating title 18, u.s. code, 10001. at the time he made the alleged false statements to the f.b.i., james wolff was director of security for the senate select committee on intelligence. and that was a position he had held for about 29 years. as the senate select committee on intelligence director of security, james wolff was entrusted with access to classified secret and top secret , including the u.s. intelligence committee that they provided to the senate intel committee.
wolfe was alleged to have lied to f.b.i. investigators about repeated contacts with three reporters, including through his use of encrypted messaging applications. he's further alleged to have made false statements to the f.b.i. about providing two reporters with nonpublic information related to the matters occurring before the senate intelligence committee. he was sentenced to two months in prison, four months supervised release for lying the to the f.b.i. he's got a complete -- he's got to complete 20 hours of community service, 20 hours a month during his release for those four months. and pay a $7,500 fine. you compare what he did with what roger stone did, roger stone wasn't dealing with any
classified information, secret or top secret. he used some bad judgment but jessie lu, attorney, these four that have now quit, thank god they quit, we need to get some people in there where, when it comes to prosecuting, it doesn't matter what the defendant's political persuasion is. you seek justice and there are democrats and republicans, attorneys, prosecutors, around the country that are quite capable of doing that. so i sure hope that we will get some better attorneys in the d.c. u.s. attorney's office. it's amazing, i thought about sergeant york, that movie, i believe gary cooper played sergeant york. and they were in the trenches and they couldn't see the bad
guys to stop them. and so he ends up using a turkey call that he used back when he and unan -- ting one after another, enemy soldiers would stick their heads up and he was able to knock them off and then eventually capture this huge group. but in order to prevail, they had to get them to stick their heads up. and i think that's what this trump derangement syndrome has done. here are people that have been working per vasively and apparently with political vendettas, but they've been able to stay below the radar and along comes president trump and they go get so deranged they expose who they are. so, i want to thank all of those political opportunists and
zealots who use their position in the u.s. government, including justice department, who have now exposed themselves. eventman is one of those people is one of those people that has exposed his animosity. it's good he's no longer part of the national security council. it's good his brother is no longer in the general counsel's office. i think we'll see less leaks now that he is gone. and so anyway. we're starting to see those people that have exposed themselves as political operatives rather than doing justice or following the orders of their commander in chief. we're seeing them exposed, we're seeing them moved out. and i'm hoping in the days ahead there will be a lot more of that occur. i think justice will be served better and so the american people can feel more like -- not one party or another, but people
need to be able to feel as a whole that regardless of the political persuasion of some prosecutor, that justice is being pursued and done, as it is being in so many federal districts all over the country. it's been a problem here in washington, d.c. when that happens, we'll all be better off. and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. flores, for 30 minutes. mr. flores: madam speaker, i request unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. flores: madam speaker, i rise today to honor dr. steven a. holdage of college station texas, who passed away --
station, texas, who passed away unexpectedly on august 9, 2019. before i continue our discussion about steve, i want to give some context about the importance of his professional career. let me state first that steve considered his roles as a husband, a father and a grandfather to be his most important. because of the exceptional way that he lived those roles, his legacy is readily apparent in the lives of those he left behind. his wife, anne, his daughter, katie and abby, and their five grandchildren. the discussion of his professional accomplishments starts with a description of current energy metrics. today the united states of america is blessed to be the number one producer of oil and gas in the world. and as of this year, we're a net exporter of oil and natural gas. reserves of american oil and natural gas rank us among the top 10 countries in the world. we also lead the industrialized world in the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions over the last two decades.
10 years ago no one would have ever predicted that we'd be where we are today. this new world of american energy dominance is having dramatic implications, both domestically and internationally. we have secure, stable, environmentally responsible and attractively priced energy sources for american families and businesses. we have become a reliable source of energy for our allies, giving them flexibility to move away from unstable russia and middle eastern energy suppliers. the oil and gas sector of our economy has created millions of good jobs and great paycheckses for hardworking americans. . this dramatic renaissance didn't happen by accident or because of government. it is because of american ingenuity, bold research and leadership. one person that is solely number le there are a
of bold leaders that looked at he problem probably in reservoirs. development studies and field experiments using horizontal drilling, revolutionized american oil and natural gas. one of those bold leaders was the late george p. mitchell. another is a person that we are onoring today, dr. steven a. .oldich steve and his family moved. he spent most of his childhood in san antonio before moving to richardson, texas for his final year of high school where he graduated in 1965.
following graduation, steve attended texas a&m university. steve quickly exceled both in academics and in the corps of cadets. he was a member of company f-1 and ross volunteers honor guard and the ross firing squad. during his senior year, he was second battalion commander. in 1969, steve graduated from a&m with a bachelor's degree in petroleum engineering. steve began his career with shell oil company in houston, texas. much of his work over his five years at shell was designing and pumping large high dahlic treatments to get from the geo pressure gas reservoirs in south texas. his work that inspired him to
return to texas a&m and set him apart as a true legend in the oil and gas industry for the advancement of this pretty important technology. one day in 19 0, steve was riding the elevator at work and met ann who was also working at shell. they were married six months later and they had been married for over 48 years when he passed away. he and ann returned to college station and pursued a phd. texas a&me joined the petroleum technology. he started his own consulting company. s.a. holdich became a power house in the petroleum engineering space. he earned a reputation for being able to solve the most difficult
etroleum engineering problems. he was distinctly proud of the work that he did along side the gas research institute to advance understandable of shales and methane. after 20 years of success, steve chose to sell his company where he stayed on as a fellow, the highest technical designation in that organization. as a fellow for five year, he traveled extensively to help solve some of the world's most difficult petroleum engineering problems. in 1995 at age 49, steve was legitimated to the national academy of engineering, the highest honor that can be given to an engineer. after many years of service to the society of petroleum engineers, steve was legitimated to the board of directors, then
vice president of finance and timely president of this global organization with over 70,000 members. he was awarded almost every recognition that s.b.e. has to give, including three of the society's top awards and elected as an honorary member in 2006, the highest award that s.b.e. can bestow on eaning individual and named a legend of hydraulic fracturing by s.b.e. in 2014. while he enjoyed successes, many of his greatest accomplishments were at texas a&m. during his tenure, he taught 97 courses and served on over 150 graduate committees. rom 2004-2012 he was worked as the head of the department of petroleum engineering and saw a
number of students in the department more than double. under his leadership, the department quickly earned a reputation as the number one ranked petroleum engineering department in the world. during this time ta he created a second legacy for america's hydrocarbon industry. the thousands of engineers who worked around the world every day utilizing steve's teaching and mentoring to solve the world's greatest energy challenges. their work like george p. mitchell along with steve have contributed significantly to america's energy dominance that is changing the world today. in 2013, steve retired from the faculty after many years of dedicated service. throughout his life, steve credited the university from which his success grew. he praised the value and in 2014
as named a texas a&m distinguished alum news for a life of service and devotion to his beloved university. and steve said you will look back at your years at texas a&m as one of the best of your life and remember the code of honor. in 2016, he was inducted into the corps of cadets hall of honor that made him prouder and happier than any award he received in his life. time etiring he enjoyed at brown college station with his wife, two daughters and five grandchildren, steve continued to support texas a&m. steve contributed a great deal to the community and can be described as a model he was true
to leadership, loyalty respect and selfless service. one of my favorite phrases that steve used, i reserve the right to get smarter. that is what he did best, always pushing to find solutions. madam speaker, steve's life was defined by his dedication to his family and friends, his world changing accomplishments in energy and true love of texas a&m university. he will be remembered as a true pioneer, a devoted husband, father, grandfather, a teacher, mentor and a friend. my father has a saying, go make a hand. steve made a hand for his family, his university, his community. our country and our world. my wife jean and i offer our deepest condolences to his family and live up to family and
friends of steve in our prayers. i requested the united states flag be flown over our nation's apitol to honor the life and legacy of dr. holdich. continue praying for our country, for our military men and women who protect us from threats abroad and first responders who keep us safe here at home. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the chair reck nyes the gentleman from arizona, -- recognizes the gentleman from arizona, mr. schweikert. mr. schweikert: in past years when i sat up here it was because the speaker was annoyed. i'm sure. you don't have to say a thing. madam speaker, i try to come to
the floor every week and sort of talk about what we see actually happening in the economy, what is happening in jobs and those things, but more of a global discussion and part of that discussion is we see the stories, we know the facts, we are about to be buried in a debt tsunami. and it's not republican or democrat, it's demographics. 74 million of us who are baby boomers. 74 million. is ay turning 65 and it such a difficult subject around here because the fact of the matter is if you use medicare or social security when you are trying to protect those programs. and our modern politics of rage, you just wrote an attack ad saying well, he talked about medicare. he must be meaning to do something.
that's absurd. if we stop talking, we are not going to save them. here's the thought experiment, next five years, just the growth of social security, medicare, health entitlements, just that equals the entire defense department. i was here last week showing hat almost all the 30-year debt, almost every dime of it is just social security and medicare. it's demographics. and my passion is, i believe there's a way we keep our promises. by using a calculator and economic modeling, using the tools we have around us. the problem is in this body, it's complex. our ability to do simple things the last year have been incredibly heartbreaking because
everything is about political gamesmanship and trying to get the lead instead of dealing with the reality. we put up this slide almost every time i come speak and if you can grow the economy through tax policy, smart regulation, population stability, getting the immigration system, the sruption of health care, incentives to stay in the labor force. we are having a miracle right now of the number of our brothers and sisters who are in the labor force and moving into the labor force. last friday, the number of folks who moved from not even looking that entered the labor force was stunning. i know that's geeky, but it's really, really, really
important. i sat on the joint economic committee for years. and three, four years ago, we had smart economists telling us that labor force participation was going to crash. this was impossible. it's here. these types of wage gains -- as you know, we had to recalculate the productivity numbers which turned out to be much higher 2019. how do we take what is working right now and expand those concepts so we hit a level of economic stability and growth that gives us a fighting chance not to be buried in debt? and how does that become a partisan rage around here? i accept my brothers and sisters on the left live in an economic folklore of well, we'll tax rich people and that will take care of it. and my brothers and sisters on
the republican side we will get behind microphones and say it's waste and fraud. none of those are true. just for once try to tell the truth about the math. the mathis stunningly ugly. simple concept and even last week i think i brought this board here, if you take the next 30 years and you pull social security and medicare out. and i have a four-year-old, i would like her to have the same type of future that i got to experience in my life. if i strip social security and medicare out next 30 years, we have $23 trillion if in the bank. not inflation adjusted. if i pull it back into that $23 r window, we are trillion in debt and do constant dollars, drop the number by a
third. you cannot be intellectually credible honest walking behind these microphones saying you are going to protect social security and medicare and then not talk about the actual math because i think there is a way we keep our promises. it just means we have to do everything. . so one of the first things i want to walk through today is a concept, and i'm desperately trying to sell and have this sort of become intellectually sort of socialized. the a.c.a., obamacare, if you really strip it down, what was it? it was a financing bill. take it down to its most basic. this is hard for a lot of us to accept. but it was who got subsidized and who had to pay. our republican alternative, if you really strip it down, what was it? it was a financing bill. it's who got to pay and who got subsidized.
we almost never have an honest argument around here of what to do to crash the price of health care. we have lots of discussions of little incremental changes. those incremental changes are important. whether it be h.s.a.'s, whether it be disclosures of cost and these things. wonderful. but they're dishonest when you start to understand the scale, the scale of what's coming at us. back to that five years. make it 10 years. just the growth of social security, mostly medicare, health care entitlements, equals the entire discretionary budget. just the growth portion. so what do you do to disrupt the cost of health care? and my argument is, we need to legalize technology. i'm not going to show it today. but in the past i've come here
and shown that we now have the technology, it's in its final stages of hopefully being perfected, looks like a big kazoo. you blow into it and it instantly tells you if you have the flu it. can bang off the medical record on your phone, instantly order your anti-virals. the algorithm we know right now is incredibly ac rate. except that technology is -- accurate. except that technology sill legal in today's construct. think of that. so how do you disrupt health care prices? one, i'm going to take us to a little bit different. did you know that almost a half a trillion a year, actually, over a half a trillion a year, 16% of our entire health care cost is just people not following the rules for their pharmaceuticals. they don't take their hypertension medicine, they take too much of this, they don't take this. that's an adherence problem. 16% of our entire health care
costs is the failure to follow your pharmaceutical protocols. that's not a drug pricing, that's not a prescription pricing, that's not a p.b.m. or benefit, that's just you and i as americans, we're not following the rules for the pharmaceuticals we have. well, it turns out the fastest thing you and i could do to actually have an immediate popdown in the price of health care is actually change pharmaceutical adherence. it turns out we have technology for that. and here's the thought experiment. we have pill bottle tops that tell you when you opened it up or if you didn't open it up and it will ping you. so we know right now the adherence of taking your hypertension medicine with is one of the most powerful things we can do. to actually crash the price of health care. but you got to take it. how many of us forget? the fact of the matter is, for a
few dollars we could issue that pill bottle with a cap that starts pinging your phone, pinging your family, pinging whoever the hell you want to ping that you didn't follow the rules. we've brought the display here before. it looks like a little dome. it actually distributes pharmaceuticals into a cup so if you're my grandmother, rest her soul, and you have a couple pills you take in the morning, one for digestion at lunch and a couple before you go to bed, it actually will distribute those in the proper time, the proper amounts, and then tell you, remind you, remind the family if that little cup with the pharmaceuticals hasn't been touched. turns out it's a technology solution. and it's a half a trillion a year issue. yeah, it's a little hard to explain. but it's 16% of our health care costs, just not taking our pharmaceuticals properly. why can't -- is this republican
or democrat? it's just what we are. and the fact of the matter is, a bunch of really creative entrepreneurs, these small disruptive tech companies are coming up with the solution, how do we make that part of what we're trying to move forward? how do you make it reimbursable? how do you actually take medicare part d and say, instead of the rules right now where someone's supposed to be trying to call, actually widen up that definition so they could also be providing the technology to make sure someone's taking those pharmaceuticals in the proper fashion. i'm begging this place to open up our minds and think a bit more creatively of what do we do to disrupt the price of health care because, remember that 30-year debt curve? it's mostly health care. and, guess what, technology is about to help us disrupt it if we could just make that technology legal, reimbursable, part of our plan. we can do some amazing things.
and actually in this hyperpartisan environment, this technology hasn't been made republican or democrat yet. i'm sure we'll find a way. what will happen is one of the corporate executives will write someone a check and will decide they're all left or right and we'll albeit the crap out of each other. but right now this is an actual solution. there's other really amazing disruptions coming and i think this one may have been shown at the consumer electronics show. and i'm not even sure i understand all the things it does, but this in many ways is a doctor visit in your pocket. it does about a dozen different things where it can actually do a number of different tests and it's in your medicine cabinet. how do we encourage this type of technology? because day after day we will have individuals coming to us and saying, we have a crisis in the united states. we don't have enough primary care physicians.
they're absolutely right. so how do we help those primary care professionals by saying, we can have some technology where it's the type of thing where you can blow into it, you can prick your finger or it can do this, this, this, this, and it's incredibly accurate. and it's available to you instantly because it's in your own home medicine cabinet. let me give you one -- what would happen if you could have a jor, highly accurate disease detection technology and it doesn't have to be in your medicine cabinet, it could be at your local c.v.s. pharmacy? turns out this technology looks like it's been perfected. your lungs throw off -- if i get my -- forgive me, i'm going to try to get my technology right. your lungs actually become part of your body that your blood circulates completely through, i think, every couple of minutes.
your breath actually has thrown off proteins and other things that can be detected. we know, i showed this a couple months ago, some researchers that actually are working on an extension, that flu kazoo, that can pick up 20 different types of dead cancer protein and let you know you have them. turns out this technology actually now exists today and the ability of it to actually look for dozens of different types of ailments, a number of different types of cancers, and what do you is you just breathe into it for a couple minutes. why aren't we running as fast as we can to make this part of our community? we talk about access to care, the fact of the matter is that supercomputer you hold in your pocket you call your phone, it's algorithm, tied in with these types of sensors, whether it be the oxygen serns i played with last year, i'm a severe
asthmatic, we just played with it, and it was helping me dial up, for the most part dial down my inhaled steroids. technically it was illegal because it's prescribing to me and hadn't been approved. to that flu kazoo i just described to you that's unreimbursable and ultimately illegal because the algorithm is writing a prescription, to something like this that can do a stunning number of dying not ticks if you're just willing to breathe -- diagnostics if you're just willing to breathe into it for 10 minutes. the miracle is here. is this republican or democrat? it's neither. it's the future. but in so many ways, congress has become the barrier, stopping, holding back the technology disruptions that actually could help us crash the price. and instead we seem so much more comfortable having debates about, well, who should get subs diedsed, who should be financed, who should be regulated, who should be controlled, instead
of, let's set people free. we have technology that can help you manage yourself, know what's going on, detect blood cancers through breathing. why aren't we running as fast as we can to get these things to market to disrupt the price of health care? and look, it's not a complex premise. we can make the economy grow like crazy, we've seen the expansive effects of the tax reform and some of the regulatory reforms, we have to get the immigration system correct, moving more to a talent-based system, we have to do the incentives for labor force participation, there's a whole bunch of things we need to do and that's -- we just know the economics there. the hardest part is, as a society, none of that is going to matter unless we have a disruption in the price curve of health care delivery. and i'm going to argue there is a path and it's here.
can i give you a thought experiment? should congress have slowed down the internet a decade ago to protect blockbuster video? really, think about it. if blockbuster video had gone out and hired an army of lobbyists walking around the hallways here, congress is somewhat in the protection bracket, should we have slowed down the internet to keep that netflix from putting them out of business? of course not. that's absurd. isn't it? yet congress does that with all sorts of rules, whether it be reimbursement, the cynicism toward health and sensors and these things that can help our medical community. because we'll often get certain lobby groups and others who will come in the door and say, this could be really disrupt to have our business model, can you slow it down? and every day we slow these things down, you're crushing my little girl's future, but you're
also crushing the rest of this country, because the debt curve is crashing down on us. if you actually look at the debt that's going to come out this year, so there was a four-month report from treasury yesterday that basically said, hey, receipts. i'm blessed to be on the ways and means committee, receipts, we don't call them revenue, but receipts are really healthy. last year we grew over 4%. but we spent over 8% and then we will beat up each other saying, well, you wanted to expand this program or you wanted to expand that program. the fact of the matter is the expansion, defense, the extension of other programs, is a fraction of that growth. almost all that growth in pending is demographics. it's the reality, those of us who are baby boomers, removing -- we're moving into our earned benefits, and we never set aside the money for it. so if you're going to keep the
promises, argue -- are you willing to do the combination of things -- and you have to do them all. because it turns out if you do the labor participation incentives to enter and stay and get involved in the labor force, well, to do that well, you actually need to be doing things over here in technology that make it available for those who may have certain barriers. over here for certain people with barriers, you have to have regulations that actually work rationally with our brothers and sisters that may have those barriers it. all has to come together -- barriers. it all has to come together. can congress do something that's complex? because it turns out there's no simple solution. it's a complex one and there's a path and the scary part, understand, when we do the math, and this is something i've been doing now for a couple of years, we still think we hit about 95% of debt to g.d.p.. my goal is just to hold us there and not blow through that.
it's possible. can congress become creative? so the next one i want to go through, and this is sort of fun for me, this is actually one of my older displays, it's from a year or so ago, because i have this fascination with what is something they call carbon capture. a couple years ago there was some -- they finally built an electric facility outside texas. la port, texas, wherever that is, i'm sure it's a lovell place. but imagine -- lovely place. but imagine there's a -- and there's two of them. there's a natural gas and a coal--fired power plant and he had don't have smoke stacks. on the natural gas one, they came up with a crazy idea, i think it's called the allen cycle, of you blow up the natural gas and you actually use the carbon, the burnt, and slam that through the turbines and at the other side you cool it and capture it. you go, oh, god, you mean we haven't been doing that? we actually last year in the ways and means committee
perfected -- now we're going to try to do it more, something they call 45-q, which is the incentive to capture and then over here to sequester that co-2. great. and you get some of those who are cynical saying, well, it can't work. or it's going to be too expensive. we're going to have a little fun with the too expensive. so the best technology we had last year was a facility i believe that's going up in canada, gates foundation, and their best number was $100 a ton. it was $100 a ton on pure carbon, everyone eked out on -- geeked out on carbon change, you can turn it back into a clean burning fuel do, what they do in texas and other places, pump it in the ground and use it for enhanced oil recovery. but $100 a ton was our best bet. i beg of you if you're someone
that's actually interested in the technology of carbon capture , go grab your phone and look up the news stories from last october. m.i.t., i want you to put this into your search engine. m.i.t. ambient carbon capture. some researchers at m.i.t. last wonderfully this elegant breakthrough. they have a really nice video, not particularly technical, showing how they did nanotubes and elect ro plates, they can power them up, power them down, in an ambient environment on the roof of your home, on top of a smokestack. in part of the articles if i'm reading it properly, it wasn't $100 or $150 a ton, it's down to $50. their model says they're down to
$50. that's almost the market price today. it turns out if you're actually someone who cares about the issue of co2 in the environment, we just had a major breakthrough and how much discussion does it get? this has been since october. how much joy have you seen in the newspaper, articles, those things, talking about that there's a revolutionary breakthrough and we can be doing mining because we have to deal with this reality. the united states has gotten dramatically cleaner in the last 15 years. good. but a whole bunch of the rest of the world hasn't. until we're arrogant enough that we think we're going to turn around carbon use policies in a bunch of the rest of the world we're out of our mind. so it turns out we can grow our economy, we can continue to use hydrocarbons and we have a technology that not only would mine our own co-2 but actually
would help us. on everything else that's being generated other places in the world. this sort of runs in sort of -- i'm going to digress for a second. this is the same sort of theme, i've come here before and talked about plastic in the ocean. before i got this crazy job, i used to love to scuba dive. we talked all the time about plastic in the ocean. here in washington, d.c., we do lots of virtue signaling. we made straws paper. but how much u.s. north american plastic actually ends up in the ocean? essentially none. 90% of the plastic in the ocean comes from 10 rivers. eight in asia, two in africa. if you actually cared about plastic in the ocean, you go to the 10 rivers that are 9 -- 90% of the plastic, eight in asia,
two in after character and you do something. create a value for the plastic. as republicans we are trying to do that. but it blows up some of the folk lore around here of well if you do paper straws in washington, d.c. we make an effect. come on. look, i understand we live in a world where everything is political. and the virtue signaling makes us feel better. wouldn't you really like to do something that actually makes a difference? so back to this concept. a major breakthrough in how you capture carbon and can do it right out of the air. that's one of the amazing things in this article is, it works in ambient air. doesn't have to be on top of a smokestack. a couple of days ago, there's an article. one of my personal fascinations is you all know the math, those of you who actually claim to pay attention to this on methane. you all know a couple of years ago we had to recalculate
methane half-life, a lot of the old formulas were all wrong. now we think methane about nine years. but the accepted ratio right now is one ton of methane equals 84 tons of carbon. ok. so the picture alongside me, because this is the best picture i had is a flare in remote texas. they're doing their best to burn off methane. someone just came up with the idea of why don't we just back it, super chill chill it like we do with liquefied gas, and with eget a valuable commodity and capture all of it and the -- remember the ratio 84-1? we incentivize this. we're already doing the 45-q to crecree ate a tax insent toiv capture carbon and sequester or do other things, wornt it make
sense to do the same sort of thing with methane? we came behind these mikes a year or two ago and showed the math possibility that a major popline could capture methane. from oil country. got to almost, just that single pipeline, got you just to the paris accord. slightly below it. and the blowback i got was crazy. i don't like pipelines. but did you see the math that just this one thing had this huge -- i don't like pipelines. we need to stop dealing in absurdities. turns out we may be able to do it without the pipeline. now it's a truck, backing up, chilling it, capturing it. we need to understand things like this and if a porl l.n.g. truck capturing the methane is a solution, is that republican or democrat? well in this environment right
now, maybe it is republican because some of my brothers and cyst thornse left hate these technologies. sorry, that's unfair. a number of them are skeptical of technologies that allow us to keep using hydrocarbons. my argument is, embrace, love the science, las vegas the technology, it will set you free. because these things make a difference. and we live in a time of miracles whether it be the health care technology, whether it be the single shot cure for hemophilia, and you saw the article that we think we have the fewer for hemophilia, not a, but b also. and the cures whether it be for curing people, chronic population, technology for our environment, technology to crash the price of health care, they're here. do you know some of the biggest barriers to the disruption that can help us continue to grow the economy, could help us have enough robustness in that economy so we can keep our promises, and at the same time getting cleaner environment,
healthier economy, is this body. and its inability to actually stop the air gabs and think werg so smart that we know what tomorrow's technology is. when i first got elected we had a family joke. what are the two times in life you think you know everything? when you're 13 years old and the day after you get elected to congress. and the family would laugh and then make fun of me. now that i've been here a few years, i worry we have lots of good people. lots of really smart people. and all day long we're hounded by folks who are trying to protect their business models. or their bureaucracy models. and they're begging us, we need what's on the
horizon. technology is about to provide solutions that don't bankrupt us and actually provides solutions and don't put government in charge of every aspect of our lives. this should be a story of incredible hope and excitement. but can we break through the politics of arrogance that we have around here and start being willing to push the envelope of these solutions. with that, madam speaker, thank you for tolerating me. i appreciate it. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion? mr. schweikert: i'd like to make a motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until 11:00 a.m. tomorrow.
live coverage starts at 11:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span and you can see both events live online at c-span.org or listen ith the free c-span radio app. >> during this election season, the candidates beyond the talking points are only revealed over time. but since you can't be everywhere, there's c-span. our campaign 2020 programming differs from all other political coverage for one simple reason. it's c-span. we've brought you your unfiltered view of government every day since 1979 and this year we're bringing you the unfiltered view of the people seeking to steer that coverage this november. in other words, your