tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN July 23, 2018 7:15pm-8:55pm EDT
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, america has been the land of opportunity but i'm hearing as i travel in my district a renewed sense of optimism. our economy is stronger and families have more money, workers are seeing bonuses and better wages, unemployment at historic lows. and confidence is soaring. s a directed 90% of workers are keeping more of what they make. the average tax cut this year for n my district was $900. as one constituent put it, any time the american tax pay hears more money in their pocket, it's a good thing.
and businesses and workers are seeing tremendous benefits too. businesses are expanding and hire manager people. in my district a local brewery can now purchase new equipment and raise wages. a local manufacturer told me she plans to bring on new employees. working with the trump administration i'll continue to work to build on this progress so more people can achieve their american dream. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom nevada seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. kihuen: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise to remember the life of bill wolf jr. bill attended the route 91 festival in las vegas on october 1. bill and his wife robin had two kids together, ethan and trevor. bill worked as a senior project manage for dueberry engineers. he enjoyed being a wrestling
coach at the elementary school and coaching little league. he enjoyed hunting, fish, boating, camp, gardening and jogging. bill and robin had traveled to the route 91 festival to celebrate their 20th anniversary. of their wedding. unfortunately, they were separated when gunfire erupted and robin later found out bill did not survive. bill is remembered for being very smart and always being willing to help others. he was passionate about everything he did and was loved by many. i would like to extend my condolences to bill wolf jr.'s family and friends. please note that the city of las vegas, the state of nevada and the whole country grieve with you. i yield back the remaining balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection, -- without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. earlier today i met with christy
glick in my office. mr. thompson: she's an alzheimer's ambassador and through the program, people like christy work throughout the clint to connect with people -- with members of congress and share their personal experience with alzheimer's disease. als him sthers sixth leading cause of death in the united states and has reached crisis proportions. there's no means of treatment, no method of slowing the progression of the disease. one in three seniors will die with the disease. according to the centers for disease control and prevention, five million americans were living with als himmers in 2013. this number is expected to almost triple to 14 million by the year 2050. mr. speaker, alzheimer's not only has a devastating impact on those who are diagnosed with the disease but also their car care -- their care 2005ers -- care givers and loved ones. my own mom, mary thompson, lived
with the disease for 10 years before it took her life. i thank christy and the alzheimer's am bass course for the important work they do to raise awareness of alzheimer's disease and to never stop searching for a cure. thank you and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize the historic retirement of broadcast pioneer and atlanta, georgia, treasure, jocelyn dorsey. mr. johnson: she's really a national treasure, ladies and gentlemen. jocelyn, your list of achievements and accolades are too long for me to recite here. needless to say, your ground breaking 40-plus year career has served as an inspiration to so many and as a role model you have been to so many of us, not
just african-americans but all americans and all georgians. we tip our hats to you and we wish you the best in your retirement and i understand that long distance motorcycle trips may very well be in your future. i hope that you will keep us abrost -- abreast of your exploits in the future. we will miss you but know that you will always be in our hearts and we always will look forward to hearing about your life as you proceed on. so congratulations, jocelyn, job well done. thank you so much. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: mr. speaker, last week i was joined in the house gallery by five incredible young
women. each of them has their own story of survival. each were sexually assaulted while in college. they call themselves the 12th woman. mr. speaker, one in five women will be sexually assaulted while in college in the united states. sexual assault is a crime that tries to steal the dignity, self-respect, and humanity of the victim. well, mr. speaker, the 12th woman has something to say about that. they came to congress and publicly told their heart breaking stories on the steps of our capitol, demanding change, not only at their own school, texas a&m, but nationwide. these ladies are determined not only to be survivor bus victors over their assault. mr. speaker, my grandmother taught me there's no stopping a bold, tenacious texas woman who has made up her mind. abby, megan, sydney, crirsen, niki have made up their minds with unwaver regular solve that sexual assault on campus will stop. and that's just the way it is.
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? without objection. ms. kaptur: mr. speaker, like a bull in a china shop, president trump bulldozed his way through the nato summit, offending our allies and then in helsinki was shamefully servile to russia's autocratic ruler vladimir putin. autocrat putin boasts a long list of brutal and violent threats to liberty, here, at home, and abroad. in early 2014, russian forces illegally invaded ukraine's crimea in the dunbas region, thousands were killed an millions of ukrainians displaced. on february 27, 2016, a russian freedom fighter was gunned down outside the kremlin's crimson walls and in the 2016 election, russian intelligence services
used social media and cyber attacks to target our elections and several of our allies. according to the committee to protect journalists, 58 russian journalists have been brutally murdered since 1992. mr. speaker, russia is murder incorporated under putin's rule. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the records a long list of some of russia's murderous actions and i urge our 39 to see tin for what he is, a brutal dictator, not a competitor. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized. >> human trafficking hurts women and children all around the world. sadly the united states is no exception. as many as 300,000 american children are at risk of child sexual exploitation. mr. paulsen: it's happening in every community around the country. every weekend in minnesota, as
many as 45 minnesota girls are sold for sex. but there is good news. the fight -- the fight online sex trafficking act, a new law passed with bipartisan support earlier this year, to crack down on websites that facilitate trafficking is making a difference. backpage.com, the single largest online source of sex trafficking, has been shut down by law enforcement. july 30 marks world day against trafficking, another opportunity to -- to raise awareness and also redouble our efforts in the fight against traffickers and helping victims. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, tonight i want to discuss the importance of nato to our nation and to europe. in 1949, the united states and 11 other countries created nato. today, 29 countries make up this alliance.
at the heart of nato is article 5, which says attack on one is an attack on all. on september 12, 2001 for the first time ever, article 5 was invoked. 9/11, an attack on america, was an attack on awful most recently, the country of meant negro joined the nato alliance. and last week, sadly, the president expressed doubt that the u.s. should come tomont negro's defense. this is disturbing. the only time article 5 has been invoked has been for america. when our nation was at its most vulnerable point, nato stepped up and had our back. we must uphold our commitment to this critical alliance. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker.
the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 184, the protect medical innovation act. many medical device manufacturers in north carolina's fifth district have reported how the medical device exeeze tax hinders medical innovation, costs jobs, decreases research and development, and slows capital expansion. a fundamentally flawed policy enacted under obamacare, the medical device excise tax was intended to spare taxpayers health care costs. instead it burdens these taxpayers and -- innovator, and innovators are the backbone of our economy. according to the tax foundation, the medical device tax costs approximately $21,-- costs
approximately 21,800 jobs from 2013 to 2015. furthermore, the tax is hidden from consumers at purchase and passed off to them in higher prices. congress has suspended this tax twice before and as an original co-sponsor of this legislation, i urge my colleagues to vote for its permanent repeal with the protect medical innovation act this week. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii seek recognition? without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. for decades, bad data and misinformation niled failed war on drugs that's wasted billions of taxpayer dollars incourse rating americans for nonviolent marijuana charges. ms. gabbard: our outdated marijuana policies have turned everyday americans into criminals, strained our criminal justice system, cost taxpayers tremendously, and torn families apart, all for a substance that's proven to be far less
harmful and dangerous than alcohol. our federal policies should be based on actual science and fact, not misplaced stigma and outdated myths. however the fact that marijuana is currently classified as a schedule 1 drug, the same category as heroin, cocaine, restricts and even discourages scientific research on marijuana, limiting our ability to create science-based policies. i'll be introducing the bipartisan marijuana data collection act with my colleague, congressman carlos curbelo so we can get studies to set the record straight oumple bill would authorize a nonpartisan, evidence-based report that analyzes current marijuana policies across the country and their effects on our communities. i urge my colleagues to support our bipartisan legislation. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized.
>> mr. speaker, the families of our veterans also sacrifice a great deal when their loved ones have been deployed and even when they come home. mr. lamalfa: current law, unfortunately, doesn't allow a spouse to be recognized by the v.a. provided grave marker after that spouse has passed away. some veterans in the north state in my district recognized this and brought it to my attention. the v.a. requested this in their budget request but the change requires action of congress. under the legislation, the v.a. will have the ability to replace the marker of a veteran to add an inprescription about their spouse following the loss of that spouse. veterans certainly should have the option of including their spouse on their own tombstone if they so choose. so this is a bill that unfortunately is needed to once again honor our veterans and the sacrifice of their families.
let's hope we can pass it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection the gentleman rom texas is recognized. mr. olson: mr. speaker, the american dream is alive and well texas 22 and alive and well at the pizza and grinders. this is a walking and talking american dream. war- the cohen family left torn kosovo and started their life in michigan. but they saw the bright light of the lone star state and moved to
exas and think started tony's. they are special because they care more about others than about making dollars. hurricane harvey, they gave free food to a volunteer fire department so they can keep saving lives. if you want the freshest, best their n america, try prouth. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and resize and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. tenney: thank you, mr. speaker. sometimes we don't realize we are surrounded by heroes. today i rise to celebrate the actions of a yorkvilleries dent,
lieutenant timothy corey and was honored one of the highest civilian honors. while invasion, he discovered a oung boy stuck in an outdoor out take pipe. he jumped into the water and for eight minutes breathed air into the drowning boy. the young boy was released from the hospital six days later. the bravery displayed often goes unrecognized. i now recognize lieutenant timothy corey as a true hero in our community. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further requests for time for one-minutes? the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. graves of
louisiana for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the request is granted. under the speaker's announced the of swran 3, 2017, gentleman from california is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. >> i ask unanimous consent that are all members may have five legislative days to include extraneous materials on the topic of my special order. mr. speaker, two years ago, house republicans made a promise to the american people that there was a better way forward under our leadership. mrs. walters: this wasal pathway to a safer community, stronger
community and robust economy. since then, house republicans have complied with results, not rhetoric. thanks to this progress, the american people are better off now. republicans started by moving bills that address some of the biggest issues plaguing cities and towns across the country. we passed over 50 bills to put end to the end of the opioids. e online sex trafficking industry was signed into law and we are keeping our children safe by providing funding for school safety programs. we are ensuring our troops have the tools, training and equipment they need to keep us safe both at home and abroad. our brave men and women in
uniform received their largest pay raise in 10 years. we are providing our veltrans by overhauling the v.a. and have access to reliable care and the ax cuts and jobs act has the most important effect on the daily lives of americans. it has led to economic growth across our nation. americans are keeping more of their hard-earned paychecks while companies are creating jobs and opportunity for all. at home in orange county, the unemployment rate has dropped to a 20-year low while pay and benefits continue to rise. and economic confidence is soaring. mr. speaker, i could go about
the numerous accomplishments house republicans have achieved in the last 18 months, but the american people don't need convincing but are seeing the results firsthand. our nation is without question better off now and we will continue our work to improve the lives of all americans. i'm proud to introduce my friend and fellow committee member, committee betty carter from the 1st district of georgia. mr. carter: i thank the gentlelady. i rise today to join my colleagues in discussing how americans are better off now. two years ago, i told the 1st district of georgia about our bold agenda and improve the lives of every day americans. now, i'm thrilled americans are experiencing the results.
we have instituted sound pro-growth policies and the economy is booming. now people are no longer asking where are the jobs. s, tead, thanks to tax reform we have more job openings than job seekers. last week, i visited game changers in richmond hill and savannah, while the revenue is up, they are hiring employees at both locations and increased wages and given bonuses. it is incredible to hear how local businesses are thriving again and that's not all. as the proud representative of every branch of the military, i have been fighting for our troops and military because they deserve better. republicans vrl fixed the v.a.
after years of neglect we have rovided investments in training. members of our military put their lives on the line for our country and working to provide the support and ensure they are the most well prepared on the planet. finally, we made major strides to make our communities safer cluding fighting the opioids epidemic, the house has passed 50 bills. and the list goes on and on. house republicans are fighting for americans in washington to deliver results, not rhetoric. i hear from small businesses, big businesses and citizens in the first district all the time. americans are truly better off now. thank you, mr. speaker. nd i yield back.
mrs. walters: i yield to the congresswoman from north carolina, mrs. foxx. ms. foxx: thank you, congresswoman walters. i appreciate you leading this special order tonight to bring attention to the american people the fact that they are better off now than they were two years ago. this is an important message for us to share with the american people, many of us are doing it individually, but we appreciate your leadership on this. mr. speaker, two years ago, house republicans promise todd eplace our broken tax code and rein the run-away administrative state and made it harder for businesses to create jobs and
growth. we proposed a better way to grow the economy for solutions with hard-working americans that were being chewed up by our system and struggling to get by. this congress, we have delivered on our promises. and i am pleased to say that the people of north carolina are better off now. we passed the most significant tax reform in over 30 years and every day, americans are already reaping the benefits. according to the tax foundation, the average increase in take-home pay for a family of four in the 5th district is 1,843. i would like to say it again, mr. speaker, 1,843. those are hard-earned wages being kept in paychecks and not sent to washington to finance
inefficient government bureaucracy. and speaking of bureaucracy, mr. speaker, this congress has also enacted historic regulatory relief with 16 congressional review act resolutions becoming law. five of those resolutions came out of the house committee on education and the work force, which i chair, and i was able to get a sixth enacted that i sponsored that came through another committee. we have rolled back some of the obama-resolution who thought they knew better. but republicans did not agree with them. north carolina's economy is evidence that republicans' policies are working. ust compare the north carolina
department of commerce's figures and you will see that our state now stands 1 thurks,000 jobs ahead. there is still work to be done. but thanks tore tax and regulatory relief, north carolinaians are better off now. again i want to thank representative walters for leading this special order and i yield back to congresswoman walters. mrs. walters: i now have the privilege to introduce the chair of the house republican representative mrs. mcmorris rodgers. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: i thank you to talk about americans who are better off now because of this congress and i want to join and share why americans and
families are better off and that's because republicans have provided a better way. after years of struggling to get ahead, men and women and are seeing jobs. this is the comeback story through our agenda. and over the past two years we have worked hard to deliver on that agenda. t bet earl.gop, america is stronger at home and abroad with a booming community andry vifed military. after historic tax reform and obama-air rein regulations, job openings at a record high, paychecks are growing and wages are rising right along with consumer
confidence. in my home state of washington, the average wage increase just hit a 10-year high and those increases are benefiting like garfield county. the smallest coirnt in the state of washington and the average wage increase has been 8.7% this the last year. another small rural county, they have seen a 6.6% increase in the has year. for other rural counties, unemployment rates. another in my district, seen a .2% drop. for families and small businesses who are no longer jofrle taxed and joifer regulated, they have confidence because they can achieve a better life and reach their full fonings. that's what i'm most excited about. i'm excited about the hope and
optimism that is bringing top people across this country. it wasn't that long ago, 2010, unemployment was at 9.9%. our policies have unleashed economic growth. more americans are coming into the work force. just last month, 600,000 americans and i'm proud to say people with disabilities, as the "washington post" reported the jobless rate for workers with disabilities has fallen at a faster rate than the general population. washington state is this is good news because washington is about to launch our able account and i am working to help those with disabilities explore work, get a job or an internship, take that money and put it into their able
account. 15,000 people in my state will be eligible for an able account, to find a job that give thems dignity and purpose. we all recognize a job is the foundation for a better life. a booming economy isn't the only reason americans are better life. we've also made significant investments to combat the opioid crisis and human trafficking. target dangerous criminals and make school safer. after the obama administration left our armed forces depleted, we've made good on the promise to revive and rebuild our military. in addition to giving our troops the biggest pay increase in almost a decade, we've provided for the largest increase in defense in 15 years. our troops, including those i have the privilege of representing at fairchild air force base, will now have additional resources to train, address the readiness crisis and keep america secure. madam speaker, the american people don't want rhetoric.
they want results. and after years of a slow -- of the slow growth and lack of confidence, stagnant wages, stagnant economy they asked for a better way. i'm proud to have been part of a group that's proven that we can get those results done. by people -- by putting peeping first and focusing on improving lives we've delivered real results and a better way forward and that's why americans are better off today. i invite everyone to learn more at better.gop and i yield back and thank the lady for hosting us tonight. thank you so much, mimi. mrs. walters: i'd like to introduce my colleague serving on the committee of transportation and infrastructure and work force, i yield to congressman drew ferguson. mr. ferguson: thank you. madam speaker, i'd like to thank my colleague from california for leading this special order. boy what a year and a half it's
been since i came to congress. there's been a lot of really positive things that have gone on. that i think that americans feel that we are better off now. i'll tell you what, if you listen to the media and listen to the rhetoric, you wouldn't know it. every time i travel home and i talk to the folks in the third district of georgia, it's a sense of optimism. this reality that they're doing better, their wages are up, job tuns are more. they are doing better. they feel more safe and they feel more secure. in spite of what you might have heard on tv and in the other parts of the media, over 177 bills have been signed into law with the 115th congress. that's the most of any congress at this point since 2008. and the results are clear. americans are better off. i've heard from small businesses, slike shredx in
griffin georgia, custom bodyworks, and emmitt manufacturing in la grage. they're all making investment, expanding, being more productive. most importantly, they're hire manager people and they're investing in their people with higher wages and better training. and the families are doing better throughout our district. but these businesses are doing more than simply investing in their people and in their businesses. they're investing in their communities. so our communities are become manager helpful. all of this is the result of a tax reform bill, better regulatory environment, and a changing attitude and education that ensures that people pursue their talents and not just a degree. but they are involved in making sure that they are able to make a living in viable careers for a long period of time. it's not just the economy that's making us more secure. we've invested heavily in our military and we have fully
funded our men and women serving this nation. most importantly, when they return home, we have made the changes in the v.a. that overtime -- that over time will make sure they have the benefits they have earned and quite candidly that they deserve. we've also made investments in many other areas. think about what we have been able to accomplish with human trafficking. we're beginning to take steps to change how we view addiction and the opioid crisis. we're making progress and that's making americans better. it's easy to get caught up in the news of the moment, to get clouded from the really good things that are happening. but we're here to remind america that things are better now because of the things we have done in the house of representatives. with that, i yield back. ms. walters: madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my
time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california yields back the balance of her time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. evans, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. evans: thank you, madam speaker. it is with great honor that i rise today to anchor this c.b.c. special order hour. i'd like to thank the -- i'd like to thank the c.b.c. chairs, chairman richmond, for his leadership in this effort. for the next 60 minutes we have an opportunity to speak directly to the american people about the issues of great importance to the congressional black caucus
and the constituents we represent. tonight's special order hour is introduced the topic, mr. speaker, i ask for unanimous consent to all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraordinary -- extraneous material on the subject of the special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. speaker, i'm going to do something highly un-- mr. evans: mr. speaker, i'm going to do something highly unusual today because my colleague who is here from the district, knows an awful lot about this subject, i've watched her, observed her, she's taught a few people on this subject matter. she is an expert so i always think what's the best way to tart off as a former law professor who teach, who understands a great deal about
what our supreme court means as the third element in this element of the legislative aspect and the chief executive. i've heard her in congressional black caucus meet, she's from the district, congressman eleanor holmes norton, i'd like for her to start off this conversation, i yield to the representative. ms. norton: i very much appreciate the kind words of my friend from pennsylvania. i certainly appreciate his leadership of this special order this evening. it is a subject of immense importance to the american people, none more so, mr. speaker, than people of color in the united states of america. so i would like to begin this by speaking to president trump's district and circuit court nominees and then
of course to his supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. who serves on the circuit court, that is to say the court of appeals, for the district of columbia. that is the circuit of my own home district. mr. speaker, long before i came to the house, i had the distinct honor of arguing and winning a case before the united states supreme court. that case was a free speech case where i represented plaintiffs with whom i profoundly disagreed. s we looked at the president's nominees, especially to the supreme court, one wonders today .ow these nominees would rule
let's look first at president trump's nominees so far to the circuit courts and the district court. this is an amazing, unprecedented figure for the 21st century. is nominees are 90% white. 2.3% african-american. now one way to look at this is to look at another republican president. so i said to my staff, find what president bush, find who president -- the makeup, the racial makeup of president bush's nominees. remember, african-americans don't expect a republican president to have anything like the number of nominees of, for
example, president barack obama. not because he was african-american but because he was, after all a democrat. that's not the standard to which i'm holding this president. the standard i'm holding this president to is by comparison to republican presidents. the lies share of president bush's appointees were also white. i had no complaints then. i don't recall the congressional black caucus taking to the floor and saying, how come the lion's share of president bush's nominees are white? more than 85%. that reflected his party. and his supporters. 8.5% of president bush's ominees were african-american.
bush's to 2.3% of nominee. that means president bush i'm looking at the comparable period, not his overall two terms in office, i'm looking at up to now and he had appointed three times as many african-americans to the bench. far more whites, i have no complaint about that. but the supreme court and the federal courts have meant everything to african-americans. do not need to point out that the political bodies in the house and senate took many years to recognize equal protection for african-americans. it didn't happen, indeed, until
the courts made it happen in brown v. board of education. in 1954. showing, i think, that the courts are of immense importance to a group that is not the majority and must depend upon the fairness of the majority and even more so on the courts which are supposed to pay no -- play no favorites whatsoever, only to equal justice under the law. the president and the republican senate have made the federal courts a top priority. i believe they have appointed as many 30 nominees if i'm not mistaken, appointed. in fact, the supreme court means so much to them even though they
already have a majority on the supreme court with their most recent nominee, means so much to them that our republican friends in the senate are taking their entire -- wiping their entire august recess away to stay here to try to get brett kavanaugh nominated. and there's a fierce fight under way. i'm speaking about not only kavanaugh, brett kavanaugh, the judge who sitz on the d.c. circuit court of appeals, but i want to give you some assistance of judges that sit on other circuits and other district courts to say, to make it understood why the congressional black caucus is so alarmed at what is happening. some federal court nominees proposed by this president had
had to be rejected because they were unacceptable on any court beyond any sense of conservatism. most recently, i believe just to week, ryan baums was serve on the ninth circuit court of appeals. republican senate forced majority leader mitch mcconnell o simply withdraw his name. because two republicans, two republican senators, senator tim scott of south carolina and senator marco rubio, had indicated that they could not because of n bounds remarks he had made on
multiculturalism and racial issues. you don't want anybody on the bench who's already showing animous. muss -- since the senate is so closely divided, 51 republicans to 49 democrats, they were forced to withdraw the nominee. now, i pount that out to let you know -- point that out to let you know that it is not a done deal that brett kavanaugh will go on the supreme court. that close number is going to hold up, we think, not only for democrats, but when those hearings are over, we believe it will be very difficult even for some of our republican friends to vote for judge kavanaugh. remember, the senate represents
a rather broad swarget of people -- swarth of people. so they will have to watch out for their own elections as well. let me give an opportunity of how extreme president trump's nominees to the federal courts can be. three more have had to be withdrawn related to race. again, i'm going to give you examples and you will say, nobody would ever have nominated such people to any court in the united states. last year the white house was forced to withdraw a district court nominee. his name was brett tally. and what forced his withdrawal were reports that he had efended the first ku klux klan
in an online post, that is the first, i suppose, the emergence of the ku klux klan. as recently as 2011. nominee er had his ithdrawn over reports that transgender children were, and i'm quoting him now, part of satan's plan. now, look. if i were to call out these remarks, you might not think that anybody who had even thought of going on a federal bench would be who i was talking about. but that is exactly who we were talking about. and that is why this congressional black caucus cannot possibly support this nominee. and we are prepared to understand that whatever
nominee comes forward is going to be a conservative nominee. we're not asking for the nominee we would appoint. we're simply not asking, and we will do all we can to oppose nominees who are beyond the american pale. i'm speaking for the congressional black caucus, which represents 17 million african-americans. it's interesting to note that we have, in looking at judge kavanaugh, and here i'm going on to the supreme court, in looking at his decisions, we concerned ruly about his lack of respect for precedent. and i say that even though increasingly these precedents run against us. but when they have run for us, they have been on matters of equal protection under the law
nd judge kavanaugh has shown an uncommon disrespect for precedent. and i invite my republican iends who also respect precedent, because many of those precedents will reinforce heir own views, to be leary of any judge who disregards precedent. his views on civil rights and equal protection have been out of the mainstream, but there haven't been a lot of them. so i have had to look closely to see what his views actually are. and i must say that even his conservative colleagues, and i must emphasize, on the d.c. circuit, which is now a conservative circuit with more
republican judges than democrats -- democratic judges, have often had to disagree with their colleague, brett kavanaugh. he has achieved a higher number of dissents than any member of the d.c. circuit court. how could that happen? this is a conservative court. who is he dissenting from? he's dissenting from not only the democratic appointees, but from his own colleagues appointed by republicans. of of course the notion equal protection has disproportionately protected minorities and women. so, we are very mindful of such
decisions. even when they don't directly entail people of color, whom we directly represent. for example, we are concerned that no americans be arrested without probable cause and if you're a minority in any country, the notion -- the probability of arrest will be greater than if you are among the majority. we are concerned about the affordable care act. again, because of the disproportionate number of african-americans who are affected. and yet i am going cite some decisions that show that judge kavanaugh cannot be trusted to uphold what even his conservative colleagues have said on such issues as these. let us look at arrests without probable cause. i bring that up because of the turning in our country.
a week does not i go about -- go by that there hasn't been a shooting of an african-american . this issue is among the very top in our country. he concern about overzealous police officers. kavanaugh has both spoken out and written over and over again in such a way to indicate that he would weaken the probable cause standards that have stood for the ages. that's how long they've been there. making them, as he has written, more flexible -- oh, my heavens . as you consider this change, this possible change, as one that african-americans are
concerned about, i hope you'll understand that most of the people who need probable cause in this country are white. so, decisions making it easier to do searches without a warrant or individualized suspicion, here i'm quoting him, without a warrant or individualized suspicion are cisions he leaves need to be looked at more closely, even though the existing precedent has been clear and they've not been challenged in other circuits. perhaps the rule that most americans understand best is the so-called miranda rule. that's a rule that says you don't have to incriminate yourself. judge kavanaugh appears to want to narrow that rule.
i didn't think i'd ever see the after decades, must be 50 years, of miranda jurisprudence there would be any judge sitting on any bench that would want to narrow the self-incrimination rule. of special interest to african-americans is judge kavanaugh's apparent views on roe vs. wade or the right of a woman to -- woman's choice. we don't know precisely where he stands on choice. but there is a very troubling precedent from this circuit involving an undocumented woman who had been found to be entitled to an abortion.
that hadn't happened here. it happened -- the case was here. but the ruling was from a texas court. perhaps the most conservative , which rs of abortion made this woman go through many she before deciding that deed qualified under roe vs. wade for an abortion. judge kavanaugh tried to do something that is unconscionable. , the house running here wants abortions done within 20 weeks. roe vs. wade allows more time. but the time was running and judge kavanaugh ruled that she
ould have to get a sponsor before she could in fact enforce her constitutional rights to choice. the court overruled judge kavanaugh. i bring that up in no small part because african-american women, for example, use that is t a rate beyond the average american woman. so this matters to the congressional black caucus. on the affordable care act we have perhaps the most astonishing of judge kavanaugh's decisions. he hasn't said it's unconstitutional, it's pretty hard to say at the circuit court level. but he has said something that's never been said before in american jurisprudence. that a president may decline to
the ce a law, even after supreme court has said -- sorry, has said yes, that the law or statute is constitutional. understand what this means. the affordable health care act has been found to be constitutional. yes, there's still attempts in this house to overturn it. but it stands and it's so popular that while brett kavanaugh is being discussed in the senate during the month of august, senate democrats are going to be talking about the affordable health care act because it has become one of the most popular laws in the united states today. even though the republicans have done all they could to ripple it.
brett kavanaugh, judge the ugh, has said that president may decline to force a law like the affordable care act even after it is found to be constitutional. what happens to the real rule of law if that becomes the standing law of the united states? his is a dangerous, not just a wrong view, a dangerous view. it would allow presidents to pick and choose which laws to enforce. . twithstanding the courts that a president may stand as the sole decider of what laws to enforce, notwithstanding the jurisdiction of the united tates supreme court.
mr. speaker, brett kavanaugh n't fit to ascend to the supreme court of the united states, based on the record he has shown. judge kavanaugh seems to have gone out of his way to try to write his way onto the supreme court. why would he write so often in dissent? in ould he so often write the law reviews, views that are uncommon among republicans? i think he was trying to draw the attention of president trump. and one of the reasons i think so is the last issue i will discuss. and that is, this nominee's view, judge kavanaugh's view of special counsel. you really had to dig this one , he as recently as 2017
dug back into a decision of long ago, morrison vs. -- this is 1988 decision, morrison vs. olson. he said he had agreed with the author of the decision, it was chief justice william rehnquist, the republican chief justice, but he went out of his way to nder about judge rehnquist's holding in that case, morrison vs. olson, that the independent ounsel was constitutional. why did judge kavanaugh go out of his way to talk about the
independent counsel? when in fact there was no such case before him. i think he was sending a signal to this president, don't worry about the independent counsel as far as i'm concerned. with whetheruarrel or not the independent counsel law is constitutional. if there wasn't an independent counsel law, really what would be the deterrent to a lawless president? the deterrent of course would have to be impeachment. impeachment is understood to be a political process. that's why it's very hard to get. so right now we have matters before the independent counsel
that are indeed ordinary riminal and civil matters. the notion that somebody sitting on any federal court in the united states that believes that the independent counsel statute is unconstitutional, or could be, he hasn't said it's unconstitutional, he's come so close to it that it's note worthy. for anyone judging whether he should go on the supreme court of the united states, judge kavanaugh has demonstrated such a departure from established american law that one wonders why he wants to be on the supreme court of the united states. record ofe a lifetime numerous dissents. i think in order to show that he
bring an even sharper departure from precedent than we have seen, one of the most important and most the vative ways in which courts operate is by precedent so it is very hard to overturn precedent but a determined member of the court can chip away at precedent and we are sure can chip away at the rights of a minority who is disproportionately dependent on a fair supreme court. so i say to my good friend from pennsylvania as i yield the remainder of my time that we have our work cut out for us. but the president's district and ircuit nominees have not all
been upheld and they should encourage us to know that while we're not in the senate we do have two members of the caucus who are in the senate and we must be doing all we can here in the house to help them make the many -- the american people understand what is at stake and to make sure that court of appeals for the district of columbia, brett kavanaugh does not become a member of the supreme court of the united states. i yield to my good friend and thank him for his leadership this evening. mr. evans: mr. speaker, i'd like to ask my good colleague if the district one or two questions if i could. ne of -- listen very intently, one of my favorite decisions that came down was may 17, 1954, brown vs. board of education.
and mr. speaker, the president asked black americans, when he came to the city of philadelphia , he said what do we have to lose? i think, quote-unquote, what the hell do we have to lose? so i ask you that question in the context of brown vs. education, that's over 64 years ago now from where we are and i heard you very succinctly say about his ability to chip away and not, you know, be able to fully overturn. could you talk a little bit about how you see anything relating to brown vs. board of education in his ability in any of his writings relating to that particular decision that came down? ms. norton: my good friend who raises the question of brown vs.
board of education may be seeming to raise a question of such settled law that it couldn't possibly come up. if i may first respond to the gentleman i bisaying that one of president trump's nominees was asked where should -- where she stood on brown vs. board of education and she declined to give an answer. more than 50 years after the supreme court for the first time that ized african-americans must be treated the same as everyone else in the united states, we now have a nominee who questions precedent. hat's a precedent. you may not be able to overturn it but the notion of chipping away at any part of it remembering that what it meant is spread now not across school bus across the jurisprudence of
equality. this means, and i appreciate the say to my good friend if philadelphia, i appreciate the question so that people understand our opposition is not farfetched. at we're talking about a supreme court justice, at least, who leads us to believe that the most settled of the decisions could be rocked by this nominee to the supreme court. i thank my friend and i yield back. mr. evans: one other question you also laid out the percentages of numbers. do you think there is some sort of philosophical packing taking place here when you describe the 8% versus the 2%, but just the 8% is some type of strategy oing on here relating to
packing the court, the highest court in the land, at least some way influencing years and year, 25, 50 years down the line is there something going on here that the public showed know and be aware of? you obviously have studies the court system, the judicial system yourself over many, many years have you ever seen and i heard you make the comparison of president bush and i understood the comparison you made but it seems like there's something else going on here besides just putting individuals on the court. but there's something like a -- some type of philosophical strategy going on here. am i missing some point in what you just laid out to us? ms. norton: that is a most
interesting question. as you indicated, i pointed out that i didn't expect a republican president to come anywhere near democratting presidents in appointing african-americans, i don't expect complete disdain for the importance of the courts to african-americans. i would not expect the lowest number of african-americans appointed to the courts of the united states in memory. certainly not since the 20th century brown vs. board of education. there have been some sense of epublicans that one way to indicate that a republican president believes in equal justice was to in fact have some african-americans on the court. now when you get to 90%, more than 90% appointees white, you're sending a very strong message on equal prosection to
-- protection to african-americans. this president has been accused of racism because of some of the thing he is said. for example, charlottesville when he seemed to be for those killing people not against them. i'm not sure what his personal views are. showsam sure that when he disdain for equal protection and has given us no evidence he understands equal protection, that we have every reason to wonder what it is that he intends to do to show people of every background that he is for equal justice. t does seem to me that the president needs to make some yes, sir tur -- some gesture to indicate he believes all people
are equal. the best would be to bite into the 2%, little over % figure of african-americans appointed to the bench, raise that number. and the congressional black caucus tonight calls on him. he may have, for example, been those who, staff, have been giving him judges to appoint but i say to you , my good friend from pennsylvania that there are many senators who i'm sure have given him some qualified african-american nominees. i would urge the president to wipe away this notion that he thinks the united states of america should have as close to an all-white judiciary as he can get by talking to, listening to, some of his, some senators who i am almost certain will have already put forward some african-americans or surely will be doing so in the future.
mr. evans: one last question i'd like to ask you. you know, we, the congressional black caucus, gave a document to the president that said we have a lot to lose. in asking that question and you have again done an excellent job in laying out historical perspective where we are, obviously as african-americans it seemed like to me there has to be a huge fear factor. the only check and balance obviously is the congressional black caucus, being the conscience of the congress and the united states senate, you know, is that check and balance, what would you say to african-americans, latinos, others relating to where we are? this is a very crucial time. what would you say when he says what the hell do you have to lose and we say we have a lot to lose. what would you say? what would you say to the
people? ms. norton: the most important thing i would say to the people, look at that 49-51 figure of how close the senate is and within a couple of months there will be an election. we could turn a lot of this around. if as the polls tend to show democrats capture the house. and they're increasingly showing they will keep the senate. seems to me all the american people can do now is take to the ultimate remedy. and that is change the congress. that it seems to me would slow up the nominees or get nominees where there would be some consultation with democrats as there has been in the past, often. in the senate because you want to get your nominee through. i kent think by any means that there's anything to fear with an
election coming so close because do believe that what this selection here on the supreme court level and certainly in the district courts and here we have african-americans mindful of the district courts the courts of appeals throughout the united states, surely all of that is, forgive the word, ammunition, to go to the polls to make sure we halt this stripping of equal protection from the federal ourts of the united states. >> i thank my colleague from the great district of columbia, where we need to make sure that you have a right to vote in this body, is also something that needs to take place in terms of the district of columbia and representation.
mr. evans: and i thank you for that knowledge and information you have provided to us. i have someone else, mr. speaker, who i have grown deeply nnding her thoughts and her comments -- understanding her thoughts and cher meants. i had the chance -- her comments. i had the chance of visiting her district in alabama, she's moving and making a lot of things happen there in alabama. she definitely said, i have to speak on this. i heard her give some comments before toen this and she has some real thoughts about what's taking place on the court. congresswoman terry sewell from the seventh -- terri sewell from the seventh district of alabama. i yield to her to comment. ms. sewell: mr. speaker, i want to first commend the gentleman from pennsylvania for his leadership on tonight's topic. i also want to associate myself with his comments, as well as the comments of delegate eleanor holmes norton. congresswoman norton has been a steward on the issue of traditional appointments in the
united states congress for many decaded and it's -- decades and it's an honor to follow her tonight in her leadership against the trump administration attempt to stack the courts with extreme right-wing political allies. just as president trump has attacked our nation's free press, just as he has attacked our intelligence agency, this president is now targeting our nation's third branch of government, our treasured court system. we cannot let president trump destroy yet another institution of american democracy. the importance of a fair and nonpartisan court system cannot be overestimated. it is our supreme court, after all, that decided brown vs. the board of education. the case that ended segregation in america's schools. it was our courts that struck down voter suppression laws like poll taxes, that freed, allowed lots and lots of african-americans in my home state of alabama to vote. it was the supreme court that
protected the work of the free press and our nation's newspapers when president nixon attempted to silence them. and it was our supreme court which struck down discriminatory state laws prohibiting interracial and gay marriage. those court decisions were the products of judges and justices in our judicial system who put our constitution and the law first. irrespective of the pressure they faced from politicians and from presidents. you know, mr. speaker, the opposite can be true as well. when our courts are stacked with political allies who put politics first and justice last, our nation suffers. we need think of no other than the infamous supreme court decision which paved the way for japanese american internment camps as an example. it is a reminder of all that can go wrong when our courts are stacked with political allies.
today our court system continues to decide questions that will have consequences for generations to come. when it comes to gerrymandering and discriminatory voter i.d. laws, our courts are still considering cases that will impact our right to vote. as this administration continues its assault on free press, we should have no doubt that the courts will be faced with a first amendment question in the years to come. that is why president trump's attempt to stack the court is so concerning. last year this administration appointed nine appellate judges. more than any president since nixon during their first term in office. and where do those open appellate seats come from? these are judges where republicans systemically have held open during president barack obama's final two years. i can speak with authority on that fact. because in the state of alabama
we had not one, not two, but three open federal judgeships that were held open for two-plus years. and one 11th circuit appellate judgeship that was held open for two years. yes, the people of alabama were not well served by the fact that my republican colleagues with held appointing any person -- withheld appointing any person to that. it was a good bet for them but it was a bad bet for the american people and for the people of alabama. for, you see, the judges that were sitting took on an inornament amount of caseload that was unacceptable. i know that for one in the middle district of alabama, there was a senior judge by the name of miron thompson who had 120% caseload. yes, that's right. as a senior judge, he not only had a caseload that equaled or surpassed his caseload when he was an active judge, but as a
senior judge, took on an extraordinary number of cases. why? because in the middle district of alabama, there was only one judge sitting. as well as one senior judge, judge thompson. this is unacceptable. this is an unacceptable play toward politics that in the end disserviced the people of alabama and disserviced the american public. but, the same was true on the supreme court level. s, judge merrick garland was supremely qualified to sit on the supreme court and was president obama's choice to sit on the supreme court. but a year prior to the 2016 election, the g.o.p. decided that it was not the time for a udge to be appointed, when a federal election was going to take place within a year. now, one could say the same thing about the fact that we have a midterm election that's coming up in 2018.
but oh, no. we don't get the same courtesy. this is politics before people and it's unacceptable and we should not take it sitting down. that is why i am very happy that this, the congressional black caucus, -- congressional black caucus tonight, under the leadership of the gentleman from pennsylvania, is talking about the stacking of the supreme court and it's important to all americans. i can speak firsthand how important the court system was to the civil rights and voting rights movements of america. you know, as a daughter of selma, alabama, and as the first black congresswoman from the state of alabama, i can tell you unequivocally that it was because of the protections of the equal protection amendment. it was because of the constitution and those brave judges, judges like frank johnson of the middle district of alabama who stood against pressure to do what was right for all americans. interpreting the constitution as it was meant to be, that all men and women are created
equal. and that the equal protection of the law extends to all americans. irrespective of race and gender. so i think it's really important that we remember from wence we all come. this is a proud tradition that is important that we uphold. what's even more concerning is the temperament displayed by the court pick under this administration. their lack of qualification for the job, last year president trump nominated four judicial nominees that didn't pass the american bar association's standard for being qualified, rated qualified by the a.b.a. that's a simple standard. the a.b.a. standard of requiring that one be qualified is simple. a nominee must show integrity, professional competence, judicial temperament. during his eight years in office, president obama never, i repeat, never selected a judicial nominee who received an unqualified rating from the
a.b.a. yet this president nominates four -- nominated four unqualified judicial candidates in a single year. which is the worst record in american history. one was to a federal bench in alabama. the nominee was brett telly. who withdrew his name in 2017 for his lack of judicial experience. he had never tried a case. and yet this person was nominated by this administration to a life appointment on the bench in the middle district of alabama. unacceptable. thank god calmer and cooler heads prevailed and he withdrew his name. but the reality is, having unqualified candidates should not go under this administration. we should stand up and speak out against it. that's why i'm glad to join with my colleagues on the
congressional black caucus as we talk about what is at stake. a heck of a lot is at stake. we have a lot to lose under this administration and it starts with the federal courts. the reason president trump has selected so many unqualified judges to fill our courts is that they are political allies of the extreme right. every single one of president trump's judicial nominees are allies of the right wing, attacking women's rights, attacking human rights, attacking health care and workers' rights. and of course attacking voting rights. president trump's recent nominee of judge kavanaugh to the supreme court is no different. a review of judge kavanaugh's record shows that he will drive the supreme court further to the right, threatening and further attacking health care and our right to vote. affirmative action and all of the important progress that we have made as a nation when it comes to civil rights and civil
liberties. it was judge kavanaugh who upheld a discriminatory voter i.d. law as a judge on the d.c. court of appeals. faced with a south carolina voter i.d. law which the obama administration reported would disenfranchise tens of thousands of minority voters, judge kavanaugh ruled that the measure was not discriminatory. the obama administration said the same voter i.d. law violated the voting rights act of 1965. a seminal piece of legislation. and judge kavanaugh approved it. that's bad news for our voting rights. and where i come from, representing alabama's seventh congressional district, the voting rights and the civil rights district of america, that's bad news for americans. we should stand up for the equal right of all americans to vote. there should be no modern day barriers to voting. and to have a supreme court nominee who has so blatantly gone against that is
unacceptable. mr. speaker, on voting rights and so many other issues, from health care to police brutality, the american people cannot trust trump's judicial nominees to put the law before politics. we must call on the senate to stop president trump's attempt to stack the court. nothing less than a third branch of government, our democracy is at stake. i want to thank the gentleman from pennsylvania for allowing me to speak on this issue and i ask that all americans oppose this nominee to the supreme court. and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. evans: mr. speaker, i'd like to ask my colleague from the great state of alabama, this president talked about cleaning up the swamp. you may recall he talked about that issue. from listening to you just now, it appears that, you know we know his cabinet and what's
taking place with his cabinet, but we're talking about something very sacred, courts. can you talk a little bit about, do you see cleaning up the swamp taking place here, relating to the courts? because as i listened to you, it sounds like the courts are not being cleaned up. ms. sewell: the gentleman from pennsylvania is exactly right. the swamp only needs to be cleaned up when the swamp doesn't agree with this president. we have seen that in the nomination of a brett telly -- tally, to alabama's middle district, that he did not report that his wife worked for the counsel, the white house counsel. this to me is an important disclosure. you can't be more on the inside, in the swamp, drowning in the swamp, than to work, than to have a relationship like your wife working for the white house. so i think it's really hypocritical that this white house would talk about draining
the swamp and yet choose judicial nominees that are clearly in line with far right-wing views and are clearly a part of the problem, not a part of the solution. so, you know, i think that we, the american people, need to really speak out when it comes to the supreme court nominee. and actually all federal judgeships. i had the great honor of clerking for the first african-american judge in the state of alabama, judge u.w. clemens. it was a great honor of my life as a young lawyer to sit at his feet and to learn. and i have to tell you that it is disheartening to see people who are woefully unqualified getting the opportunity to be nominated to a federal bench. these are life appointments. life appointments that allow people to sit in those seats for decades to come. and therefore decide decisions decades to come. and i know that when you talk
to our senators, they will -- if they're truthful, they'll tell you that some of the most pressing legacy issues for them are the nominations to the supreme court. and the nominations to the federal courts. why? because these nominations with , fe appointments have lasting you know, they have lasting effects that yield way beyond the actual nomination itself. and it's unfortunate to me because when we think about what, the three branches of government that worked for the civil rights movement and worked for all of those freedom fighters, it was the federal courts that, with its independence, was able to grant so many opportunities to those freedom riders. i think about frank johnson, a young judge from montgomery, alabama, who grew up in rural alabama and had the temerity, had the audacity, had the
courage to do what was right and face -- in the face of mounting pressures that came from his white citizenry around him, to do the right thing and to actually issue that injunction that allowed marchers such as our colleague john lewis to march across the edmund pettus bridge, which brought us the voting rights act of 1965. where is our courage today, i ask the gentleman from pennsylvania? we have to stand up in the face of such overt partisanship and speak out against it. . the balance of the court is so important. so many of the progress we have seen in our nation, we have been one justice on the supreme court from that progress being eroded. it is with great sadness i see justice kennedy leave but it is with greater sadness i see the nominee, kavanaugh, coming before this -- coming before the
senate for confirmation as the next federal justice. i do know that politics and elections have consequences but i think that when i think about the scale of progress and what effects that progress -- what affects that progress, nothing is more telling, nothing is more important than the supreme court. i would hope that a person irrespect i of their gender, irrespective of their race, and who they love, that they can come before the supreme court and get a fair hearing. mr. evans: mr. speaker, i would like to ask another question but before i do that may i inquire how much time is remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has four minutes remaining. mr. evans: ok. past judge the kavanaugh has emphasized the importance of checking political
alliances at the door. so i ask you that relating to what you just said. in addition to the dark future roe nd mark decisions like v. wade, brown vs. board of education, access to affordable health care could be greatly diminish. you said there are consequences, his quote. check political alliances at the door. -- in the now that next four minute, that he'll check his alliances. ms. sewell: he has an expansive record. i believe in looking at a person's record to be able to tell what they'll do in the future. and his past has shown he's squarely aligned with the federalist society. squarely aligned with the far right. and it is because of his extreme views that he's now the nominee. now i would love for him to
prove me wrong but one's history, one's past is a judge of what one will do in the future. so my great fear is that on issues such as the right of the executive branch to overreach, his decisions that relate to that which to me is the reason why i believe this president chose him, because there has been some overreaching going on in the executive branch and this president feels that this judge will be more partial toward him. now let's just be very clear. the judge should be about being partial toward the facts. and toward the law. irrespective of who the petitioner is. i can tell you that often people say that justice is blind. but the reality is, justice often is seen through the eyes of the experience of judges. that is why it's important to have a bench that is diverse. a bench that has diversity of
thought a diversity of philosophy and ideas. because at the end of the day we are not monolithic as a people. we are -- we all have different view and we come to those perspectives based on our experiences. frankly, this particular judge this particular nominee, kavanaugh, does not show that diversity of experience. his views have been clearly aligned with the far right. and i believe that that is woefully out of character with the american public. i believe that the american public is far more centrist than that and that the american public deserves better than that. mr. evans: i thank my colleague from alabama and i really appreciate her comments. in closing, mr. speaker, i would like to submit for the record the honorable johnson from the great state of texas has some comments she'd like to admit for the record. again, mr. speaker, the condition gregsal black caucus
work both my colleagues along today, show how we need to be very conscious of this decision the senate is about to make. this is extremely important in talking about the future in america and we need to understand that we must operate under the constitution and the rule of law. again, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 7 of rule 22, i present a privileged report. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: conference report to accompany h.r. 5515 to authorize appropriations for the fiscal year 2019 for military activities of the department of defense, military construction and for defense activities of the department of energy to describe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: ordered printed.
the gentleman from texas. >> i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for morning hour debate. build a memorial to honor america's second president, john adams. morrow, legislation that fully tax that was established by the 2010 health care law. measure thatek, a authorizes defense department programs for 2019. follow the house live on c-span. tuesday aturn on 10:00 a.m. eastern.
front --er of the now group -- house majority whip talks about the house democrats plan for jobs and the economy. posted a white house event with u.s. manufacturers. c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, reporter mcintyre discusses the future of the affordable care act. congressman brian will be on to talk about the administration's trade policies. democratic maryland congressman will be with us to talk about the role in the midterm election. that is tuesday morning starting at 7:00 eastern. tosure to watch the journal
discuss how president trump's policies are impacting their bottom line. friday, join us for a discussion on the opioid crisis, live from baltimore, maryland. >> a former jihadis two worked with al qaeda and the former new york city intelligence officer responsible for having him oh -- arrested joined a discussion. we will hear from the leader of the now defunct group. organized by the center for strategic and international ready. -- studies.