tv U.S. House Meets for Legislative Business CSPAN March 8, 2017 12:00pm-5:48pm EST
we're also covering the ways and means committee markup. that's over on c-span3. and available c-span.org and the free c-span radio app. here on c-span live now to the house floor. they are coming in to begin work on the $578 billion defense spending bill for the remainder of 2017. they'll also start debate on is a measure that relates to federal standards in fraudulent civil cases. we expect votes this afternoon. live congress here on c-span.
the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of universe we give you thanks for giving us another day. we ask your blessing upon us this day. during these days, the american people can see the difficulties of legislating for this great nation of ours. disagreements between and within parties emerge when important and sweeping laws are being considered. so also the push and pull of local, state and national governmental interests and responsibilities can be seen to contribute to the enormity of
our way of governing. be it health care or immigration, the wisdom of our founders can perhaps be seen in their designing a governmental process that is difficult, resistant to hasty solutions and demanding of those who engage. may the american people be patient with and supportive of this process. and may members of this house especially merit the trust of their constituents, those who voted for them and those who did not. and may all that is done this day be for your debater honor and glory amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces his approval. pursuant to rule 1, clause 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be
led by the gentleman from georgia. mr. woodall: 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 entertape up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. collins: i rise today in gratitude, gratitude for the opportunity we have to serve the american people and by beginning the process of repealing and replacing obamacare. as republicans we understand that even $1 trillion in new taxes of the affordable care act dropped on our friends and families cannot save the health care system that is based on government interference and overreach. we as conservatives defend compassion, fairness, and freedom. these values mutually inclusive and i submit the american health care act is a case study in their application. as the insurance markets contract and health care markets for americans go away. medicaid gives more federal
dollars toward able-bodied americans than the program was designed to help. obamacare has ushered in a brave new world and we cannot let the directives stand. republicans are protect our most vulnerable neighbors by putting conservative principles back in place, limiting government, free markets, and the choices best medicine we have to bring relief to struggle -- struggling americans. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> vbles have introduced their health care plan. the president said it would be better and more cost-effective than the affordable care act. mr. cohen: it would offer insurance to everybody. if you believe that, you believe the president's got a isis plan to defeat
which he was going to give us within 30 days. there were thousands of muslims in new jersey cheering 9/11. and that president obama was born in kenya. isis which he was going to give us it's not true. what the plan they introduced is is something you give the wealthy unbelievable tax breaks. the 400 wealthiest people in america will get tax breaks of $7 million apiece. and the americans who earn $200,000 a year or less will get none of those breaks, but they'll may for more the insurance and less for tft the fact is property taxes will go up. less and less people are covered by insurance and they go to emergency rooms for primary care and hospitals get more uncompensated care and they have to raise your insurance rates and public hospitals raise your property taxes. the american hospital association has come out against this. the american medical association has come out against this. next thing you know the people living the lifestyles of the rich and famous at mar-a-lago will come out against it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. 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 from texas is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, elizabeth returned from east africa after spending 2 1/2 years as a peace corps volunteer. mr. poe: before returning home, she was examined by a peace corps physician. she was deemed healthy and ok to come back to america. two days after coming home, elizabeth went to her doctor for a regular checkup where she was diagnosed with a life threatening illness. she had stage one thyroid cancer. her peace corps insurance ended the next day. peace corps volunteers often have to have severe health problems upon their return abroad. health issues that are a direct result of serving in the peace corps should be covered by the peace corps. volunteers like elizabeth are the spirit of hue mantarian assistance. it is our responsibility to ensure they are properly cared for both home and abroad. my bill, the sam farr peace corps enhancement act, improves
health care for all current volunteers and returned peace corps volunteers that contract illnesses during their service. we must continue providing support for our american angels abroad. and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. langevin: mr. speaker, is i am deeply troubled and disappointed that republicans have chosen to move forward with their plan to dismantle the affordable care act rather than working on -- in a bipartisan fashion to improve this landmark legislation. republicans have had seven years to work across the aisle to find solutions. instead, they chose to ignore the a.c.a.'s suck's in pursuit of their single-minded focus on gutting the law. they have voted over 60 times to repeal the a.c.a.
could not even one of those votes been to try to improve it if they see shortcomings? mr. speaker, the a.c.a. expanded health care access to over 100,000 rhode islanders and 20 million people nationwide who otherwise did not have health insurance. unfortunately, the republican proposal jeopardizes the comprehensive affordable and quality coverage americans received under the a.c.a. mr. speaker, the republican plan will lead to higher costs and less accessible coverage and it will strain not strengthen our health care system. their plan disproportionately harms seniors, people with disabilities, and those who rely on medicaid. i have long said, mr. speaker, that the a.c.a. isn't perfect but it is an important first step toward fulfilling our nation's promise of compassion and opportunity. because health care is a necessity. it is something that's a right not privilege. unfortunately republicans' health care break this promise
by understanding the health care coverage of millions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington -- beg your pardon. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. woodall: i rarely come down during the one-minute time of the day and aim glad i came down this morning for father conroy's prayer because there really is a lot of anxiety in this country as it relates to health care. every family in this country has health care on their minds. the gentleman from rhode island is exactly right. we have an opportunity to work together to fix it because we all know the obamacare system is failing. that's why we talk about how to fix it because we know it is failing. president trump said on monday that the republican alternative is now open for review and negotiation. he didn't say take it or leave it. he didn't say read it. pass it before you can read it.
he said, open for review and negotiation. i challenge my colleagues think about our opportunity to serve not just one constituent but all of our constituents. think about our opportunity to come together and put this health care discord behind us for a generation. i thank father conroy for that admonition this morning. i hope we will rise to that challenge. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman from washington is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i strongly oppose potential deep cuts to the environmental protection agency. ms. jayapal: according to many recent press reports, the e.p.a. budget to restore our critical puget sound in my home state of washington is facing a 93% cut. what's worse is the e.p.a.
overall is potentially facing a 25% budget cut resulting in a loss of 15,000 jobs. let us be clear that the e.p.a. is the entity that ensures clean air, clean water, and strong human health. because of the e.p.a.'s work on accountability and oversight of strong environmental regulations, we have seen progress on pollution mitigation, shoreline restoration, water treatment, and education projects that are aimed at protecting our sound and our environment. this administration's cuts will be devastating to our environment. by signing an executive order to move forward on keystone anti-dapl pipeline, appointing scott pruitt to lead the e.p.a., rolling back environmental regulations, we're showing over vert hostility to protecting our environment. we need to be investing in our environment and not slashing it. and we need to make sure that we restore our environment and preserve it for our future generations. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman new york is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. today i am honored to rise and recognize and congratulation the new section 4 class b boys basketball champions, the nor witch purple tornadoes. the hard work, dedication, and sportsmanship of these young men help lead their team to claim the victory for the second year in a row. in the game against the waiverly woofer reasons, senior forward chris jeffrey scored 17 rd fought points, in the final half nor witch took the court by storm to claim the title of section 4 champion with a final score of 49-35 on behalf of the 22nd district, congratulations to nor witch
and coach brian collier on an outstanding win. we wish you lalk in the state quarterfinal on the section 3 champions. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman new york yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. beatty: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of international women's day and to join the countless women across this nation in participating today and, yes, dressed in red, to celebrate our achievement for women across the world in many fields. i stand with the women today to highlight the economic injustices women face. unequal pay. unpaid leave. gender discrimination. and the list goes on. oh, yes.
to repeal the affordable care act. women are the primary breadwinners, six out of american women are paid only 80 cents on the dollar. for women of color like me, 64 cents. but today it is so important for us to say we are faced with a dangerous and irresponsible repeal of the affordable care act. which will once again mean being a female with a pre-existing condition will take away access to free preventive sever visses like mammograms -- services mike mammograms and cervical cancer screening. you should ask yourself why are they doing this markup without hearings? you should ask yourself, why should families pay more? why should those with pre-existing conditions pay more? why should billionaires benefit more? stand with us. women on international women's day. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back.
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, without the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you so much, mr. speaker. it's an honor to join so many of my women members of congress who recognize and celebrate international women's day. mrs. bustos: in my lifetime women have made so much progress, but our journey toward full equality still has so far to go. more than five decades ago, a half century, we began the work to achieve equality in the workplace when president john f. kennedy signed the equal pay act. we took another important step forward when president obama signed his first bill into law, the lily ledbetter fair pay act. even with those laws women in my congressional district still only make 72 cents on a man's dollar. 63 cents for african-american women. when you consider women make up half of the work force and women
are either the sole or primary bread winner in 40% of the homes, this isn't a woman's issue but a family issue. we must give every woman additional toolts to fight for equal pay they earn on each and every pay day. in a country as debate as ours, we must guarantee that our daughters have the same opportunity to earn a fair and equal wage. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. . >> here we are on international women's day seven years from when we started the affordable care act, 60 votes to repeal behind us and yet only this of we had the big reveal
what the plan will be for replacement. what are we seeing? we don't have any cost information but we are going to protect wealthy insurance executives. and we know that estimated 15 million to 20 million americans will have health insurance ripped away from them. let me introduce you to one who is concerned. her name is stephanie cheney and from my district in framing ham, massachusetts, a recent grad student where she studied to be a clinical counselor and dance therapist and diagnosed with a rare and extremely painful joint disease and because of the a.c.a. she got the treatment she needed. but because she was a student and not employed, the health care law and the changes we make are going to have a direct impact. she worries if she cannot afford another plan she will have to start over again. let's think of her and do the
right thing by americans with their health care. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the seek oman from nevada recognition? >> permission to address the house the for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to voice my full support for the fiscal year 20717 defense appropriations bill. this legislation supports our armed forces by helping pay our troops and provide care for our men and women in uniform and families and gives the military the resources necessary to combat terrorism, deter our adverse areas and support our allies. the defense appropriations bill includes 2.1% pay raise, which will help our military families like those who are struggling in nevada to make ends meet.
we will strengthen our national security. the legislation fully funds troop number increases and provides an additional $6.8 billion in procurement spending. this will modernize our armed forces by fulfilling unmet requirements the joint strike fighters and unmanned aerial vehicles. finally, the n. ndaa strengthens relations with our allies. i urge my colleagues to pass this important legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. frankel: thank you, mr. speaker. today is international women's day, a day without women. and i'm going to join millions of women in recognizing the important economic power of women in the united states and around the globe. in a few minutes, i will exit this chamber with colleagues to show solidarity with our sisters who are staying away from duties to call attention to the inequities that women continue to face. we are wearing red to show our passionate energy that will advance the lives of women, such as equal pay, paid family leave, access to health care and freedom from violence. in congress, democrats will resist efforts to take us back our hard-earned gains, standing
strong against the attempts by republicans to repeal the affordable care act, defund planned parenthood and block access to full reproductive care. in the words of the women's march, women's rights are human rights regardless of religion so forth. when women succeed, the world succeeds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from california is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise today in opposition of the plan to repeal the a.c.a. a recent analysis of this plan concludes that 10 million people would lose their health insurance. that is due to the fact that it would stop medicaid expansion and shorten the medicare trust
fund. many people in my district would be affected by this plan. 68,000 of my constituents are covered by the medicaid expansion. 23,000 constituents receive assistance to afford health insurance through the exchange. if the a.c.a. is repealed and new plan implemented, thousands of my constituents, my neighbors would lose their coverage. don't just take my word for it or my constituents' words for it, let's ask the congressional budget office to look at the plan carefully and give a report as to how many people it will affect. if you are going to take on something that affects so many americans, america needs to know how our health care and our lives will be impacted by your plan. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized.
ms. lee: i rise today in strong support of international women's day, a day without a woman. today we are here and joined by our sisters to declare once and for all that women's rights are human rights. we are here to stand with women across the country to send a clear message. we will not rest until we create a society where all women, all women have equal rights under the law. we are not revisiting and letting president trump and the republicans know that we will not go back. they are resisting. we stand with the millions around the nation who have walked out today and today, we are walking out for them. we are raising our voices for the millions of women who can't, because they might get fired or because they can't afford to lose their meager wages. i encourage all of my democratic colleagues to join us along with
leader pelosi and congresswoman katherine clarke for a walkout following these one-minutes and attend the press conference on the house steps right outside in solidarity and in honor of all of the women in the world who are marching today and striking today for equal rights. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? >> permission to address the ouse for one minute. ms. lujan grisham: it is ironic today that we are sell debating the national success of women when we are also working to repeal affordable quality health care for women and families and i'm reminded in fact of my own mother who fought during a time in the 1960's and 1970's to
assure my sister who was very sick and disabled would have access to a quality public education and also to affordable health care and unfortunately, it was not available. my mother and father were financially destitute and today as a result of trying to provide that health care, i'm my mother's caregiver. i'm reminded of all of the women, 49 million of us providing more than $500 billion long-term care and care giving support to our families. this is a day to celebrate that leadership, that support and the efforts made by women and this is a body congress should do much, much more to preserve and protect those rights of women and their families all across america. i yield bark. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. are there any other members in the chamber who wish to do a one inute?
for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wyoming seek recognition? ms. cheney: by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 174 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution number 174. resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill h.r. 1301, making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017, and for other purposes. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations, and two, one motion to recommit.
section 2, the chair of the committee on appropriations may insert in the congressional record not later than wednesday, march 8, 2017, such material as he may deem explanatory of h.r. 1301. >> the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from wyoming is recognized for one hour. ms. cheney: mr. speaker, during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. cheney: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. cheney: mr. speaker, i rise in support of house resolution 174, which provides a closed rule for consideration of h.r. 1301, the department of defense
appropriations act for fiscal year 2017. i would like to thank chairman frelinghuysen and chairman granger and ranking member visclosky for their hard and dedicated work on this bill. mr. speaker, we have no higher obligation as legitimated representatives of the people of this great republic than ensuring for the security and defense of our nation. we are gathered here at a tremendous time of action and achievement across an array of crucial policy areas, regulatory relief for the citizens and businesses of our nation, restoration of authority to our states and local communities, tax reform, ork repeal and list goes and the on. president trump is doing what he promised during his campaign and it's an honor to serve the people of wyoming at this historic moment. but, mr. speaker, it is no ex acknowledge ration to say if we fail to provide the resources
our military needs, if we fail to do what is necessary to ensure america's armed forces remains superior to all others in the world, if we fail to provide the support our men and women in uniform need to recover from eight years of devastating policies, nothing else we are doing in this body will matter. and mr. speaker, the need is urgent. as we meet today to debate the 2017 defense appropriation, our nation faces a more complex and grave threaten environment than we have faced at any time since world war ii and possibly, mr. speaker, more than at any time in our history. for eight years, our add various' strength that is grown while relative capabilities have stagnated or declined. north korea continues its ballistic missile launches as it
threatens our allies. the iranian nuclear agreement has bought time for iran to continue to advance its nuclear weapons program as it reaps the wind fall of at least a trillion dollars of taxpayer funds provided it by the obama administration. iran continues to threaten naval vessels, to support terrorism across the middle east and test ballistic missiles. china is rapidly building up its military and it's targeting in particular, technologies to try to level the playing field with our capabilities. . russia has invaded ukraine, threatens eastern europe and the baltics, violating i.n.f. treating obligations, and openly threatening the use of nuclear weapons. al qaeda today exists in more
countries than ever before. and isis continues to recruit and hold territory as it plans and launches attacks against the west. most of the actors i just mentioned are also responsible for cyberattacks against the united states. against this backdrop, mr. speaker, the u.s. military is vastly underresourced. at a recent house armed services committee hearing, the vice chief of staff of the army told members that of the 58 brigade combat teams, only three are ready, quote, to fight tonight. the vice chief of naval operations, recently testified that more than half of all navy aircraft are grounded due to maintenance issues and an inability to acguire the necessary parts. our nuclear force is aging. even as our adversaries continue to make advancements in their own nuclear forces and
capabilities. our air force is the oldest, smallest, and least ready it has ever been. these stories and shortfalls, mr. speaker, exist across nearly every aspect of our military. america's fighting men and women are the greatest fighting force and the greatest force for good our world has ever known. and they deserve the resources to do their job. we have prevailed over great challenges in the past. from our unlikely and miraculous founding through our civil war, two world wars, the cold war, and the early years of the war on terror. we must, mr. speaker, marshall our forces to do so again. to prevail congress, this congress, must do its job. that job begins with passing this 2017 defense appropriations bill. then, mr. speaker, we must
repeal the budget control act and end sequestration. there is a rational and responsible way for us to undertake defense budgeting. the process in place today is neither. the last time our military was able to assess the threats we face and then recommend the necessary funding levels to defeat those threats was fiscal year 2011, over six years ago. we must return to this standard budgeting process. in describing the effects of sequestration several years ago, our current defense secretary put it this way, quote, no foe in the field can wreak such havoc on our security as mindless sequestration is achieving today. we must end this practice with all speed. this should not be a partisan issue, mr. speaker. it has not been in our past. since world war ii, every american president, republican
and democrat alike, has understood the importance of american military superiority, of ensuring a world in which america and our allies set the rules. threatened by the nazis and the japanese, franklin roosevelt, and george c. marshall knew america had tonight arsenal of democracy. at the beginning of the cold war, harry truman, dwight eisenhower, john f. kennedy roused the nation to defend freedom and liberty against communism. john f. kennedy knew america had to be, quote, the watchman on the walls of freedom. in the 1980's, president reagan oversaw the defense buildup we're still benefiting from today. he knew, and i quote, war comes not when the forces of freedom are strong. it is when they are weak that tyrants are tempted. and in the aftermath of 9/11,
it was george bush and dick cheney who kept us safe. who knew we could not win this war on defense, who understood we had to have a military strong and capable enough to defy terrorists the safe havens from which they plot and plan and launch attacks against our fellow citizens. mr. speaker, now it is our turn. across the globe our adversaries challenge us from china to north korea to iran to russia. across the middle east in syria, iraq, and afghanistan. 34 years ago ronald reagan described our duty at another time against another enemy this way. ote, it is up to us in our time to choose and choose wisely between the hard but necessary task of preserving peace and freedom and the temptation to ignore our duty and blindly hope for the best
while the enemies of freedom grow stronger day by day. mr. speaker, we can no longer ignore our duty while our enemies grow stronger. we must take the first step today to begin rebuilding our military. h.r. 1301 is that first step. it increases defense spending, provides a full pay raise for our service men and women, and begins to address our readiness shortfalls. this bill provides funds based on our military's priorities for fiscal year 2017. and gets us off the cycle of continuing resolutions which are doing real damage to our readiness and our capacities. therefore, i urge support for the rule to allow for consideration of h.r. 1301 and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentlelady from wyoming, ms. cheney, for the customary 30 minutes. i ask unanimous consent to
revise and extend. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i want to express my appreciation to defense subcommittee chair granger and frelinghuysen and ranking member visclosky for their hard work in bringing this bill to the house floor today. the defense subcommittee is known for its ability to work in a bipartisan manner, and this bill demonstrates that this tradition continues. last year the house approved its version of the f.y. 2017 defense appropriations bill. it was a deeply flawed bill, filled with funding gimmicks, including a funding cliff that cut off funding for the war budget in order to boost base defense spending by $18 billion. the senate version of the defense appropriations bill did not contain such come gimics and was marked up by the senate defense subcommittee, the full committee, and reported out of senate appropriations committee, but it never went to the senate floor for consideration. the f.y. 2017 defense appropriations bill that the
house will consider later today is not, therefore, a conference report. it's being treated as if it were a conference report, namely by having a closed rule, by let us be perfectly clear that this is not a conference report. let me also be clear, mr. speaker, that we could have had this type of final bill come before us last december just as we could have brought up all the pending f.y. 2017 appropriation bills before the house last december for final action. instead, republican leadership chose to keep nearly the entire federal government, including the pentagon, operating at f.y. 2016 levels without any clarity about what their annual budgets might be. so when we hear talk about problems with military readiness or shortfalls in defense budgets, i suggest the republican leadership hold a mirror up to their faces and take some responsibility. this bill is five months late.
it could also have been taken care of three months ago in december, and in fact it should have been taken care of in december. it is now making its way through another convoluted process today. but we still have no idea about the fate of the other pending 10 appropriations bills that the republican leadership failed to complete last december. and i say convoluted, mr. speaker, because when the house votes on h.r. 1301 today, it still needs to go back to the senate, and we really have no idea what they are going to do with it. are they going to pass it without any changes and send it to the president for signature? or are they going to use it as a vehicle to attach the -- the other 10 appropriations bills and send it back to us as the f.y. 2017 omnibus that we should have completed in december? perhaps they might consider holding on to it until the president gets around to sending congress his request for the f.y. 2017 supplemental so that we finally know how
much congress is actually being asked to approve for pentagon spending in f.y. 2017. so hold on to your hats because the not done today with defense spending bills for fiscal year 2017 one way or the other. mr. speaker, i know that everyone in this house wants to make sure that our men and women in uniform the defense spending are well staffed, trained, and equipped to carry out the missions and duties that we have asked them to carry out. in these areas in particular there is much to recommend in this latest version of the f.y. 2017 defense bill. the same is true of the funding included in h.r. 1301 for suicide prevention sexual assault, and medical research. i would also like to point out that h.r. 1301 totals $577.9 billion. this includes $516.1 billion in the base bill and $61.8 billion in the overseas contingency operations account to fund the many wars in which we're engaged.
cuppled with the $5.8 billion f.y. 2017 supplemental congress approved last year, total defense spending for f.y. 2017 currently stands at $583.7 billion. and that's before we receive still another f.y. 2017 supplemental from the president. mr. speaker, that's well over half a trillion dollars for the pentagon. more than the combined total military spending of the next seven greatest military powers in the world. so for those who beknown how underfunded the pentagon is, i would argue it's more a matter of failing to set priorities and tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse. every report on every attempted audit of the defense department reveals that the pentagon doesn't have a clue about where the money goes. billions and billions of dollars cannot be accounted for. no other agency in the u.s. government gets so much money
or is allowed such sloppy accounting. yet the white house and congress can't wait to throw even more billions at the pentagon, rather the demanding accountability and sending -- setting clear spending priorities. there are also other matters of concern with this bill, mr. speaker. h.r. 1301 not only continues but adds to the prohibitions regarding detention -- the detention facility at guantanamo. this is all an effort to prevent guantanamo from shutting down. which hurts america's ability to do human rights work around the world and remains a stain on our own values and ideals. this bill continues to spend billions of dollars on the insane trillion dollar effort to modernize and produce new generations of nuclear weapons when what we should be doing is continuing to reduce our nuclear arsenal and enter hard negotiations with other nations that have nuclear weapons to
eliminate them all together. and finally, h.r. 1301 continues to provide so-called emergency funding through the observingo accounts to continue wars -- o.c.o. accounts to continue wars in iraq, syria, yemen, and elsewhere. these wars are hardly unexpected or an emergency and should, therefore, be fully incorporated into the base budget for the pentagon. they are also wars for which congress has not debated or approved any authorization for the use of military force. we do not have an aumf to deploy our military forces against the islamic state, yet we have deployed military forces in the air, at sea, and on the ground in iraq and syria and elsewhere in the region. we do not have an aumf to deploy our military forces in this civil war in yemen, yet we have deployed them to yemen where one of our navy seals was killed in combat and several others wounded in january. the republican leadership continues to fail in its
constitutional responsibilities by not bringing any aumf before the house for consideration despite promises to do so. so here we're in the 115th congress following in the failed footsteps of the 113th and 114th congresses getting ready to vote on tens of billions of dollars for wars that congress has failed to authorize. i am proud of the courage demonstrated every single day by our men and women in uniform. i wish i could say the same thing about congress and this house. finally, mr. speaker, while i am glad that at least one of the pending appropriations bills is going to see some action today, i wonder about the fate of the other 10. when will we see those bills, mr. speaker? in fact, speaking of urgent pending matters, when will we see a jobs bill? when are we going to see legislation to repair and modernize america's infrastructure? will extra funds be included in the f.y. 2017 transportation-h.u.d. appropriations bill and the
energy and water appropriations bill, interior appropriations bill for similar improvements on federal lands? we allred about the replacement proposed by the republican leadership for the affordable care act, and correct me film' wrong, mr. speaker, but i'm having trouble remembering how many hearings were held on that proposal so that congress could benefit from experts in the health care field about whether this replacement bill will provide health care to even more americans at less cost than the a.c.a. . . the proposal is being marked up without any testimony whatsoever. it is important to remember that when the democrats drafted the affordable care act, there were dozens of hearings, 30 days, pre-notification before energy and commerce held its markup. and then the bill as reported out of committee was posted for over two months online before
coming to the full house for debate and amendments and final passage. if a replacement bill to the a.c.a. is not able to make sure more americans have health insurance at a lower cost, what is the point other than politics. we don't need to see a bill that covers fewer bill and forces workers, families and individuals to pay even more for their health care coverage and get even less in health care protections. the republican replacement bill is being marked up in committee without a score by the congressional budget office. and without a c.b.o. score, no one in this chamber, in this city, in this nation has any idea, has any clue how much this replacement bill will cost the taxpayer, let alone who will benefit and who will suffer under its provisions. that is simply a scandal, mr. speaker. completely unacceptable. it is a cruel joke on american
families, american workers and the state, local communities, hospitals, doctors, nurses and health care providers, who will have to struggle with the consequences of people losing their health insurance. let's see america's priorities are taken care of, a jobs bill, an infrastructure bill. let's make sure we don't weaken health care protections for people in this country and let's see all of the f.y. 2017 appropriation bills come before the house in the next few days so we can complete the work that should have been done last december. with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: i yield five minutes to the vice chairman of the rules committee, the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. cole. the eaker pro tempore: gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: i want to thank the gentlelady for yielding and thank her for taking on this rule and the role she plays in this house. she came to congress with an extraordinary expertise in
national security, probably unsurpassed by any new member. not only a member of the rules committee and important voice for the security of the united states of america and a -- in a very dangerous era. before i begin, i gee with my friend on a couple of very important points from massachusetts that he made. and first, i want to agree with him that this should have been done earlier. my friend is exactly right. this could have been done in november and december and should have gotten it done there. we would have avoided the problems that come with a continuing resolution and pleased we are moving it now. but earlier would have been better. no question about it. and that's true with every other bill. we really should make sure each of the appropriations bills are passed. all the problems associated with the continuing resolution are evident for our military and evident in every other department. i would hope my leadership continues to do what they are
doing today and that is move these bills forward. my friend talk about the use and authorization of military information. this is a congressional responsibility. the president has said he will announce a new strategy against isis and that would be a great time to come to the congress and .ave this robust debate i'm less persuaded by my friend's arguments about the spending levels here. i would point out for the record. this is well below what former secretary of defense gates when he was secretary in the obama administration recommended we should be doing at this time. and that's because the last administration dropped the ball and didn't listen to its own experts as to what the appropriate level of our forces should be. the underlying legislation here is an excellent bill. my friends have already talked about it in detail and will take
it higher and remind our listeners and colleagues, there are three important objectives that this bill achieves. the first is stopping the erosion in end strength, something that went on for years under the last administration and somehow thought we would be safer if our military got smaller. that was a bad assumption. the second is to restart the procurement cycle. we have fallen far, far behind in terms of replacing, upgrading and improving the weapons systems and the communication systems, every system that we move into war with and we ask our men and women to use. and finally, this begins to address a problem that my friend from wyoming discussed in great detail, readiness. e are not ready now to fight effectively. if we had to deploy massively that our forces would do well and win. but a lot of people would die because they haven't had the
appropriate training or time to get ready. the other great objective, we finally match up spending with the authorization. last year, we had an excellent authorization bill out of the house armed services committee, unfortunately that doesn't get you far if the money doesn't match the policies and recommendations that they advance. this now takes care of that problem. but i remind our colleagues that passing this bill is only a first step. as my friend from wyoming pointed out, we are going to need a supplemental later this year just for this year. we are going to need a robust increase in the fiscal year 2018 authorization and appropriations, something the president has committed to and something i hope we can advance on a bipartisan basis. and finally, again as my friend pointed out, real military buildup takes years, not months and weeks. we have to restore and strengthen frankly what we
allowed to decline and what the last administration allowed to decline over several years. this is an extraordinary first step, but it is only a first step and i hope my colleagues joins us on a bipartisan basis. we come together and put to the sense of the country in a very dangerous time ahead of all else that we do. so i urge the adoption of the ill and the underlying legislation and i urge passage of rule and i thank my friend from massachusetts, but he makes very valuable and important points in some of the thirnings he offers and i hope we heed them well. i urge passage of the underlying legislation and the rule. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i thank the gentleman from oklahoma for his kind words and understanding
that it is inappropriate for congress to continue these wars without having a vote on an aumf. i hope that changes, but i appreciate his support and there is bipartisan support for having this body actually do its job. and that shouldn't be a radical idea but unfortunately, doing our job is something that a lot of people don't want to do. mr. speaker, at the very beginning of the year, the republican majority adopted a rule to explicitly exempt the cost of any bill that repeals or amends the affordable care act from the requirement that is not not increase spending by $5 billion. they effectively adopted a legislative blind fold to effectively repeal. let me show you the language and
i provide this to my colleagues on the republican side and give you my glasses because it's important that people understand what it says. point of order, it shall not be in order to consider any bill that would cause a net increase indirect spending in excess of $5 billion. limitation, this subsection shall not apply to any bill, repealing the patient protection and affordable care act. mr. speaker, as you can see, with this act, the majority declared that they were not going to let the rules of this house, which are purport he hadly in place to stand in their way of repealing the affordable care act no matter how much it would cost the american families. but mr. speaker, it gets even worse. as we stand here today, republicans have taken -- have taken their head in the sand approach to the affordable care act to a new low.
right now, both the energy and commerce and ways and means committees are considering republican legislation to repeal health care reform without providing any analysis from the nonpartisan experts at the congressional budget office of the cost of the legislation. let me put this another way. earlier it was said, it doesn't cost to take health care away. they don't want to know how much it will cost or the impact it will be or have on american families. mr. speaker, we have over 200 employees at the congressional budget office. that office cost nearly $50 million a year. we pay them to advise us precisely at times like this. republicans have talked about repeal and replace for seven years, acting like they had not enough time to waive the cost of their actions would be laughable
if it were not so responsible. we democrats care about health care and costs and demand to know what the impact of this repeal will be. members should not be asked to vote on this situation until they know the full weight of their decision. if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule that would require a c.b.o. cost estimate to be made publicly available before any legislation that amends or repeals the affordable care act may be considered in the energy and commerce or ways and means committee and on the house floor. i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of that amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: to discuss this minutes i yield five to the distinguished the gentleman from california, mr. ta qana, who has been a leader on this issue and will explain this even further.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> the issue before us is far more basic than one's view on the affordable care act. i recognize that there is a philosophical difference about the affordable care act. on our side of the aisle, we think it's good legislation. on the opposite side of the aisle they have concerns. but the issue is whether the american people, whether taxpayers ought to know the cost of the repeal legislation. whether they have the right to know how much a legislation introduced in this legislation costs. mr. canseco: here's the irono, chaunchaun -- mr. chandler: that was his
mantra in his time of service in the house. you talk to doug elmendorf, and he said that the one thing he represented about the speaker is he would actually insist on the numbers that he would want to know how much we are adding to a $20 trillion deficit. it is why it's incomprehensible to me that in this congress, under this speaker, we would ever be asked toll vote on legislation without knowing the impact of that legislation. these are basic issues. how much is the repeal legislation going to add to our deficit. how much is it going to finance tax cuts for the wealthy. how many people will it leave out of insurance or how many people would it add to insurance. there ought to be a transparent discussion. now it's not just democrats who
want this transparent discussion. actually a republican, the gentleman from ohio, a founder of the freedom caucus, has expressed similar concerns. he has expressed concerns that this repeal legislation will balloon the deficit and explode the deficit and he wants to know the numbers. we can have as much disagreement that we -- respectful disagreement how to cover people and whether the affordable care act is a good piece of legislation or not. but what we should not be debating is the public's right to transparency. that's why i urge my colleagues to reject the previous question, so we can hold an immediate vote on requiring the congressional budget office to score the repeal legislation and provide the american people with the basic financial costs of the legislation. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields. the gentleman from massachusetts reserves.
the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: what is incomprehensible to me is that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are confused what the issue before us today is. the issue before us today is whether or not this house is going to undertake its fundamental, most important, most sacred obligation under our constitution and provide for the defense of this nation. now they can choose to dedicate their time to another very important topic and usually important topic and one we will have many days to debate and discuss unlike under the previous leadership, our speaker has not said we have to pass the bill before we know what's in it. today, the issue before us is whether we are going to provide for the dens of this nation. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from florida. h.
i only wish during their time in control of the white house we had not doubled the national debt. i'm similarly grateful that members on the other side of the aisle would say we should know the impact of legislation before we vote for it because after all it was former speaker pelosi who said let's vote for it so we know what's in the affordable care act. but mr. speaker, i rise today because following an eight-year cycle of abandonment, it's time we do right by our military members and their families. i rise in support of the brave warriors stationed at egland air force base and all across the globe. the 2% pay raise we provide in this appropriation is a modest down payment on what's owed to those who put themselves in harm's way for our freedom. our current state of military readiness is not acceptable. half of the planes in our navy cannot fly. pilots are leaving. marines are harvesting parts out of museums.
soldiers downrange don't have the unrivaled equipment they need to match their unrivaled patriotism. this $583 billion appropriation is a first step. it means 74 new f-35 aircraft. it's the noes capable aircraft in the sky. pilots have greater survivelt in the f-35. this matters so much to me in my district. we're training the next generation of f-35 pilots to fight and win against any enemy we encounter in the skies. this legislation also reflects our values by investing in cancer research and traumatic brain injury research. some say we cannot focus on defense, we should focus on other domestic priorities. i would simply say our adversaries are not waiting, our war fighters and military families are tired of waiting and so am i. i yield back to the gentlelady from wyoming. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i would -- i just appreciate the
gentleman's comments. why has the republican leadership five months later bringing a defense appropriations bill to the floor? we could have done this months ago. so if there is this urgency, you know, it seems to escape the republican leadership. i want to take issue with my colleague from wyoming when she says, what's important today and what we're debating today is only this defense appropriations bill because as you know, we are currently debating the rule. and the rule is a tool used to set the house agenda. and to prioritize consideration of legislation. and for that very reason, this is in fact the appropriate time for us to explain to the american people what legislation we would like to prioritize, what is of great concern to us and what agenda we would like to pursue in this house. the fact of the matter is that as we are speaking, the house ways and means committee and the energy and commerce committee are marking up
trumpcare which we know in all likelihood is going to result in millions of americans losing their health insurance and we also are concerned that it's going to cost the american taxpayer a boat load of money. and what we are simply saying here today is that the congressional budget office, which we fund and we rely on, ought to be able to give us a cost estimate, ought to tell us how much this is going to add to our deficit, how much it's going to cost the american people, how many people are going to lose their health care. why in the world would you rush a major piece of legislation through committee and onto the floor without even knowing what you're talking about? i mean, this process constitutes mindless legislating. this is not doing your job, and that's all we're here requesting. we can argue over whether or not you like the affordable
care act or you don't. but whatever you are going to do, we ought to bring it to the floor with everybody's eyes wide open and knowing what the impacts are going to be. and, you know, talk about lack of transparency. this trumpcare bill was under lock and key until a couple days ago. the best-kept secret in the world. seven years my friends have been talking about a replacement bill. no one ever saw it. all of a sudden it's brought out before the american people in a press conference and, again, in a way that doesn't answer a lot of questions and it's being rushed through committee and it's going to be rushed onto the house floor. that is -- that is not a good process. i will remind my colleagues that when the affordable care act was considered here in the house, the house held 79 bipartisan hearings and markups on the health insurance reform in 2009 and 2010. you've held no hearings.
none. no expert testimony. no health care professionals. no doctors. no patients. no nurses. no families. nothing. no hearings. right to markup. house members spent nearly 100 hours in hearings, heard from 181 witnesses from both sides of the aisle, considered 239 amendments both democratic and republican, accepted 121 amendments. i mean, no hearings. in markup, energy and commerce committee adopted 24 g.o.p. amendments. in markup, education and work force adopted six g.o.p. amendments. the original house bill was posted online for 30 days before the first committee began their markup in more than -- and more than 100 days before the tricommittees introduced their bill in the house. the promised 72-hour review. the senate bill voted on the house -- voted on in the house was online for three months, and the reconciliation bill was
online of 72 hours of review before house vote. house democrats and republicans heard from constituents in public events and tens of thousands of emails, calls, letters were registered to have public comment. my friends are trying to avoid public town meetings. but i'm just simply saying that we are raising this issue because we are deeply concerned about the prospect of millions of americans losing health care and about you adding god knows what to our deficit. i don't think it's too much to come together in a bipartisan way to say let us know what the costs are going to be, let us know what the impacts are going to be and if you still want to vote for trumpcare you should vote for it but you ought to know what you're voting for. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: mr. speaker, i would just, you know, say that not knowing what they're talking about is something with which our colleagues on the
other side of the aisle are quite familiar. accounts of public input, which really bare -- bear little relationship when obamacare was drafted in the dark of night. imagine what it must be like if you're tuning into this conversation, this discussion thinking that the u.s. house of representatives is taking up the rule to debate and discuss and pass our f.y. 2017 defense appropriations and instead what we're hearing is, you know, a list of when bills were posted online and lists which, as i said, bears little reality what actually happened when obamacare was passed. those are hugely important issues. i am incredibly proud of the job we are doing as republicans in this body to help save a collapsing health care system. but, mr. speaker, i don't think there's no higher duty and obligation we have than to ensure our military is second to none, and no matter what kind of a job we do, as repeal as that is to
and replace obamacare, if we fail to provide the resources our military needs, nothing else we do in this body matters. and i believe, frankly, that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle owe our men and women in uniform, they owe the policymakers at the pentagon, they owe those people who are serving this nation the respect of talking about the resources they need to do their job and focusing on the true issue before us today. mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, mr. lamborn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lamborn: and i thank the gentlelady for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in support of the rule for h.r. 1301 by will fund our national defense for fiscal year 2017. this bill is a vital first step as we begin to work on rebuilding our military. the best way to look at defense spending over time is as a percentage of u.s. gross domestic product. since world war ii, we spend an average of 5% of our g.d.p. on defense during peace time.
despite a world that's gotten more dangerous, the defense drawdown in recent years cut defense spending from 5% of g.d.p. to 3% of g.d.p. in a $17 trillion economy that's real money. meanwhile, since vietnam we spent an average of 21% in defense. today we spend below about 15% of the overall budget. things are so bad today -- i don't have time in two minutes to go into all the details -- that we are actually at risk of losing more american lives than we should in the event of another war. the next step is to pass a robust defense supplemental and then to fund defense for fiscal year 2018 at a minimum level of $640 billion. anything less will not keep americans safe and will not allow us to rebuild our military as we desperately must do. congress must deal with sequestration. trying to fund defense at b.c.a. levels is like trying to
put a size 10 foot into a size 7 shoe. it simply doesn't work. it's dangerous for our own security and it's dangerous for the world. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. i just want to say to my colleagues on the other side, i know you don't like me talking about health care. if i were you i wouldn't like me talking about health care either. but this is a serious matter. and it's a matter of security for millions and millions of americans in our country. and, you know, again, maybe somebody over there can tell me, you know, how much this new affordable -- this new trumpcare is going to cost, how much it's going to add to the deficit, how much of the american taxpayers are going to have to pay for it. does anyone know how many people will lose their coverage?
hello. i mean -- i guess i'd ask the question -- why do we have over 200 employees at the congressional budget office who we, you know, pay $50 million a year to to be able to give us these estimates if we are not going to utilize them? why would we -- why are we doing this? it seems to me that before we do something that could harm millions of people in this country, before we could do something that could, you know, result in an increase in our deficit, i mean, why don't we ask the experts -- and we all acknowledge that they're experts and we pay them lots of money -- why don't we get their advice? i just -- this whole process seems backwards. you ought not to be marking up bills when you don't know what their impact is going to be.
part of our job as members of congress, in addition to holding hearings and listening to experts and listening to citizens tell us their perspective which, again, has been totally ignored in this process of the repeal of the health care bill, but it's also to make sure that when we're voting we know what the impact is going to be, we know whether or not it's going to have a positive impact or whether it's going to have a negative impact. so all we are saying here -- again, it's one of the reasons why i want to defeat the previous question is so we can vote hopefully in a bipartisan way to get a c.b.o. score so we know what's what. you know, and i get it. i am not here -- i know my colleagues don't want to talk about health care. they'd rather talk about something we should have done months ago. that's what we're doing, we're doing old work now that should have been done four, five months ago. i'm just baffled why, you know, you don't want to do your job.
with that i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: mr. speaker, we on this side of the aisle are more than happy to talk about health care. we're more than happy to talk about the really crucial work that's under way to rescue our health care system from the collapse and the train wreck of obamacare which my colleague's party put into place in the dark of night with no reading of the bill, thrilled -- i won't yield just yet, mr. mcgovern. we're thrilled, actually, that our bill is 120 pages and that it's readable and available online right now so when you leave the floor, mr. speaker, my colleague can go read the bill. it is also not surprising that our colleagues do not want to talk about our national defense because the record of the last eight years, the record of the last president is unparalleled in american history. and the mess that we are having to clean up with respect to our health care system is matched perhaps only and maybe even exceeded by the damage that was done to our military and to our
national security under the last administration. and we think on this side of the aisle it's crucially important we do our job and the time is now to debate, discuss and vote on this bill and address this topic. mr. speaker, in that regard i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. taylor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. . . i rise to speak in support of the the 2017 defense appropriations bill, a bill providing for the military who are responding, engaging and destroying threats around the world. mr. speaker, i have the honor and great responsibility of representing the largest concentration of active duty and military veterans in the nation. who are they? fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, sons, daughters, soccer coaches, neighbors. our district has thousands of the less than 1% of the nation
that has gone forth over and over to fight for us. the best amongst us, fighting the worst in the world. in our district, mr. speaker, we have the largest naval base in the world, army soldiers, air force combat demand, master jet base, national guardsmen and many, many more. we are moving towards the smallest army since world war ii, smallest air force ever, navy ships not being properly maintained due to budget, ma even plans not combat ready. this is unacceptable. our nation requires the military, but our force is voluntary. we owe them more. we must take up the 2017 defense appropriations bill to help maintain a technological advantage. we must always send our men and women into harm's way not with a fair fight. let us always send these war
tighters with that unfair advantage. this bill provides essential equipment, platforms and upgrades. we must give our force and our industrial base predictability and stability, the right equipment, the right training and right military superiority. this bill not only supports the war fighters, but their families as well. who, mr. speaker, are the backbone of our forces and the integral part of the tremendous sacrifice for our nation. this bill provides important investments in brain injury, suicide prevention, sexual assault prevention and much more. this bill gives a well-deserved pay raise -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. taylor: this gives a pay raise enhances health care and eases the burden on military families moving forward. i urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in support of this bill.
and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i want to make sure we support our war fighters. my problem with the defense bill is that we are spending so much money on things that i think are questionable. i would rather spend money on supporting our troops more than spending a trillion dollars over the next three decades building more nuclear weapons. we have more nuclear weapons than any other country in the world and ought to be eliminating them all together. i want to support our men and women who are in harm's way, but i want members of this house to do their job. doesn't take any courage to sit back and have troops deployed all over the world in harm's way and we don't even take the time to actually debate an authorization for the use of military force.
we're too afraid to talk about those issues. when we talk about supporting our men and women in uniform, people ought to do a little bit of reflection of how we have not been doing our job. my friends don't want to talk about health care. my colleague said she would like to talk about health care more. well, we should. the fact of the matter is, as i said, as we are speaking here, the republicans have unveiled this bill in secret and nobody has had a chance to digest. no hearings. no expert testimony. no nothing. right to markup. trying to rush it to the floor before we find out the true cost to the american people about what this trumpcare bill is going to be all about. how many of them are going to lose their care and how it's going to cut medicare and senior citizens will see an increase in
their health care costs and average americans will pay more for health care and less in protections. people struggling in poverty will be out of luck because they medicare aidy with to states. they are taking that right away and they are doing it in a again, so that c.b.o. employees at the congressional budget office that congress properties $50 million a year to support so they can do their expert work and we are not asking for their expert advice? what sense does that make? this is the rule and we set our priorities about what our legislative priorities ought to be. and vote no on the previous question to vote on an amendment and demand a c.b.o. score.
that doesn't slow down the appropriations bill. it still goes forward. nothing stops. let's do what's right. let there be a little sunshine on this house of representatives. there is a pattern that has developed under the republican leadership where everything is closed. this bill we are dealing with right now, closed rule, not a conference report. closed rule. we have had more closed rules than any congress in history. and that's the pattern. no hearings, no discussion. let's go right to markup. we don't want to know how much it is going to cost or people thrown off of health care. let's rush this through. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. gallagher. mr. gallego: the united states has -- >> last month russia secretly
two batteries of crews missiles. north korea test launched four ballistic missiles and china bolsters its presence in the south china sea. meanwhile our own navy is the smallest it has been in 99 years, satisfying 40% of the demand, 54% of the air force major weapons qualify for antique license plates. the army to quote the vice chief outgunned outaged, outdated. these are the bitter fruits. defense sequesters must be pulled out root and branch. no foe in the field can wreck such havoc on security that mindless sequester is achieving. it is mindless and dangerous and so today while i speak in
support of this rule and bill and applaud the appropriations committee for its critical work and i urge support for the final passage. we will have fulfilled our constitutional duality to keep the country safe when we have eliminated the defense sequester strength to strength to peace. the part of passive spectator is unworthy of this country and bound in the end to lead to disaster and if we do not act now to rebuild and modernize our military and continue to play the role of passive spectator. we will no longer be worthy. and so to my colleague, i will say this is our job and our most basic job. so let's do what the american people sent us here to do to keep the country safe restore peace through strength. that is doing our job.
i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: how many more speakers does the gentlelady have? s. cheney: we have just one. mr. mcgovern: i reserve. ms. cheney: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from -- the gentlewoman from arizona, ms. mcsally. ms. mcsally: i thank my colleague and i appreciate the hard work of chairman frelinghuysen. i rise today in support of the f.y. 2017 department of defense appropriations bill and i urge voting and adoption of this bill. i served 26 years in uniform and say firsthand that continuing resolutions are bad for our troops. it is urgent that we pass this bill. one reason is that we are in a military readiness crisis like i have not seen in my lifetime. this bill provides over 215
billion, an increase of $57.2 billion. this includes flight time for our pilots, maintenance for our aircraft and provides more than $6.8 billion for procurement of ships and helicopters and funds he a-10 warhog and funding upgrades, extending its service life by starting the rewinging of the 110 aircraft. wings. inue to fund air and important missile programs. our troops are counting on us. let's stop the bickering and let's pass this bill. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. ms. cheney: we are prepared to close, mr. speaker.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself the remaining time, mr. speaker. i'm going to urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote to defeat the previous question so we can bring an amendment to the floor to demand c.b.o. and tell us how much the republican health care bill is going to cost and its impact is going to be on the american people. let me tell you why i'm worried, he aarp said it could increase premium costs $8,400 and could put at risk health care of millions of vulnerable americans. now we have over 200 employees at the congressional budget office. that office cost nearly $50 million and we pay them to advise us precisely at times like this. we ought to ask for their guidance. before marking up bills, before rushing bills to the floor that could adversely impact millions
and millions of americans that could break the bank in this country, we ought to find out what we are talking about. we can walk and chew gum at the same time. you can pass the defense bill and pass an amendment that tells us how much this republican health care bill is going to cost. we ought to do both. defeat the previous question so we can bring this amendment to the floor and let the american people know what's going on here. and i think that's the appropriate way to proceed. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from wyoming is recognized. ms. cheney: h.r. 1301 is the first step we must take in rebuilding our military and only the first step and repeal the budget control act and end sequestration if we are going to truly address our shortfalls. we must return to a rational budgeting process at the pentagon where spending is based on defeating the threats to this
nation, not arbitrary and devastating across the board cuts. mr. speaker, nearly 70 years ago, president truman addressed this body about the growing soviet threat to eastern europe, quote, he said there are times in world history when it is far wiser to act than to hesitate. there is some risk in action, there always is, but there is far more risk in failure to act. president truman continued, we must be prepared to pay the price for peace or assuredly we shall pay the price for war. today, mr. speaker, i urge we begin to pay the price for peace. i urge support for the rule and for the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on -- the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye.
opposed, nay. the ayes have it. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote of the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. buck: mr. speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 175 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 17, house resolution 175. resolved,that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 725, to amend title 28, united states code, to prevent fraudulent joinder. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived.
general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary. the bill ral debate, shall be considered for amendment under the five minute rule. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. no amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted.
the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for one hour. mr. buck: thank you, mr. speaker. for purposes of this debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during the consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of relevant debate only. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. buck: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of the rule and the underlying legislation. current federal court rules allow trial lawyers to engage in picking their preferred venue. in particular, trial lawyers are able to file suit against a defendant in one state while keeping their case in a different state's court.
when a lawsuit is filed against a defendant in another state, trial lawyers may also sue a defendant in the state where they want the trial to occur. this keeps the case in the lawyer's preferred state court. many times the target of the lawsuit is a large national business, but if the only defendant in the case is an out-of-state business, then the case can be heard in federal court. because of this, the trial lawyer then -- will then also sue an innocent local individual or small business in order to keep the case before a local court. usually the case against the innocent local defendant is dropped once the case is safely back in state court. but it is dropped only after the innocent local defendant has spent time and money dealing with the lawsuit. this practice is wrong. this practice perverts our justice system and causes needless pain. trial lawyers should not have the power to subject innocent local individuals and small businesses to costly and time consuming lawsuits just to rig the system. this kind of abuse of
litigation is unjust and must be stopped. a well-respected federal ppeals court judge, jay harvey wilerson has supported congress putting an end to this abuse. he's suggested that congress provide judges greater leeway in making the proper decision on whether the case should be removed to federal court. he's also suggested that congress give federal judges greater discretion to determine early on in a case whether a local party has been fraudulently sued. the innocent party protection act provides these exact changes. in 2014, judge wilkinson addressed these proposals and said, and i quote, that's exactly the kind of approach to federal jurisdiction reform that i like because it's targeted, and there is a problem with fraudulent jurisdiction law as it exists today. i think, and that is you have to establish a joineder of a nondiverse local defendant is
totally ridiculous and there is no possibility of ever recovering and that's hard to do. so judge wilkinson went on, so i think making the joinder law appeals to me because it seems to me the kind of intermediate step that addresses some real problems, end of quote. the legislation that this rule makes in order is the solution to the problem that judge wilkinson identifies. the underlying legislation would protect innocent local defendants in two main ways. first, the innocent protection -- innocent party protection act allows federal judges more leeway when determining whether a defendant has been fraudulently joined to a lawsuit for the purpose of keeping the case out of federal court. when a judge has a case before his or her court, the judge will have clear guidelines determining the locality of a defendant can be disregarded and establishing whether the case will proceed in federal or state court. however, this in no way infringes on our state court system. the judge must conclude that the defendant is not -- will
not face a liability under applicable state law. once that conclusion is reached, the judge then may release the innocent defendant from the case. this provision keeps legal claims in federal court that properly belong there by allowing federal judges to decide whether a local party is truly a legitimate defendant and not simply ensnared in a case for the sole purpose of keeping the case in a trial lawyer-friendly state court. this is a fair and efficient solution to the problem. secondly, the innocent party protection act establishes a uniformed approach for evaluating whether the defendant has a good faith intention of seeking judgment against a local defendant. while the u.s. supreme court has long recognized the right of courts to consider whether a plaintiff has a good faith intention of seeking judgment against a local defendant, the application of this principle has not been uniform. the innocent party protection act simply codifies this longstanding principle and permits federal judges to limit
a lawsuit to the appropriate defendant. plaintiffs with legitimate claims against both a local and out-of-state defendant will be able to pursue their case in a state court. however, if no legitimate claim exists, the out-of-state defendant will have the ability to have the case heard in a neutral form. by codifying this principle, we effectively protect innocent individuals and small businesses from bad faith litigation. mr. speaker, the underlying legislation is a fair solution to one type of frivolous litigation. i support this effort and thank chairman goodlatte and the judiciary committee for bringing this bill to the floor. i reserve the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you very much. and i thank the gentleman from colorado for yielding me the stomary 30 minutes for debate. mr. speaker, i rise to debate a
rule for piece of legislation that will in the final analysis make it more difficult for hardworking americans to stand up to corporate malfeasance. piece of legislation that jettisons a history of legal precedent in the blink of an helps keep well, it the deep pockets of the ultra wealthy as deep as possible. i learned this law in law in 1959. but it was in existence way before that time and now my friends across the aisle is telling me this legislation is needed because it will protect small business.
small businesses, indeed all of us, have been and continue to e protected by the century-old injures prudential rule that republicans come here today to upend. in reality, all this bill will do is make it more difficult for regular folks across this country to bring lawsuits against massive corporations. i shutter to think what it would happen in the critically important asbestos case had this particular law been in effect. this bill -- and there are many more. this bill will make it more expensive, both in time and treasure for our fellow ericans to hold corporations responsible in the courtroom. a need all the more prevalent today as my friends across the
aisle have been busy gutting regulations at a doesying pace -- dizzying pace. let me make it clear. after we finish, my friend from colorado and i are going to go back to the rules committee to discuss the more judicial reform. a lot of it is stuff that is going to harm little people in the courts and to cause them not to have access to the court system, as have many of the regulationes that we have already disapproved. let us be clear, the american people didn't vote for dirty water, but that is what they got when this republican majority when they voted to repeal a rule that barred corporations from dumping mining debris into our drinking water, helping powerful mining companies by hurting all of the
rest of the people in their area. the american people didn't vote to weaken the security and exchange commission, but that is what this majority did when it passed a bill adding more hurdles to the s.e.c. rulemaking process, making it more difficult for the agency to protect consumers, helping wall street while putting our economy at risk. and i'll make a prediction here. it may not happen right away, but just like we saw the great depression that we are just coming out of, we are likely to see that same kind of situation again by virtue of lessening the rules against violations and securities. the american people didn't vote to drug test americans on unemployment insurance, degrading the hardworking men and women in this country but that is what this republican
majority did without delay. mr. speaker, the list really does go on and on. in fact, just yesterday republicans continue to chant the corporate clairian call with the unveiling of what i now will call their shameful replacement of the affordable care act and until there is a resolution, i am going to call it trumpcare. my colleagues like to tout how short the bill is compared to the affordable care act. well, the american people will be surprised to find that in that brevity, republicans managed to repeal an affordable care act provision that placed a limit on insurance executives' compensation. let me repeat that. they managed to repeal a
provision that placed a limit on insurance executives' compensation. the insurance executives shouldn't be too surprised by this. however, repeatedly, republicans have shown they represent corporate interests over the interests of the american people. but my republican colleagues didn't stop there. their so-called replacement, the trump bill, also claims to have done away with the individual mandate. what they don't tell you is that instead their plan calls for funneling money to the insurance companies in the form of a 30% surcharge if an individual goes without health insurance. and let me tell all the older americans and 80-year-old people like me to get ready because they're going to be able to charge you just exactly what they want to charge you,
and my insurance will go up if this becomes law. that's right, under the republican health care proposal, if you, the american worker, goes without health care coverage for longer than two months -- say you couldn't afford a new plan between jobs, then republicans give insurance companies the right to charge you 30% higher premiums. that's ridiculous. republicans didn't get rid of the individual mandate. they just turned the mandate into a windfall for insurance companies, a windfall that's going to work out great for insurance executives now that republicans also removed the cap on their compensation tax deductions. mr. speaker, let us not lose sight of the fact that it took
republicans seven years of undermining the affordable care act to finally come up with this proposal for replacing it. their plan would kick millions of americans off their health insurance and force millions more to pay higher premiums. it will take health care away from the poor, give tax cuts to the rich and pull the rug out from under seniors, families this plan is so bad, republicans hid not only their horrific proposal, but themselves from their constituents. and many of their members are seeing it just in the last 36 hours. they did this by brushing off town hall meeting after town hall meeting.
while all these smoking mirrors regarding something as simple this measure in light of the act that they ran on replacing it, then why hide it and go through this that most of us know and several senators said yesterday that it will be dead on arrival. actually, let me ask the american people, who do you think the republican party is representing? you or corporate america? mr. speaker, we are not a full two months into the republican-led government. and in addition to the unconstitutional muslim bans and i said s because the old one is nothing but the new one and the is the old one. election.dling in our
all of the intelligence agencies have indicated that there was russian interference in this last election. i don't understand why we are not totally outraged and why there is not extraordinary emphasis on this kind of action against our fundamental democracy. it is ridiculous that we are around here doing things that we know that are not likely to pass the united states senate and we are disapproving regulations and yet we cannot get an independent commission to make a determination of how this impact occurred, and we do know that it occurred. i'm outraged and i would hope more americans would be as well. have also seen the almost
immediate recusal of the attorney general due to his inability to be forthwith our senate colleagues, wild and baseless claims eminating from late-night twitter storms from 1600 pennsylvania avenue, we have a republican party dedicated to ensuring their corporate benefactors can rest easy no matter the harm they cause to every day americans. are we addressing these concerns here today? our republicans colleagues will say that all the things are not this particular rule. this rule is not even deserving of that kind of consideration largely for the reason that it is yet a structured rule disallowing members in this house to have an opportunity to have input to a measure that is getting rid of a century of precedent in our judiciary.
no. what we are doing, we are debating this obscure civil procedure rule that dates back to the days of president teddy roosevelt. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. buck: we are debating the special order of business from rules and that all comments must be relevant to the rule or the underlying bill. this particular underlying bill has to do with a rule of civil procedure and fraudulent joineders. it does not have to do with the gentleman's health care replacement act or his thoughts on insurance executives' compensation, tax cuts to the rich, russia, iraq, although i did appreciate his memories from law school the year i was born. i yield to the gentleman from texas as much time as he may
consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: it is a delight for me to join mr. buck on a piece of legislation that he actually -- his name is on, he is responsible for. he understands and is prepared to fully debate. and i would like to thank the gentleman from florida, member of the rules committee, for his offer y coming down to his arguments against the facts of the case as they reside today on this important piece of legislation, but i want to acknowledge, i know the frustration. i know there is a lot of frustration. there's a lot of frustration from our colleagues who lost the house, senate and presidency and the middle of what may be wandering in the darkness or doldrums of being deep in the minority. with that said, there is an
agenda that is being laid out before the american people and it happened, mr. speaker, directly as a result of what we call an election. an election that all these issues or most of them that have been discussed by the gentleman were fully debated not only in a theater near you, but directly in congressional contests and senatorial contests and in the debates for the president of the united states. and the facts of the case are really pretty simple. the republican party will be talking about all the issues that the gentleman brought up, today, right before our eyes, probably on c-span trying to compete against us is a hearing at the energy and commerce committee, the chairman of the committee, greg walden, over the weekend released the text of the chairman's mark. the quote bill of the republican party of how we are going to look at health care.
it is true that we have chairman nunes of the intelligence committee who is looking at the issue that was brought up of russia. we have forthrightly over the weekend said, we are being asked to look at this. media, american people, we are going to do. we are going to do what you have asked because it is the right thing to do, open hearings, open debate, acknowledgement of the issues and a certainty that we will look into it and let you know what we find. that's really where we are. this morning, 8:00 in my office, i co-hosted with the gentleman from florida, an opportunity for the american bar association, a committee on the judiciary and the courts. and we brought in from across this country, they came in to my
office from across the country, a number of well established, thoughtful and articulate people, we didn't ask if you are republican or democrat. we said you represent your organization and we want to hear from you. this is the kind of leadership that i believe not only i, but also the gentleman, mr. hastings, want to be associated with. we want to listen to the american people, trying to be thoughtful about what we do and equal participation and the gentleman knows that at the rules committee yesterday, we had a very thoughtful person representing the republican party, the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, came up. we had mr. buck who was able to come and talk about this issue today. in fact, it might be an arcane issue to the american people. but it consumes a lot of time
and it has a deliberative effect on the outcome of important cases in federal court, in state court across this country. we feel like it's worthy of an afternoon, an afternoon at the rules committee to fully vet the legislation, and an afternoon here on the floor of the house of representatives. like any good majority, we have a lot of other things going on and we are looking at the affordable care act, how it worked and how we might thoughtfully replace it. we are looking at the issues relating to russia. we are looking at the american bar association. members of congress are extremely busy. but mr. speaker, i think with great respect, we should give the author of the bill, mr. buck, his time to come and thoughtfully explain what we are doing. i'm just the chairman of the
committee. i just do the things that i hope are necessary to look at every single item and being fair, being fair in the ability that people have to come and bring their ideas and trying to be fair and trying to by them down here. so i want to thank the gentleman, i want to thank the gentleman for acknowledging this body is busy. this body is trying to engage all the members. this body is engaged as we speak in a public, open debate about what direction health care should go. but what i would like to offer is my evaluation of where we're going to be. we are going to be at a point where we do not have to scare people about where we've been or why we are going to a place. i'm on obamacare. as a member of congress, i'm
legally required to be on obamacare form of health care. but, mr. speaker, it is twice as expensive as what i had before. and it is not working for me. it is not working for my family. and it's not working for a lot of people. so we are trying to look at how we might carefully, thoughtfully, artfully work with the american people where we put the bill up and let you see it. we don't have to pass it to find out what's in it. we are trying to read the bill and understand it first. mr. speaker, it is not a pledge, it is a hope that every single member of this body will understand what is in the bill where they can respectfully, whether someone agrees or disagrees with it, explain the bill for what is correct. and what is correct about the bill is this. if you like your own doctor, you can keep your own doctor.
if you like your own health care plan, even if it's obamacare, you can do that, too. the republican party is open about what we believe. we are trying to be thoughtful with the american people. and mr. speaker, i believe with the leadership that we have of paul ryan, who is attempting to work through a difficult issue, the american people will understand why republicans, not only won the election, but why republicans have better ideas in health care, too. i thank the gentleman for his time. and i yield back to him as he chooses to consume the rest of his time. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman from texas yields back. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. back. the gentleman reserves the balance of his time.
the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i have great respect for my chairman of the rules committee, and he knows that. i just heard him say his insurancep went up under obamacare and mine did, too. if this measure as offered yesterday were to become law, his and my insurance is going to go up again. so we aren't doing all the things you said you are going to do in bringing the price down and in addition, we don't even know what c.b.o.'s score is with reference to this matter. and you are reading it to understand it now, and yet members are in the commerce committee as you explained, marking it up and they don't even know what c.b.o. score is. i'll get back to that in a few minutes about all the people we pay for them to do that work and not utilizing them. i want to address my friend from colorado and have him to understand that i'm not precluded from presenting to the american public what legislation we wish to prioritize.
as the gentleman knows, we are currently debating the rule. this is a tool used to set the house's agenda and prioritize consideration of legislation. for that very reason, this is, in fact, the appropriate time for us to explain to the american people what legislation we would like to prioritize and what agenda we would like to pursue in this house. and i won't reiterate it in the interest of time. and i will have a previous question that will show what legislation we think we should be addressing. and i will do that for as long as i'm given the opportunity to manage rules. i will come down here and present a position of the democratic party so as how they understand our priorities and bound essarily am i hide
with this rule. with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. buck: thank you, mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. sessions: i thank the gentleman mr. buck. i would like to without continuing to the dialogue at least respond to the gentleman and tell you we are going to have a c.b.o. score. we are going to have a c.b.o. score when we have an agreed-upon bill. this is a process that is open. the bill is being proposed and debated and then there are going to be votes. and for them to presume that they know the score before they know the outcome is not the way the chairman of the committee looks at it. mr. walden looks they'll come up with a bill and there are significant changes that could happen one way or
another, and i think it would be a presumption viewpoint to sumptous viewpoint to say anything else. when it is finalize, a score will become available. and i appreciate the gentleman bringing this issue up. thank you very much. i yield back to the young gentleman from colorado for the time that i took. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. mr. buck: i yield to the gentleman from iowa five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from colorado for yielding. i especially want to thank him for bringing this legislation before this congress. this is we are addressing the topic we used to call fraudulent joinder. i like the title of this bill as pointed out by ms. slaughter last night. we call it the innocent party protection act. it's more accurate. it's more descriptive.
the other fraudulent joinder piece tends to put people to sleep. i know mr. buck has operated in this arena and he has significant experience and frustrating experience watching innocent parties be drug into litigation and just so that an opposing attorney can utilize that jurisdiction within a particular state where they think they have a friendly venue. and so first, mr. speaker, i'd make the point from the beginning, which we don't often enough do here, and that is our pledge we made some years ago all of our legislation would be indexed back to the constitution. we don't always address that in the debate but i rise in support of this rule and underlying bill. so i turn my pocket constitution to article 3, section 1. says the judicial power of the united states shall be vested in such inferior courts as congress may from time to time ordain and establish. ok. we agree with that. and i have made this point that all of the federal courts are
completely under the jurisdiction of the united states congress. if we decided that we wanted to abolish a federal district we can do that. it happened 200 years ago two districts. i don't oppose such a thing but i am asserting the power of congress which hasn't been questioned or challenged, i point out. under section 2 it says the judicial power extended to all cases -- it says the judicial power shall extend to all cases in law and equity arising between citizens of different states. so this is a tool, then, that the fraudulent joinder attorneys use to drag people into litigation that may have nothing to do with it whatsoever. and it's a problem. it's a problem, we know, not just because there are complaints out there from innocent parties that have been wrapped up in litigation and required to defend themselves and hire attorneys and spend thousands of dollars, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to protect their economic interest even though they have zero involvement in the case and perhaps zero chance of
being having any judgment brought against them. so apparently the judges that make these decisions look at the rule, rule 11 and they find enough latitude in there they allow the defendants to stay on the case -- and i will call them being fraudulently joined to the case. so we need to tighten up these rules and we need to send a very clear message to the courts so they got some guidelines to live by because it is their job, of course, to read the law and take their directions from the united states congress and act accordingly. i think this debate and the debate we had in the last congress help us in that cause. so the next thing i pick up from the constitution, the next thing is the bill itself. prevention of fraudulent joinder is under section 2 and it sets out four different categories that would be cause for the court to release a defendant. and it says, the joinder of the defendant is described in this paragraph. and so it says, if fraudulent
-- it is fraudulent if the court finds that. one of four different categories. there is actual fraud in the pleading of jurisdictional facts with respect to that defendant. if there's actual fraud. that's pretty much a no-brainer. should be released from the case. it's simple. i'm glad it's an opportunity to go into statute. second is, if it's based on a complaint and the material submitted under the paragraph is not plausible to conclude that the applicable state law would impose liability on the defendant. in other words, if it's implausible for the defendant to have a liability, then the court can release that defendant under this act should it become law. that's also to me a no-brainer. one who has been a defendant in lawsuits, i would reflect, mr. speaker, that when i first ran for office there were some people that thought i should capitulate to whatever their legal demands were and even though i had been in the courtroom a couple of handfuls
of time throughout some 40 years of business of congress construction i had four of them lined up against them at the same time they thought i should settle out of court. it's frustrating to not see that liability but have that leverage brought against you. that animates me on this. the third complaint is a state or federal court bars. all right. that's a simple provision. but the fourth one is another one that deserves consideration. that is that there be a good faith intention. otherwise, if there is no good faith intention to prosecute that defendant or to seek a joint judgment which would include that defendant, then that defendant can be released from the case. we need to streamline our courts, mr. speaker. can i ask for an additional minute? mr. buck: i yield an additional minute to the gentleman from iowa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: i thank the gentleman from colorado, mr. speaker. and i would just in summarize this case is it's not only me, it's not mr. buck alone, it's
not mr. sessions alone, it's the american people that are calling out for this kind of relief and it's not just the american people who i consider to be lay persons in this but it's also the courts. the fourth circuit court of appeals judge harvey wilkinson, as mr. buck quoted, spoke about this. the supreme court of the united states has spoke about this. professor martin reddish has spoke about this. the third circuit, spoke to the briscoe issue. the fifth circuit has essentially adopted a similar if not identical policy. this is a chance for us to do so. i urge support of the rule and the underlying bill and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. buck: i would thank the gentleman for his thoughts. i would inquire how much time we have left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 10 minutes remaining. mr. buck: just for purposes of this debate we have no further witnesses. mr. hastings: all right. i'd say we have no further
witnesses and i will at this time proceed to close if you are prepared to close. mr. buck: that's great. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, if we defeat the previous question i am going to offer an amendment to the rule which would modify the rules of the house to require a cost-estimate from the congressional budget office before any legislation that would amend or repeal the affordable care act, may be considered in committee on the house floor. the committees on ways and means and we just heard energy and commerce are marking up repeal legislation today, legislation this significant should not advance through the committee process let alone the house without first hearing from our nonpartisan budget experts at the congressional budget office on what the cost nd overall impact will be.
mr. speaker, we have over 200 employees at the congressional budget office. we pay them collectively and administrative duties nearly $50 million a year to advise us at times exactly like this. house rules already require congressional budget office cost estimates to be included in committee reports. we are simply trying to improve and strengthen this principle of transparency in order to ensure that we know the cost of this repeal legislation before we vote, and that includes the members in the energy and commerce committee today that are marking this up so they would know the cost before they vote in committee today.
mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, it's not too late for my friends across the aisle to tether themselves to the ideals that have made this country great for generations. ideals that if we are to be saved from the russian current we presently find ourselves being dragged down by, we'll be, as they always have been, those ideals which save us from ourselves. we are a nation built upon the strength of immigrants, of teachers, of doctors, of millworkers, garbage men and women, small business owners and farmers. we are a nation of dreamers and
innovators, respectful of our individuality and mindful of our unparalleled power once unified in common cause. at some point, my republican friends will, i hope, realize that they are unabashed and wholesale championing of corporate interests at the expense of hardworking americans is a losing cause. for the sake of our environment , our children, our grandchildren and our unborn children, i hope this day is earlier rather than later. mr. speaker, i urge a no vote on the rule and the underlying measure and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. xes inhibiting job growth in our country, but there are other headwinds that our
nation's job creators face as well. one of those headwinds is frivolous litigation. i believe strongly anyone and everyone should have access to justice. everyone who is injured should have their day in court and they should have the opportunity to make their case. however, sometimes trial lawyers take advantage of our justice system and seek to gain an unfair advantage against a defendant. trial lawyers may go -- may try to go court shopping in order to rig the case against the defendant. one way they may seek to secure their preferred venue is to sue a perfectly innocent individual or small business who happens to reside in the jurisdiction within which the trial lawyer desires to pursue the case. after some time, the innocent party is often released from the litigation, but not before incuring legal costs as well as emotional and opportunity costs. each time an innocent small business man or woman has to
divert their attention from growing their business and divert resources away from investing in their employees and creating jobs and divert energy away from expanding their involvement in our communities. and instead, they are forced to direct their attention toward defending themselves from a frivolous legal claim. each time this happens is a missed opportunity for creating jobs and for realizing economic growth. the innocent party protection act defends our small business men and women from bad faith lawsuits. it provides relief from trial lawyers who seek out friendly courts in order to pursue their cases. it balances the needs of justice with proper restraints on decidedly unjust actions. the innocent party protection act is a good and ack we cannable -- equitable solution. i ask my colleagues to support our local businesses and defend them against frivolous lawsuits.
vote yes on the resolution, vote yes on the underlying bill. rein in this abuse of our justice system. i thank chairman goodlatte and chairman sessions for bringing this bill before us. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question on house resolution 175 will be followed by five-minute votes on adoption of house resolution 175, if
ordered, ordering the previous question on house resolution 174, and adoption of house resolution 174 if ordered. this is 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: on this vote the yeas are 230 and the nays are 184. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a
recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the speaker pro tempore: the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 235. the nays are 185. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous question on house resolution 174 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 16. house resolution 174.
resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 1301, making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i have an inquiry of the chair. can the chair tell me whether the c.b.o. has scored the american health care act which is currently being marked up in the ways and means committee? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has not stated a proper parliamentary inquiry. mr. hoyer: i regret the speaker will not respond and i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion that the house adjourn. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, on that i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland has requested a recorded vote. so many as are in favor say aye. -- a sufficient number having arisen, members will record their votes by electronic device.
pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on the motion to adjourn will be followed by a five-minute vote on adoption of resolution 174, if ordered. this is 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.]
are 295. one member voting present. the motion is defeated. the unfinished business is the question on adoption of house resolution 174. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 16, house resolution number 174, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 1301, making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts has requested a recorded vote. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote.
vote, the yeas are 233, the nays are 185. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the gentleman will state his inquiry. mr. speaker, i wonder if -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. mcgovern: i'm wondering whether you could inform us whether a c.b.o. score has been completed on the republican repeal of the affordable care act. many of us are worried it will kick millions -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is in the stating a proper parliamentary inquiry. mr. mcgovern: to give the republicans more time to request a c.b.o. score, i move that the house do now adjourn.
the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion that the house adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. mr. mcgovern: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has requested a recorded vote. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having risen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, by direction of the committee on the judiciary i submit a privileged report to accompany house resolution 111 the speaker pro tempore: the the clerk will report. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 111, directing the attorney general to transmit certain documents to the house of representatives relating to the financial practices of the president. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey, mr. frelinghuysen, seek recognition? mr. frelinghuysen: pursuant to the rule passed earlier, i call up the bill h.r. 1301, making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017 and for other purposes. and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the
department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 174, the bill is considered read. the gentleman from new jersey, mr. frelinghuysen, and the gentleman from indiana, mr. visclosky, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. frelinghuysen: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 1301 and i may include tabular material on the same. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. frelinghuysen: i yiled myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i rise to present h.r. 1301, the defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2017. in total, this bill provides $577.9 billion for the department of defense, $15.1
discretionary funding d $61.8 billion overseas contingency operation global war. when combined, supplemental enacted in december total defense funding equals $584 billion. consistent with the top line provided by the national defense authorization act and $10.9 billion more than fiscal year 2016 levels. strengthening our national security and rebuilding our military starts today. with this agreement, the first step after years of cutbacks. our armed forces and intelligence communities shall operating under a continuing resolution, which denies them stability and predictability, both of which they have not had for many, many years. h.r. 1301, provides that
stability, removing defense funding from under the continuing resolution to auto pilot, preventing further damage to our national defense and providing additional support for our men and women in uniform and their families. our troops serve with honor in iraq, afghanistan, japan, across andbattleics, across africa south america, on the air, aboard ships across the land doing work of freedom. this rejects the reductions poped by the previous administration, providing for increased end strength levels authorized by the ndaa, at one point, three million active duty troops and 18,000 national guard and reserve troops, all of whom work as one team. our bill fully funds the authorized 2.1% pay raise and
provides increased funding for defense health programs to ensure full care for all of our war fighters, their families and military retirees. ensures that our armed forces have the training and equipment they need to conduct successful missions. funding is increased for key readiness programs that prepare and train our troops and modernize essential military installations and reverses the previous administration's cuts to procurement providing for additional production of state of the art aircraft and ships. in addition, we enhance cyber d i.s.r. programs, capabilities our combatant commanders badly need. this legislation reflects congressional priorities to take into account the members that have worked with us.
this is a bipartisan, bicameral agreement that deserves the support of the house. i would like to thank kay granger in bringing this bill to the floor today and for taking over the leadership of the defense subcommittee in january. i would like to thank the subcommittee's ranking member, mr. visclosky, for his contributions to this bill and earlier bill. he has been an excellent partner throughout this process and i'm grateful for our continued, strong, working relationship. and i commend nita lowey, the ranking member of the full committee, for her partnership and commitment to completing all of our appropriations work. lastly, i want to thank the staff of the subcommittee that is behind me, both minority and majority as well as our personal offices in the full appropriations committee for their tireless work putting this bill together. in particular, i would like to acknowledge will smith and dave pomer ans, the outgoing staff
directors, both minority and majority leaders. both have made immeasurable contributions to the appropriations committee and we are indebted to their service. we thank both of them and wish them both the best. mr. speaker, today, our nation faces a dangerous and unpredictable world. at the same time, our armed forces are struggling to have our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines readily trained and meet every conceivable threat. to address that situation, i urge support of the legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. visclosky: i appreciate the recognition, mr. speaker. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. visclosky: i would like to begin by congratulating chairman
frelinghuysen on bringing his full bill to the house floor as chairman of the appropriations committee. i greatly appreciated his friendship and steady leadership of the defense subcommittee. further, i would like to thank our new subcommittee chairwoman kay granger. she has been a great partner incompleting the work on the 2017 conference report and i look forward to working with her as we proceed. finally, i want to thank the members of the subcommittee in our extraordinary staff for their wisdom and long hours that they have logged inputting this product together. the chairman has well described h.r. 1301. i would add that this bill includes the strong positions countering russian aggression, building partnership capacity and supporting readiness, because it is a product of bipartisan negotiations.
this is a good bill, and i intend to support it. despite my support for this legislation, i am extremely troubled that we are still working on the fiscal year 2017 defense bill five months and eight days into the fiscal year. for nearly six months, the department of defense has been operating under two separate continuing resolutions, which wastes the time of people's lives and leads to inefficiencies in spending. i would emphasize, this is not the fault of the committee. all that has been absent is a lack of political will on behalf of the majority party. even more disconcerning is the fact that the defense appropriations act is just one of 11 fiscal year 2017 appropriation bills that need to be completed by the end of next month. there is no excuse for them
remaining unfinished. the investments made through these bills are vital to so many in our country and they need equal attention from congress and the administration. it is imperative that we strive every day to prioritize keeping america safe and supporting our brave service members. but we must also prioritize educating our work force, making improvements in public health, in science and in our economic and transportation infrastructure. if we neglect these investments in our future and well-being and success of current families and future generations, then i am deeply concerned that we will not have a country worth defending. confounding a confused fiscal situation, there is a $30 billion supplemental request for 2017 recently submitted to the office of management and budget by the department of defense,
which should make its way to congress in the next few weeks. additionally, as the modifies its fiscal year 2018 budget request, they are without a predictable base on which to build. there is very little margin of error given the few days remaining before the continuing resolution expires. we do not view that date as another point for negotiations. it is an absolute deadline. and the value of this bill and every other appropriation bill diminishes every day they are not enacted. in closing, i again appreciate the leadership and the management of this wonderful work by our chairman, mr. frelinghuysen. going forward, i will work hard with the chairman. i will work with chairwoman granger, with ranking member lowey and the other members of our full committee to return the
appropriations process to its normal schedule. mr. speaker. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i recognize he gentlewoman from texas, chairwoman of the subcommittee of defense appropriations such time as she may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for such time as she may consume. ms. granger: i rise in support of the defense department appropriations act. the world is more unstable than any time in our history. we face constant threats from countries including iran, russia, china and north korea. isis and other global terrorists threaten our very way of life. our number one responsibility as members of congress is to provide for the defense of this nation. i commend chairman frelinghuysen
for the outstanding job he did drafting the f.y. 2017 bill. he deserves our thanks for reducing such -- for producing such a significant and meaningful bill. since becoming the defense subcommittee chairwoman i've spent a lot of time tucking to senior defense leaders to find out what they need to combat these threats. they have unanimously stated that the only thing our adversaries respect is strength. and they need this bill passed to ensure our military is as strong and effective as possible. sequestration and reduced budget requests have caused the military to be unfunded for too long. underfunded, i'm sorry. underfunded for too long. this bill begins a prosofse rebuilding our military and giving our war fighters the resources they need to counter the numerous complex threats around the world. this bill reverses the drawdown
of end strength and instead increases it by 36,000 troops above the f.y. 2017 budget request. this bill reverses steep cuts to procurement by funding additional ships and aircraft to modernize our weapons systems and address shortfalls. this is important because we have the smallest number of ships in the navy since 1916 and the average age of the air force aircraft is 27 years old. marine aviation quad rons have been forced to salvage parts from museums in order to keep our planes flying. in every meeting i've had with defense leadership, they emphasize the devastating impact both sequestration and operating under a continuing resolution have on our security. when asked about the impact of a full year c.r., general goldstein, chief of staff of the air force, said there is no
enemy on the planet that can do more damage to the united states air force than us not getting a budget. our military is counting on us to pass this bill now. it's the only way to ensure the united states will be strong and able to lead in this very dangerous world. i strongly urge a yes vote, mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. visclosky: i yield four minutes to the gentlelady from new york, mrs. lowey, the ranking member of the full committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for four minutes. i want to thank hairman -- i want to thank chairman frelinghuysen, theirwoman granger, and ranking
member vis -- chair woman granger and ranking member visclosky for their hard work and cooperation. today's bill is the product of good faith, bipartisan, and bicameral negotiation. each member of this body will need to determine whether positive aspects of the bill outweigh uncertainty about the prospects of 10 other critical funding bills languishing without a clear path forward. unlike the defense appropriations bill passed by the house last june, this bill keeps faith with existing caps on discretionary spending. it does not use a budget gimtoik create a mid-year shortfall in funding which would have affected salaries and mission support for men and women serving bravely in harm's way. i want to thank the chairman for
increasing cybersecurity operations by nearly $1 billion, fully funding the european reassurance initiative in response to russian aggression, investing in the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance resources combatant commanders clamor for, and assisting men and women in uniform by creasing pay by 2.1%, adding $25 million for sexual assault prevention and response and providing $33.8 billion for the defense health program. despite these positive attributes, i would be remiss not to remind this body that the 2017 appropriations process can be described as nothing but a
failure that continues to this day, more than five months into the fiscal year. the defense bill that we considered today -- that we consider today could have and should have been finished in september, 2016. the majority chose to punt the deadline to this and 10 other appropriation bills until april. for entirely political reasons. all americans know we must ensure our armed forces are staffed, trained and equipped to meet the challenges they face. we must fulfill that responsibility without neglecting the critical services and investments funded through the 10 other unfin herbed appropriations bills. i'm very concerned that the house republican leadership is proposing to move one bill forward without any indication
that the other 10 will see the light of day. hank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i'm pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from texas, the chairman of the armed services committee, mr. thornberry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. thornberry: mr. speaker, i want to thank the distinguished chairman for yielding time and mmend him for his continuing leadership on national security. i also want to thank the chairlady of this subcommittee, ms. granger, and mr. visclosky for their continuing work on national security. mr. speaker, it is important that we pass this bill now. the department of defense is currently operating under a continuing resolution which means you've got to spend the same money this year that you spent last year. and you have to spend it on the same things. even if you don't need to spend money on something this year that you spent last year, you have to. so it's wasteful.
but you also can't spend money on new things even though new threats arise. it's not good for any part of government. it is particularly bad for the department of defense. it's important to pass this bill now to remove this continuing resolution and have a regular appropriations bill. secondly this bill is consistent with the defense authorization conference report which passed this house in december. all but four republicans and all but 30 democrats in the house voted for that measure in december. this is very consistent with that and i hope it gets at least as much support as that bill did in december. there are a few differences. we are further into the fiscal year, so the committee was able to fund some additional priorities that were in the house-passed authorization bill that we were not able to put in the conference report. and i just think it's important for all of us to remember, mr. speaker, that the only answer to some of the readiness problems we're facing is modernization.
we've had testimony that it takes twice as long to maintain an old f-18 aircraft, for example, as it does a new one. well this bill has some additional f-18's and that is good for the pilots, good for the services that receive them. maintenance to work on other things. finally, it's important also to remember that this bill is just a first step in repairing and rebuilding the military. i'm afraid all of us have underestimated the deep damage that has been done through sequestration, budget cuts and a high tempo of operations. just yesterday, i was out at fort campbell to see some of this and hear about some of this firsthand from the army. this is an important essential first step. but shortly, we should receive a supplemental appropriation to do more of the work of repair and then we need to move forward an
18 bill that begins rebuild -- rebuilding that i think on a bipartisan basis most all of us in this chamber would support. remember, mr. speaker, the first job of the froth is to defend the country. this is an important first step to help us fulfill that responsibility. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from indiana is recognized. mr. visclosky: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from minnesota, ms. mccollum, a member of they have subcommittee on defense. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. mccollum: thank you, mr. chairman, thank you, mr. visclosky. i rise in support of the department of defense act of 2017. last year i was unable to vote were this legislation but the bill before us today is improved and is one i can support. i was unable to vote for the previous bill tawes because it included budget gimmicks that would have jeopardized a full year of funding for our troops and threat readiness. i am pleased to see this problem
has been resolved. this bill provides funding for the remainder of the 2017 fiscal year without breaking the budget cap. it also includes much-needed pay raise for our service members and ensures that they will have the equipment that they need to complete their missions and come home. what is disappointing is that we're voting on this legislation today, halfway through the fiscal year. this work should have been finished months ago. instead a stalled appropriations process left the defense department and our troops operating under a damaging continuing resolution. right now it opportunity appear the f.y. 2018 process will go any smoother. president trump's proposed increase for defense will come at the expense of essential domestic programs that our service men and women and their families depend on. education for their children, quality of health for their families. safe roads to drive on. protection of clean air and drinking water. the list goes on and on. mr. speaker, i am voting for this bill today but i want to
make it clear that i'm very concerned about president trump's proposed cuts that would put our national security against our domestic needs of all americans. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from kentucky, from rogers, for two minutes, a member of the defense appropriations committee and a chairman in his own right. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. rogers: thank you mr. speaker. thank you, mr. chairman. congratulations on your assumption of the chairmanship of the full committee and for putting this bill together when you chaired the subcommittee on defense. this bill certainly represents the outcome of many hard choices. it prioritizes funding for our -- where our troops need it most. it wisely invests in readiness, training, maintenance and procurement. and ensures that our troops are
prepared for the tasks before them. also trks this bill supports our efforts to defeat isil alongside our allies in the region as well as our continued focus on deterring russian aggression. i'm also pleased, mr. speaker, that this bill takes care of the troops. and their families. granting them a long-awaited 2.1% pay raise. time and again, our service members put themselves in harm's way and respond to the myriad threats facing the nation. this pay raise is one small way for us to honor their dedication and willingness to serve. as the threats we face continue to become more unpredictable, we must provide our troops with the trools they teed -- with the tools they need to win in uncertain times. this bill goes a long way toward restoring the shortfalls in manpower and readiness that our military has endured in recent
years. in closing, mr. speaker, let me call attention again to will smith, who has been clerk of this committee for six years, served as my chief of staff in my private office for many years before. this is likely his last appropriations bill on the floor to help manage and put together, and so i want to say to will an to all of you on behalf of saying something good about will what a great amount of service he rendered the nation with a true kentucky attitude, which he has. will, we owe you a lot, thank you for your service, you've been great, we wish you god speed. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from indiana is recognized.
>> mr. speaker, i would simply follow up on the chairman's remarks and also want to congratulate mr. smith on his life of service to this country. mr. visclosky: mr. pomeranz on our side was also mentioned. again, both gentlemen in their service to this country are a reflection on public service. i appreciate it very much on behalf of all of us in this chamber. mr. speaker, i would now yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. ruppersberger, who is also a member of the defense subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. ruppersberger: thank you. mr. chairman, i rise today to support the department of defense appropriations act. i'd like to thank chairman granger and ranking member visclosky for bringing this bill to the floor. the bill helps to close gaps in readiness, while making investments in research and development. these investments are critically important because i guarantee our adversaries know where we have work to do. mr. chairman, i represent a congressional district home to two army bases, the n.s.a. and
several national guard facilities. and dozens of other private sector partners. i serve on the board of u.s. naval academy and i co-chair the army cawculls. my experience tells me we're living in a world that has changed since our armed forces entered the middle east 16 years ago. while our men and women in foe, our ught our near adversaries such as russia and china made advancements in technology that threaten to degrade our military qualitative advantage. this appropriation bill ensures our troops are ready and that we have enough of them to get the job done. it fully funds the new end strength number. and allows for a 2.1% pay raise for our troops. this is the least we can do for the brave men and women who sacrifice for our country. this bill also deters russian aggression by fully funding the european reassurance initiative and makes critical investments in missile defense technology. this bill is a solid start and i encourage all of my
colleagues to support it. there's still work to be done. our troops should trust the elected officials will support them and do their job to fund the government. just as we trust them to accomplish the mission assigned to them. band-aid budgets are bad for everyone. our partners in industry, the american taxpayers and especially our armed forces. now's not the time to argue over partisan issues. congress should create a front line of support for our armed forces that is just as strong as the front line our soldiers have created to protect us. i call on all my colleagues to work in a bipartisan fashion to pass this and the other f.y. 2017 appropriation bills as quickly as possible. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from indiana reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. frelinghuysen: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from texas, judge john carter, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: mr. chairman, i'm grateful that we're here hoping to end the continuing resolution on the department of
defense. and i rise in support of the action we're going on today. we all know too well continuing resolutions are unacceptable burdens on the least and the greatest of our d.o.d. assets and our members and civilians, at a time of unprecedented threats to our nation. i want to thank chairman frelling hughesen and chairman man frelinghuysen and chairman grange aer for bringing this bill to the floor. i would also like to thank this committee for fully funding and increasing the active guard and reserve soldiers. i am also co-chair of the army caucus and providing them with the modern equipment, training necessary to keep them alive and the greatest fighting force on earth is very important to the defense of our nation. we have more that we need to consider.
chief of staff daniel allen recently told the house armed services committee that our rmy requires modernization equipment -- mr. frelinghuysen: i'm pleased to yield the gentleman another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. carter: our army requires modernization equipment to win decisively. today we are outranged, outgunned and outdated. at the present time he says that only three of the army's 58 brigade combat teams are ready to fight. it is crucial, and i urge my colleagues to support this appropriations bill and fully fund our armed services. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana. mr. visclosky: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. lee, who is a member of the full appropriations committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. lee: thank you very much. first let me thank the gentleman for yielding and also
for his tremendous leadership as our ranking member. and giving us all an opportunity to really voice our opinions and put our points of view forward in a very fair way. so thank you again. i rise in opposition to this bill, however. i offered two amendments to this bill, the fiscal 2017 defense appropriations bill. and i'm really disappointed to once again see that my amendments were not made in order. i want to explain these two amendments. because this is the only chance that we'll have to talk about this. the first amendment, which i've offered several times on a bipartisan basis, would prohibit the funding for the 2001 authorization for the use of military force, the aumf, beginning on september 30, 2017. and that window, mind you, that six-month window provides congress ample opportunity to draft and debate a new aumf and to vote it up or down.
clearly congress is required to act. this amendment would require congress to finally debate and vote on nearly a three-year-long war that is raging in the middle east, a war that has already claimed the lives of several brave service members. the house simply cannot continue to abdicate its constitutional responsibility, to give the american people a voice in the matter of war and peace. i offered another amendment, which prohibits funding for united states combat troops in syria. mr. speaker, this amendment was really simple, but once again, sad to say that it was not made in order. this amendment would use the power of the purse to prevent funding for combat operations in syria, unless the purpose is to rescue or protect members of the armed forces from danger. we can all agree that isis must be degraded and dismantled.
but congress continues to be missing in action from this debate. we know that the 2001 authorization was specific to 9/11. may i have another minute, please? mr. visclosky: i yield another minute to the gentlelady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. lee: thank you very much. as i was saying. with know that the 2001 authorization was -- we we -- we know that the 2001 authorization was specific to 9/11. i voted against it because i knew it would be broadly interpreted, which it has been, and sadly it's a blank check for war. the congressional research service provided us the declassified report saying, and this was last year, it had been used over 35 times. nothing related to 9/11. and so this blank check needs to be repealed. and we also know that isis didn't even exist in 2001. every day more bombs fall and the battlefield expands. we've already spent billion of dollars against this unauthorized war. so congress needs to show up for work, muster its courage,
exercise its constitutional responsibility for debate and vote on the ongoing war in iraq and syria. we owe nothing less to our brave men and women who are in harm's way. it is past time to force the debate and vote on this issue. hopefully one day you'll make these amendments in order. hopefully we'll have bipartisan support to just move forward and do our job as members of congress, which is what the constitution requires. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairman, i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman for three minutes. and thank him for his service on the appropriations committee, on the defense appropriations committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. diaz-balart: mr. speaker, i rise to strongly support this bill. but i want to first start by commending the chairman of the full committee and the former chairman of the subcommittee. for his unwavering commitment to the men and women in uniform
and also for bringing this great bill forward. thank you, mr. chairman. i also want to thank and recognize the good work and the leadership of the new subcommittee chairwoman, the titanium texan, ms. grange aer. -- ms. granger. mr. speaker, i have to also mention the ranking members. mrs. lowey and mr. visclosky. this frankly is a partnership in allowing this bill to come forward. mr. speaker, with this bill congress fulfills what i believe is an essential part what have we're here to do. and what government's essential role is. to fulfill, to provide for the common defense. this bill is essential for the men and women who serve our nation with distinction in the military. this bill funds a 2.1% pay raise for the military, something that they so, so deserve. it also targets resources for the health care to our service members and to their family
members. and throughout the year, you've already heard it, we've heard testimony time and time again from our service chiefs about the necessity to address our military's alarming readiness shortfall. while this bill, mr. speaker, addresses the readiness problems, that are making it more and more difficult for our troops. and we devote resources to prepare our troops both for combat and peace-time missions. including flight time and training and to ensure that we maintain our military superiority. lastly this bill provides the necessary essential equipment, the weapons systems and the blatt forms needed to main -- platforms needed to maintain that essential military superiority. both, whether it's in the air and the sea, on the ground. so, mr. speaker, i would just end with what i mentioned before. i believe the principle job of our federal government is to defend and protect our country. the defense appropriations bill before us does just that. and it deserves all of our
support. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana. mr. visclosky: mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from ohio, ms. kaptur, a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. kaptur: thank you, ranking member visclosky, very much. mr. speaker, every year our top responsibility as appropriators is to finish the 12 spending bills that keep our government running by october 1 of the year before that fiscal year is supposed to start. but here we are today, march 8, halfway into the fiscal year 2017, finally voting on a compromise bill that closely reflects the requests the last administration delivered to us one year ago, february. our service chiefs and secretaries present a consistent clear message to congress. they've pleaded for stability and predictability in the budget so they can ensure complete readiness of america's forces. force readiness remains the
defense community's top priority. funding the capabilities to provide this responsibility must remain our top priority. and we must approach congress' appropriations responsibility from the historic bipartisan process that has broken down once too many times in recent years. this political infighting harms the stability and predictability necessary for our armed forces to properly plan. it left both our adversaries and allies questioning our ability to defend or support the multiple conflicts we are currently engaged in abroad. this compromise worked out by our responsible colleagues, congresswoman granger, chairman frelinghuysen, ranking member visclosky, ranking member lowey, and their senate counterparts are strong >> imers of hope that we might actually finish -- are strong glimmers of hope that we might actually finish our responsibilities. but we have 10 additional subcommittee bills that are equally important and account
for nearly half of our budget. when will we vote on those compromise bills? i can think of little that would be more irresponsibility than to only move this -- irresponsible than to only move this defense bill and leave remaining agencies operating under a continuing resolution. i've always supported our troops and our national defense. however, we know the safety and well-being of the american people does not merely rely on defense funding. it is rooted in the stability of the republic they are sworn to protect and defend. we have a responsibility there, equally important. our financial commitments to energy independence, critical infrastructure, homeland security, funding for first responders, teachers, health care programs are equally necessary to increase america's security at home and abroad. and i hope my colleagues alleviate this concern and quickly package the remaining bills for a vote as the american people so richly deserve. i thank you very much for allotting me the time and i yield back any additional time to the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from indiana reserves -- the gentleman from
indiana reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. frelinghuysen: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from arkansas for two minutes and thank him for his great contributions to the defense subcommittee on appropriations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. womack: thank you, mr. speaker. i consider it one of the great honors in congress to serve on the defense appropriations committee with some real champions for national security. guys like rodney frelinghuysen, the overall chairman. chairwoman kay granger from the defense subcommittee. my friend, pete advice clossically over there, the rank -- pete visclosky over there, the ranking member. these are all people who have heart and soul for what we're trying to do here today, that's to provide for the common defense. it's our constitutional duty. guys like mac thornberry, the chairman of the house armed services committee, a lot of champions here that believe in a strong national defense. mr. speaker, not only does this bill rebuild readiness by giving our troops the equipment they need, but it also reverses obama-era cuts to developing defense platforms. stops troop drawdowns and
perhaps most importantly gives our war fighters a much-deserved pay raise. as a 30-year veteran of the arkansas army national guard, i'm particularly pleased that this bill provides the funding necessary to ensure the national guard remains a fully operational force. it's a good bill, mr. speaker, and with a willing partner in the white house and a pledge to rebuild our military, it marks the first step, an important first step, our congress has to take to complete our business from last year. . and it gives our defenders what they need and what they deserve and that's certainty. threats are growing. america must project strength. that starts with creating a military so strong that we never send our men and women downrange in a fair fight. i call on my colleagues to stand strong against our enemies, take this first step today in projecting power with our financial commitment. i urge a yes vote on the bill, and i yield back the balance of
my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana. mr. visclosky: mr. speaker, i verve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. >> i yield to mrs. roby for three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. mrs. roby: i appreciate the chairman of frelinghuysen and chairman granger at the defense subcommittee on this bifment providing for the common defense is one of our most fundamental duties under the constitution. last week i appreciated the message that president trump delivered in his joint session address and i was particularly encouraged by his call to properly fund our military. for the last six years we've been in almost constant tension th an administration whose sequestration policy threatened
to hallow out our military. mr. speaker, as a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, i stand ready to work with the president and secretary mattis to make sure our military is properly funded, well equipped and ready for the fight. that's why i'm so proud to support this defense appropriations bill. our bill rejects the obama administration's proposed troop level reductions that would have amounted to as many as 36,000 service men and women cut from the ranks. instead, our bill provides funding for an additional 1,000 active duty army soldiers, 1,000 army national guard soldiers, 1,000 army reserve soldiers and 1,000 active duty marines. the bill also fully funds the much deserved 2.1% pay raise for military personnel. mr. speaker, i'm proud to represent a district that's home to fort rutger and maxwell gunner intellectual base. i'm pleased to report this bill
contains a strong budget for army aviation, including $187 million for the 28 lacota helicopters, which are the primary aircraft used for training at fort rutger. it also contains an increase of almost $450 million for the air force's cybersecurity efforts. serves as an intellectual hub for the air force and -- in the emerging battlefield for cyberwarfare. this appropriations bill contains procurement for 74 joint strike fighters. the montgomery base is on the short list for being assigned this next generation fighter jet, and our alabama congressional delegation is working together to make the case to the air force why this special unit is an ideal fit. mr. speaker, i take our responsibility to craft sound military spending plans very
seriously. i am pleased the house is moving the fiscal year 2017 defense appropriations bill this week, and i urge my colleagues to support its passage. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana. mr. visclosky: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. frelinghuysen: i yield to mr. jenkins two minutes, he's a great member of the full committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. jenkins: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. chairman, i want to say thank you for the outstanding work and effort that you have put into this critically important piece of legislation and chairwoman granger, thank you for your strong support in advancing this much-needed legislation. the people before me have talked so eloquently about our responsibility as members of congress to defend and protect our nation. we've talked about national security. we've talked about troops. we've talked about battling
terrorism and that's what this bill does. but i want to take a slightly different approach and say something about what this bill does in all of our communities, not just distance lands around the world, but in our home communities. i want to highlight one area that will make a real difference in all of our communities, and that's the national guard's counterdrug program. this program is essential in detecting, disrupting and curtailing drug trafficking. it provides resources to almost every state and territory to help train personnel and run counterdrug missions. the national guard supports almost 60,000 requests a year for assistance from local law enforcement agencies. in fiscal year 2014, national guard counterdrug programs took
almost $12 billion in illegal drugs off the streets. this minor investment is paying major dividends. during ndaa consideration i helped secure an amendment to this se funding for account by this account by $30 million because this program works. this legislation under consideration today also increases funding for this vital program. $135 million more than the mount requested by then-president obama. this is a critical moment in combating the drug crisis, and we must fully fund every program that will help us solve it. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. frelinghuysen: mr. speaker, i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from mississippi, mr.
palazzo, a great member of the full committee, for a minute or two minutes as he wishes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. palazzo: well, thank you, mr. speaker and thank you, mr. chairman, for the time. 2017 today in the defense appropriations bill. i have long said the number one constitutional responsibility of this body is the common defense of this nation, and today the appropriations committee under the leadership of chairman frelinghuysen has once again shown the importance that we place on this most sacred duty. after years of weak budget requests from our prior administration, this bill contains over $5.2 billion over the 2016 level, and more than a illion and a half over the obama request. included in that appropriations bill is the funding of 10 new ships for our navy including l.p.d., essential to our marine corps mission. as well as three destroyiers, two virginia class submarines, an l.h.a., all ships desperately needed by our navy
and marine corps. funding these ships steadily is not only a key to keeping our military strong but also keeps our industrial base healthy and keeps these ships affordable in the long run. appropriations bill takes the first steps toward rebuilding our military, is showing our allies they can trust us and showing our enemies they should fear us. so mr. speaker, i thank the chairman appropriations bill takes for his work and his staff on this fine bill and encourage all my colleagues to support this important legislation. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from indiana. -- visclosky: mr. speaker mr. speaker, sen: i'm prepared to yield back and urge all members to vote in the affirmative. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back? mr. frelinghuysen: yes, i do. mr. visclosky: mr. speaker, i end where i begin because i think this will be the last time we will manage a defense
appropriations on the floor. it has been a delightful relationship and look forward to continue as you're chairman of the full committee. again, thank the staff and working with chairwoman granger and ask my colleagues to support the bill and yield back my time as well. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. frelinghuysen: i yield back as well. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 174, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. pursuant to clause 10 of rule 20, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this uestion are postponed.
for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, parliamentary inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his inquiry. >> mr. speaker, can you tell us when the congressional budget office will score the republican a.c.a. replacement bill? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has not stated a parliamentary inquiry. members are reminded to refrage from requiring communicative badges while under recognition. mr. takano: i do the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion that the house adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. takano: i ask for a recorded vote, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is
ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is 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: on this vote the yeas are 114. the nays are 290. the motion is not adopted. the unfinished business is the vote on passage of h.r. 1301 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1301, a bill making appropriations for the department of defense for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2017. and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on passage of the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is 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: on this vote the yeas are 371. the nays are 48. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? collins mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report. the clerk: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 180, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 720, to amend rule 11 of the federal rules of civil procedure to improve attorney accountability and for other purposes. and providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 985, to amend the procedures used in federal court class actions to end multidistrict litigation proceedings to ensure a fair, more efficient outcome for claimants and defendants and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.
he house will be in order. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on -- pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? gentlemen, please take your seats. >> i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 132. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 132, a ar bill to authorize the secretary of the interior to convey certain land and appurtenances of the ar buckle project, oklahoma, to
the ar buckle converseansy district, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks including extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. webster: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. webster: h.r. 132, sponsored by congressman tom cole of oklahoma, conveys two acres and two buildings of land of federal ar buckle project to serveansy e master of oklahoma. it has operated and maintained the project for decades and repaid for the project in 2012. while noncontroversial, legislation is necessary in order to facilitate this and other bureau of reclamation titles and transfers. under current law, these buildings and land remain in federal ownership until legislation --
the speaker pro tempore: the entleman will suspend. the house will be in order. mr. webster: until legislation is enacted. the speaker pro tempore: members in the rear of the chamber, please take seats or remove conversations from the floor. the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: until legislation is enacted to transfer the title of the -- to the district. mr. cole's bill achieves this objective. this title transfer is a win-win for the district and for the federal government. the district will no longer be subject to certain federal paperwork requirements and the federal government will be relieved of all future liability and financial responsibilities associated with these facilities and land. i urge the adoption of this measure which overwhelmingly passed the house on a bipartisan basis last congress and i reserve the balance of my
time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. >> mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, h.r. 132, as the gentleman from florida just mentioned, would allow a title transfer of two federal buildings to the arbuckle master conservancy district in south central oklahoma. mr. huffman: these were part of the arbuckle project which is a water project authorized by congress back in 1962 to provide flood control, recreational opportunities and municipal water supply. nearly all the facilities within this project were already transferred to the arbuckle master conservancy district in 2012 after the district finished repaying what it owed the federal government for construction. however, due to some overerly narrow language, two buildings within the -- >> mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members, please cease conversations in the back of the chamber.
i know. on both sides of the aisle. the gentleman from california. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. two buildings have yet to be transferred. transferring them will save taxpayer money that would otherwise be needed to operate and maintain these buildings. it will also relieve the federal government of any potential future liability associated with these buildings. it's a straightforward bill that should be quickly passed, so i thank you for the time and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. webster: i yield such time as he may consume oklahoma, mr. cole. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank my good friend for yielding. before i begin my prepared remarks, i had no idea there were such interest in the arbuckle watershed, but i'm flattered and pleased that all of you are here for this important legislation. rise to support h.r. 132, the
arbuckle maintenance complex and district office conveyance act. this bill is straightforward. as mentioned, it's a land conveyance which has both federal and local support. i'd like to remind my colleagues this legislation was passed in the 114th congress on december 7, 2016, by a vote of 412-1, but clearly it was so good you guys wanted it back again. h.r. 132 would authorize the secretary of the interior to convey certain lands and buildings of the arbuckle project in murray county, oklahoma, to the arbuckle master conservancy district. in 1962 congress authorized the payment of reimbursable cost for construction, operation and maintenance of bureau of reclamation's arbuckle master conservancy district in south central oklahoma. they completed payment in september of 2012. in accordance with the bureau of reclamation framework for the title transfer in december of 2014, the bureau of
reclamation, the district executed an agreement to transfer and fee title certain facilities that could be more effectively and efficiently managed at the local level. the title transfer involves approximately 2.83 acres of land. on this land is a small house, associated structures and the conservatory district's headquarters office building. the house and property are used to accommodate district employee who maintains and inspects the dam and the pumping facility. headquarters office building is the base of operation for the district. this district also divests the federal government of its responsibility and liability associated with the district's facilities. reclamation and the district have worked cooperatively and successfully to address all of the elements necessary to bring this legislation forward and make this transfer proceed as smoothly as possible. i'm pleased this bill is in agreement with which both the federal and local interests are satisfied. i want to urge all of my
colleagues to support this legislation once again, and i want to again thank the chairman for his help in expediting this matter. with that, mr. chairman -- mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from maryland, mr. raskin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. raskin: mr. speaker, thank you. i have a parliamentary inquiry. is it consistent with the rules of the house of representatives for the committee on ways and means and the energy and commerce committee to be considering the american health care act without a c.b.o. score that would permit us to know how much this legislation will cost? the speaker pro tempore: the chair is asking -- the gentleman is asking the chair to make a hypothetical situation that is not pertinent before the business of the house currently. mr. raskin: i didn't think it was currently. i do the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman first yield back to the time that was yielded to
the gentleman from california? mr. raskin: yes, i would. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. raskin: i move to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on adjournment. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. mr. raskin: i would ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the noes have it. the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, 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.]