Skip to main content

tv   U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives  CSPAN  May 2, 2019 8:59am-1:51pm EDT

8:59 am
in or debate before any votes. host: let's hear from stephen in cicero, illinois. what do you think? caller: what i think is that everybody is jumping the gun. mueller was supposed to do the investigation. barr is now making the determination. when it is congress's investigation that follows up and makes the decision whether or not there is grounds for impeachment, and the grounds -- the evidence they are looking at now is about obstruction, and barr is doing nothing but causing more obstruction, it is obvious. do you wantn, what lawmakers to do about it? caller: what i want them to do about it is, ok, follow up like they are and people have to stop complaining about why people are worried about how questioner asked -- questions are asked.
9:00 am
we will have to leave it there. the house is coming in early for their legislative session. coverage of the house judiciary committee over on c-span3 and coverage of the floor here on c-span. thanks for watching. the speaker: the house will be in order o. the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend foip, church church, lynchburg, virginia. -- thomas road baptist church. the chaplain: we thank you forer blessing us so greatly through these 243 years of american history. the bible says blessed is the
9:01 am
nation whose gd god is the lord. we ask for your forgiveness of sins. we as a people and nation have committed. we pray you can't wisdom and guidance to all who serve. we ask you to give clear direction as they set the course for our nation and pray you lead them as they lead us. we ask you to protect us who serve this nation both here and around the globe. we ask you to continue to bless this great nation we call home. in jesus' name we pray. amen. the speaker: thank you, reverend. the the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to he house her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson. mr. thompson: 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.
9:02 am
the speaker: without objection, the gentleman from virginia, mr. cline, is recognized for one minute. mr. cline: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to recognize our guest chaplain, the reverend jonathan falwell of thomas road baptist church in lynchburg, virginia. he's long been a leader in his community, the commonwealth of virginia, and the united states. his sermons are delivered to thousands each week. at thomas road, on television, and through the internet. jonathan falwell followed in the footsteps of his father, dr. jerry falwell, as senior pathors of thomas road baptiffs church. he was founder of liberty university, one of the largest christian universities in the united states. in addition to his role as senior pastor at thomas road, he also serves as executive vice president of spiritual affairs at liberty. on this national day of prayer i extend my thanks to jonathan falwell for his devotion to
9:03 am
christ, his family, and community. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois 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 is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, last year was an abject failure in addressing the climate crisis in both policy and real world emission reductions in the u.s. and globally, we fell short. we can cannot afford another year like it, yet 2019 is off to an ominous start. a the consequences of inaction on climate change are are both dire and familiar. the lives and livelihoods of
9:04 am
millions across the country and billions around the world are at risk. climate change is a national security threat, a food security threat, a housing issue, a transportation issue, a infrastructure issue, and immigration issue, a jobs issue, an energy issue, financial issue, and public health issue. mr. quigley: we can can cannot in good conscience claim to be adequately representing the people of our districts and our country and the world if we ignore or deny the dangers that climate change poses to the american public and the world. i stand here in strong support of h.r. 9, the climate action now act, to reverse the shameful and dangerous course of the last two years and meet the challenge of climate change head-on. thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. extend and revise my he remarks. the speaker pro tempore:
9:05 am
without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today we observe the 68th annual national day of prayer, a day dedicated to bringing men and women of all faiths together in prayer for this great nation. statistically only about 14% of americans read the bible and pray on a daily basis. that is why this year's theme focuses on our love for one another. just as we learn in the teachings of jesus in john 13:34, love one another just as i have loved you. this theme is just as important in our nation today as it has been throughout our history. mr. allen: right now america is a divided nation and we are fighting for the values that this great country was founded upon. more than anything else, we need unity. mark 3:24 says a kingdom divided against itself that kingdom cannot stand. but to find unity we must put our faith before our politics. we must do what is right for the american people.
9:06 am
why? because our faith unites us in christ. jesus prayed for us in john 21:17, that all of them may be one, father, just as you are in me and i am in you. may they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. i encourage all americans to join me in celebrating the national day of prayer and humbly come before god to seek his guidance on how we may become one america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it was an honor to preside over the hours during the debate on h.r. 9 yesterday to up hold our commitment to the paris climate accord. mr. blumenauer: our first real piece of climate legislation in over nine years. it may have been an honoringor but jarring to listen to my republican colleagues in denial. for decades americans have seen
9:07 am
with their own eyes rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and temperature increases all terrifying prospects for our children and grandchildren. yet republicans are defending the trump administration's action to undercut and isolate the united states as the only country to withdraw from the climate accord. placing us firmly on the wrong side of history. in contrast, i'm thankful today --that today's action demonstrates that democrats are on the side of protecting our children's future. h.r. 9 is a first step towards a future of climate action and climate justice. a green new deal for clean energy jobs, rebuilding and renewing our fraps. sustainable agriculture, and environmental justice. we can't afford to wait and either can can can the planet. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south dakota seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous
9:08 am
consent to -- the body for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> in 1961, south dakota's ben rifle became our nation's first lakota in congress. lakota indian. he grew up dirt poor in a log cabin in rural todd county. he dropped out after 8th grade but later graduate interested south dakota state and from harvard. that gentleman was respected in this chamber. mr. johnson: that gentleman was respected in indian country. you see throughout his career at the bureau of indian affairs and for a decade here in congress, he worked tirelessly to further economic opportunity for american indians. he celebrated education, hard work, and self-determination. yesterday i filed a bill asking that ben rifle's name be placed on the mission post office. it is my hope that young american indian boys and girls
9:09 am
will see that name and realize that great american leaders have come and will come again from that place. mr. speaker, thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lowenthal: mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 9, the climate action now act, to ensure that the u.s. remains part of the paris climate agreement. report after report -- scientific report has told us that when it comes to climate change, we are on a precipice. the status quo leads us over the cliff. the only way back is with immediate and earnest action, that is all of us together.
9:10 am
the paris agreement was meant to be a collective first step towards beginning to address climate change. we have a duty to ourselves, to our children, and to the rest of the world to not only join in that step forward, but to lead it. i urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting h.r. 9. thank you, i yield back the alance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. thompson: i rise today to recognize may as national foster care month. this is a time to recognize the more than 400,000 foster youth in america. during this month, we renew our commitment to ensuring that every child has a safe and loving home. mr. speaker, i'm a member of the congressional caucus on
9:11 am
foster youth, and i have still to this day have a foster brother part of my family. i know firsthand how a loving, supportive home can make all the difference in a young person's life. more than 200,000 children enter foster care system every year. with a child entering care every two minutes. all children deserve a safe, loving, and permanent home. we have a responsibility to continue to create policies that will improve outcomes and the overall well-being of foster youth and their families. i thank every foster parent, volunteer, and mentor who works to make sure the needs of our children are not only being met by giving them the opportunity to thrive in a loving home. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
9:12 am
>> mr. speaker, i rise today to address the opportunity we have today to lead on the crisis of climate change. mr. himes: the climate change crisis is unlike any other that we faced. it can can cannot be defeated on the battlefield. it can can cannot be cured can. it can can cannot be wished away and no longer be denied. what we can do is what we have always done and lead the community of nations to address a problem that would leave our children and their grandchildren with an unbelievable crisis and possibly a planet that they can no longer inhabit. the paris climate agreement was a set of targets that we developed, that are not mandatory. the paris climate agreement is about making a statement that this is a problem and a crisis and that america will lead. today this chamber has an opportunity to say, yes we will
9:13 am
lead. we will not hide from the problem. we will not let this crisis distract us. we will lead. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 9 today and to send a statement to the world as we have always done, we will lead on this global crisis. i yield back the balance of my time. for eaker pro tempore: what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise to join our friends in israel and the jewish communities around the world in recognizing israel's holocaust remembrance day. mr. la mall if a: president trump declared this week who caust recommend brans week. the recent rise in anti-semitic rhetoric amongst some, even in this house, it's important we remember just how horrific and dangerous these ideas are. more than six million jewish
9:14 am
people died at the hands of the nazis during the holocaust. many who survived will never be able to escape the horrors of their experience. the emergence into a world that changed them forever. but the world has changed since then, too. no longer is that sort of hatred and bigotry to be accepted. that's what we must do to affirm on this national day of prayer, via prayer, via our actions for jewish people, as well as christians being massacred around the world. i thank the president for once again reaffirming america's commitment to supporting israel and the jewish people. this week, today, and always we are with you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new hampshire 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. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to discuss our work in the house to advance innovative solutions to improve access to affordable health
9:15 am
care for people in my district in new hampshire and across this country. ms. kuster: over the past two weeks, i have had the opportunity to visit with hospitals and providers throughout my district to discuss the challenges facing health care in my state. i heard consistently that the efforts of the trump administration to sabotage the affordable care act are causing serious anxiety for patients and health care providers. . the american people have made clear that they want republicans and democrats to improve access to affordable health care and to abandon the partisanship that's seen protections for individuals with pre-existing conditions threatened and access to health care restricted. i'm excited that next week the house will pass innovative legislation that will have a real impact on the lives of hardworking families, including my bill to protect people with
9:16 am
pre-existing conditions. we're advancing pragmatic solutions and stabilizing and strengthening the affordable care act. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, recently we celebrated our national libraries. i rise today to discuss the important role they have across many kansas communities. i visited libraries throughout the big first, stopping in manhattan, salina, dodge, clinter, colby, great bend and scott city, and recently visited the marion city library that was awarded the 2019 five star honor for their facility with well-targeted programs. communities from colby-abilene has partnered with organizations such as the library of congress, national archives and smithsonian institute to highlight the qualities that's rich and
9:17 am
unique to kansas. these programs, ran by our local libraries, are vitally important to our small communities and reach more than 27,000 kansans in 2018. mr. marshall: i'm so proud of our kansas libraries that's constantly going above and beyond. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the bill h.r. 9. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 329 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 9. will the gentleman from
9:18 am
linois, mr. casten, kindly resume the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 9, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to direct the president to develop a plan for the united states to meet its nationally determined contribution under the paris agreement, and for other purposes. of committee when the of the whole rose on wednesday, may 1, 2019, amendment number 20 offered by the gentlewoman from nevada ms. lee had been -- nevada, mrs. lee, had been disposed of. it's now in order to consider amendment number 21 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. kim: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 21
9:19 am
printed in house report 116-42 offered by mr. kim of new jersey. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. kim, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. kim: thank you, mr. chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise to offer my amendment to h.r. 9. my amendment is straightforward. this bill requires the president to submit a plan to congress to meet our obligations under the paris accords. this amendment ensures that we do not forget the impact of our infrastructure when addressing the threat of climate change. we know that climate change is real. we know that we are already feeling its effects and that it will only intensify, and strong scientific research tells us that storms are getting stronger and more frequent. sea levels are rising and this poses a direct threat to our coastal communities. while this bill and the paris accords takes significant steps to address root causes of
9:20 am
climate change, we must be prepared to address the significant impact it's having on our nation's infrastructure today. my district in new jersey was amongst the hardest hit by superstorm sandy. tom's river saw $.2 billion in property damage, the highest out of any township in new jersey, and we're still recovering from that storm that hit our state years ago. in 2017, we saw three of the five costliest storms in our history in harvey, maria, and irma. rising sea levels are increasing. the severity and frequency of flooding are contributing to beach erosion, posing a threat to coastal tourism economies. climate change isn't just measured by rising tides and rising temperatures, it's measured by the rising costs that will incur on our communities and the investment needed in infrastructure to keep our communities resilient in the face of that threat. in the coming months, as we hopefully take up and pass a bold infrastructure package,
9:21 am
this amendment will provide guidance towards achieving the infrastructure resiliency our communities need. we know that infrastructure improvements don't not to come in the form of potholes fixed and bridges rebuilt, they need to lessen the impact of rising storm surges from the next big storm and make sure communities like mine in ocean county can remain a place for people to raise a familiar hely, create jobs and a-- family, create jobs and maintain the american dream. this will help communities deal with the adverse impacts of climate change. i urge we include this amendment because it's crucial there is an understanding from top to bottom the threat that climate change imposes and the impact it will have towards infrastructure resiliency across our country. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and ensure we're not only protecting our climate but the infrastructure we need to support our communities, and
9:22 am
i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to the amendment and i reserve the balance of my time to close. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. sorry. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. kim: mr. chair, i'll yield one minute to the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi. the chair: the gentlewoman from california is recognized. the speaker: i thank you very much. mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman for yielding, commend him for his leadership. this issue of infrastructure resiliency is so important. as we now discuss doing major infrastructure legislation to rebuild america in a way that is making it safer and promoting commerce and improving the quality of life by decreasing the amount of time people have to spend in their cars, by increasing broadband and all of the things that enable people in our -- whether it's health care,
9:23 am
education, our commerce, the infrastructure is so central to that. when we talk about infrastructure, we have to talk about resiliency, and when we talk about climate change, we have to talk about infrastructure. so this is a very important amendment, and i rise to support it and i thank the gentleman for sharing his new jersey experience in terms of the need for resiliency in this very wise amendment. i also want to rise in support of h.r. 9, the climate action now act. i commend chairwoman kathy castor, who is the chair of our select committee on this subject of climate and also the chairman of the foreign affairs committee, mr. engel, for his leadership on this important issue, which is under the jurisdiction of his committee. they bring vision. they bring values. they bring the voices of members and the american people to make a difference. we thank you our members, our
9:24 am
freshmen members in particular who carried out the priorities in the communities to congress to demand climate action now, and i think it's very appropriate that the gentleman in the chair is on the committee, the select committee on climate, and has been a leader in the private sector, now in the public sector, on this important issue as we go forward. it's time, mr. speaker, to end denial about this and start listening to the facts. this is about science, science, science. there is an overwhelming number -- 86% of americans know this is a crisis. they know that human behavior has an impact on it, and they want us to act. it is from our communities, we all have stories. one of my constituents wrote, y daughter's developed asthma. we're literally choking on the denial and i action. another writes, green jobs are
9:25 am
guaranteed, local jobs, will put people to work. survival is now poised to become viable in the economic sector. let me just say this. this is about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. it's very important for our country to be preeminent in the world on the green technologies, and this legislation is in recognition of that. it's about public health, about clean air and clean water, the air our children breathe, the water they drink, and it's about environmental justice in that regard as well. all children will be able to live in a safe, clean environment in which they can thrive. it's about our national security. over and over again, the national security experts, generals, admirals, experts have come to us and said that this is a global security issue because of what the impact climate change and the crisis is doing to the use of water
9:26 am
and access to food and how natural disasters affect migration and also how that can lead to some initiation of hostilities among people. it is a national security issue use our f how we resources for our national security as well. and it is a moral issue. if you believe, as do i, and so many evangelical communities that this planet is god's creation and we have a moral responsibility to be good stewards of it, then you would be sure to be a good steward and sign up for climate action now. but even if you don't share that religious belief, we all know that we have a moral responsibility to the next generation to pass this planet on in a better way than we found it, in a very responsible, responsible way. so it is -- we must take
9:27 am
action. the bill demands action now, keeping us in the -- as the only international agreement dedicated to ending the climate crisis and demanding a plan om the administration -- a plan for action for the administration. as mr. kim put forth that plan, it should recognize resiliency as the administration comes forward. it sends a signal to the world that the u.s. is in denial about the overwhelming science about climate, but this bill is a step in the right direction. the select committee on climate crisis and the committees of jurisdiction -- we have the select committee, and i'm very proud of the work that it's doing, but it is a task for every committee of the congress to look at the jurisdiction of the committee and to see how, in terms of jobs, public health, national security, and, again, our moral responsibility
9:28 am
to our children and future generations, it's everybody's responsibility. it's a congresswide responsibility that i do thank the select committee for the focus that it is placing on all of this, and we will be able to accommodate so many entrepreneurial ideas, new thinking on the subject, being current on the data and on the science. so we have a tremendous generational opportunity and responsibility. i thank all who are involved in this, for their extraordinary leadership. anyone who cares about our planet, our children's future is deeply in debt to those of you who have taken the lead of it. under president bush's leadership, when he was president and we had our select committee then, we passed the biggest energy bill in history. while everyone was not agreement on the climate crisis, we all agreed that we had to take action.
9:29 am
president bush signed the bill. a big ceremony. it was the equivalent of taking tens of millions of cars off the road. now we raise the emission standards. it was important. that legislation was the basis for many of the executive actions that president obama was able to take under the authority of that legislation. so that was -- that was very important and it was bipartisan. hopefully we can be bipartisan as we go forward for the next big steps that we have to take. technology has come a long way since then. science informs us better. current events have made it very clear, we have an imperative to have climate action now. i, again, urge our colleagues to vote for mr. kim's amendment, for h.r. 9, and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey reserves. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. shimkus: -- mr. kim: thank
9:30 am
you, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized to close. mr. kim: i yield to chairman engel. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i thank the gentleman for yielding. let me just say on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and the energy and commerce committee, we support this amendment, both of us. it's a good amendment. i want to thank the gentleman for working with the committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. . mr. kim: i'd like to reiterate my amendment is straightforward here. it's recognizing the importance of safeguarding our communities and updating infrastructure to he protect against the adverse impact of climate change. we can see storms are getting worse and worse and more costly. they don't hit in red states or blue states but all of us. i urge all my colleagues to stand behind my amendment and
9:31 am
lend your support to ensure our communities are esillent after the next big storm so they can remain for a place for people to raise a family, create jobs, and achieve the american dream. i urge adoption and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shuttle columbia cuss: thank you, mr. -- mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. it's great to be here this morning. i appreciate the speaker coming down and talking about bipartisan solutions and working together. obviously in this piece of legislation i think the terminology was demanding a plan for the administration. that assumes the administration would sign this bill. or that also assumes that the senate would pass this bill. even if the president would sign a bill that he doesn't want to enact, he would probably then veto the bill he just signed, then we would sustain his veto. if we really want to move forward, we want to do kind of things that can get through the senate anti-president's desk. that's why all afternoon yesterday we talked about --
9:32 am
this amendment has some of those issues in it. the adaptation, resiliency, grid modernization. we appreciate the intent on which this amendment is being brought forward. just also another cautionary note in the paris accord when it talks about address loss and damage associated with the impacts of climate change, it's referring to the paris accords provision to developing countries. it is not -- that accord doesn't have provisions in developed countries. as we address this and maybe as things move forward, my colleague from new jersey, we can we can make sure we address that -- we can make sure we address that appropriately. we would like to have these studies done before we go into international agreements we don't know how they'll respond, versus after the fact. it's like the cart before the horse. then we know this is a good deal, we should do this. or maybe we shouldn't. we had a couple amendments last
9:33 am
night that talked about all the bad aspect but none of the positive. we had a couple that said let's look at the good and bad. i would also suggest an amendment there may be some areas of the country in which the infrastructure is not going to be harmed. the area of that country might even benefit from these changes. with that i ask my colleagues to vote against the amendment and i yield back my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. so many as are in favor say aye . those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
9:34 am
it is now in order to consider amendment number 22 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i have a an amendment at the desk. i ask for its consideration. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 22, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mrs. fletcher of texas. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentlewoman from texas, mrs. fletcher, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas. mrs. fletcher: thank you. i yield myself four minutes. i rise in support of my amendment. innovation drives the energy industry. and it is important that we continue to follow a technology neutral approach that allows the best science to flourish and the best technologies to emerge. when it comes to energy innovation, my home in houston is its home. houston long known as the
9:35 am
energy capital of the world is the epicenter of our modern energy renaissance. home to virtually every segment of the energy industry, including exploration, production, transmission, marketing, supply, and technology we see opportunities for innovation in all sectors of the energy industry. over the last decade in particular, energy technology has enabled us to recover resources in new areas and new ways. advances in technology that have transformed our energy economy has substantially reduced u.s. carbon emissions. replacing coal fired plants with natural gas plants has led to the greatest reduction in carbon emissions in the last 30 years. and we are leading the way on new technologies critical to reaching our missions reduction goals and combating climate change like carbon capture technology. two plants are near my district in houston. we believe in an all of the above approach to energy sources that reduces costs as
9:36 am
well as emissions. and we see that in texas' investment in wind energy. in texas we have installed more wind powered generation than any other state. three times as much as the next leading state. houston is home to more than 100 solar related companies. these statistics may surprise some, but they should not. because energy companies, whether he renewable or hydrocarbon based, are really technology companies that apply their technology to energy. my amendment ensures that nothing in this act will favor one fuel source or one technology over another. climate change is a global threat. we need the input of a diverse and broad coalition of stakeholders who have energy expertise we need to chart our path forward. and we need to encourage innovation and technology in every area. it is for these reasons that i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time.
9:37 am
the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: thank you. i'd like to reserve my time to close. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. mrs. fletcher: i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from new york. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. engel: i thank the gentlewoman from texas for yielding to me. on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and the energy and commerce committee, we support this amendment. it's a good amendment and i want to thank the gentlewoman for working with the committees on the amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas. mrs. fletcher: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas. mrs. fletcher: i urge support for my amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, this is a perfect
9:38 am
example of an amendment that as we move something forward that might be able to be considered by the senate and signed by the president i think we would be very interested in dealing with. we all know -- although i guess i'm a little confused because the amendment says we don't want to be technologically specific you mentioned the benefits of carbon capture, sequestration utilization which is an amendment we had on -- in the committee to try to say here are some good technologies we ought to consider. a a lot of folks on our side have been excited about the energy renaissance. the ability to recover more oil. we know that the great stories of texas and the ability to capture carbon and sequester it with utilization for money to help with other issues. i think when we move in a direction of a bill that we plan to get through the senate
9:39 am
and house, we should keep our communications opened because i think there are some bipartisan solutions. the republicans have always talked about conservation, innovation, and adaptation. this is part of the innovation package. we also have advanced nuclear in that package. we also have pump storage batteries in that package. i think there is opportunities here. we offered, as i said, in the committee the value of nuclear and advanced nuclear energy, hydropower, carbon capture, and the production of export of natural gas, which is part of my portfolio of volunteer activities in the easternure peaian block, and ability to export natural gas has been a boom to these countries that don't want to be enslaved to russian natural gas. again there are things we can can do. when we talk about innovation necessary to produce a strong economy, energy security and lower emission, we have to focus on the benefits of these technologies. i can agree with the idea of
9:40 am
this amendment, i think it falls short of what is necessary for congress to assist our priorities. with that i encourage a no vote. i look forward to working with my colleague in the future. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from texas. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mrs. fletcher: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: friction, further proceedings on the -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from texas will be postponed.
9:41 am
it is now in order to consider amendment number 23, printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from massachusetts seek recognition? ms. pressley: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 23, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by ms. pressley of massachusetts. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentlewoman from massachusetts, ms. pressley, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from massachusetts. ms. pressley: thank you, mr. chair. i rise to offer an amendment to h.r. 9, the climate action now act. my amendment is a commonsense amendment which reaffirms the interconnection between climate change and public health
9:42 am
disparities plaguing communities across our country and throughout the globe. mr. chair, despite arguments to the contrary by many, there is no such thing as planet b. this is the only earth we have. and we need to act like it. h.r. 9 will ensure that this administration acts accordingly. it has been said that politicians consider future elections while states men and women consider future generations. it is our responsibility to consider future generations to take the necessary actions to re-establish our nation as a leader in the global fight to combat climate change. the impacts of climate change are not some futuristic threat. the threats are imminent. we are being confronted by them daily. and we must act now. climate scientist vs. made clear that if we are to continue down this path without action, it will be too late. we must act now, we must act today. we must act in this very
9:43 am
moment. climate change and global warming are threatening all aspects of our society and increasing the risk to human lives and health today, particularly for vulnerable communities like chelsea in my district. these communities are finding themselves on the frontlines of the crisis. for example, in boston's chinatown neighborhood a predominantly immigrant and low income community that falls at the crossroads of two major highways, my constituents breathe some of the most toxic air in all of boston. air polluted with air exhaust and other irritants. and while these are largely invisible pollutants, the impacts are crystal clear. er the last several years as asthma rates at a school in the heart of chinatown have jumped from 18% to 25%. let me make this plain, our children are breathing toxic amplete these climate injustices are far-reaching. according to a report released earlier this week by the
9:44 am
american lung association, more than 141 million people in the u.s. live in communities with unhealthy levels of toxic pollution. including many living in the -- in my home state of massachusetts where air quality has worsened each year. the world health organization estimates that seven million people around the world die each year as a result of these types of air pollution exposure. these toxic pollutants are affecting nine out of 10 people. the vast majority of the world's population. these statistics are staggering and quite frankly terrifying. if it seems we are being fatalists, it's because the threat is a fatal one. again my amendment recognizes the critical impact that climate change poses to our fundamental right to breathe clean air, drink clean water, a ep live in clean and safe communities. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i yield 30 seconds of my time to chairman engel. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: thank you. i thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me. let me say with pleasure on behalf of the foreign affairs
9:45 am
committee and also the energy and commerce committee we support this amendment. it's a good amendment. and i want to thank the gentlewoman for working with the committee on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from massachusetts. ms. pressley: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? mr. shimkus: i'd like to rise in opposition to the amendment and i reserve to close debate. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from massachusetts. ms. pressley: i yield. the chair: the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. really don't need a paris agreement to make substantial changes in carbon dioxide or, as my colleague was speaking, she was really referring to the clean air act and four criteria pollutants that we so aggressively addressed since 1992. having said that, what's better
9:46 am
for the poor and the downtrodden is to have a job. what's better for their health and economic opportunity is to have a job. what also helps is that they have a good-paying job that provides great health care benefits. so from 2015 to 2018, the industrialized countries, the united states is the number one reducer of carbon dioxide. number one. we didn't have to deal with all these international accords. we do it through innovation, technology, and advancement. but carbon dioxide emissions went up last year. that's a known fact. the question is why. well, we have -- mr. chairman, we have one of the best economies that i ever served in in the house of representatives where there's job wanted signs all over the place. as the sector grows, there's a need to address these emissions. that's why republicans continue
9:47 am
to look forward to the day when we can join with our democratic colleagues on conservation, innovation, adaptation, moving some bills and processes through the floor that will get -- that will be received well in the senate and to the president's desk. with that i think rather than focus on the finding we should debate bipartisan solutions such as boosting research, advanced technologies, and promoting innovation. with that i ask my colleagues to vote no on this amendment and -- this amendment, and i yield back my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from massachusetts. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
9:48 am
it is now in order to consider endment number 24 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? ms. schrier: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 24 printed in house report 116-42 offered by ms. schrier of washington. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentlewoman from washington, ms. schrier, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from washington. ms. schrier: thank you, mr. chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. my amendment would support farmers and ranchers who employ agricultural practices that help us meet the goals and ambitions of the paris agreement. in order to combat climate change, we are all going to have to work together. ours is a country that's always banded together to take on the greatest challenges of our
9:49 am
time, and this is no exception. this is a time for the united states to not just partner but to lead the world in protecting this planet for our children and future generations. now, farmers and ranchers are on the frontline of the climate crisis, and they are stepping up. drought, fires and floods are threatening their safety and livelihoods. my time on the agriculture committee and time spent with growers in my district have shown me that farmers are deeply invested in addressing our climate and are eager to be part of the solution. farmers are already expanding no-till practices, rotating crumbs and planting crops to fix nitrogen and other soil nutrients and reduce erosion. with healthier soil, they are reducing fossil fuel-based fertilizers, reducing water and greenhouse gas emissions.
9:50 am
we must recognize the contribution of our farmers who engage in sustainable ag practices. my amendment would support this agricultural ingenuity and creativity and prevent this administration from standing in the way of farmers and ranchers who are fighting climate change. the climate crisis is an urgent matter, and there isn't one silver bullet. let's recognize the solution will require something from all of us and support our farmers who can make a tremendous dent in co-2 emissions. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in opposition to this amendment, and i will claim my time to close. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from washington. ms. schrier: mr. chairman, i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, for 30 seconds. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding to me, and let me say with pleasure, on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and also the
9:51 am
energy and commerce committee, we both support this amendment. it's a good amendment. i want to thank the gentlewoman for working with the committee on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman from washington. ms. schrier: i would just like to reiterate, it is so important that we all step up. when i hear my colleagues talking about jobs, needing to do other jobs, waiting. in is too advanced, it is frustrating to see that -- it is too advanced, it's frustrating to see that kicking the can down the road further puts our future in peril along with the future of our children. so i would ask for that step of faith that we will protect jobs, and i am happy to say that h.r. 9 specifically notes that in addressing our changing climate, this will create jobs, clean-energy jobs, and you can rest assured that our economy
9:52 am
will flourish with addressing our climate. the chair: the gentlewoman yield or reserve? ms. schrier: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: i'd like to reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from washington. ms. schrier: i yield back my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. again, to my colleague, and i appreciate it. she has me at a disadvantage because i have a huge ag district. 33 counties in southern illinois, more pigs than people. i have corn, beans, and the like. we appreciate this. we appreciate this amendment because it's -- the voluntary action of it and trying to incentivize and appreciate what our agriculture community has done, because as you know, other proposals out there that are debated in washington might have some severe effects on agriculture. i also want to take this time to say, we did a lot in the
9:53 am
last congress. i think the misnoemer is that if we don't -- misnomer is that if we don't move good public policy we haven't done anything. through the house we passed the energy efficient government technology act. that was voice voted and sponsored by anna eshoo from california. advanced technology and technology act, bob latta from ohio. streamline schools act, this is another thing we did in the last congress. ozone act, that mr. olson from texas. saving the environment, the sense act, was passed. blocking regulatory interference by closing k limbings ns act by bill johnson. -- kiln act by bill johnson. responsible disposal act, the west valley act, of course, i am a proud sponsor with a huge bipartisan vote of the -- h.r. -- what was it -- h.r. 53, how
9:54 am
to deal with the nuclear waste provision. so we actually moved a lot of bills in the last congress, and many of those bills were in a bipartisan manner. yeah, do we not carry the mantle of paris or climate, but not everything has to be a subtitle of that major provision, especially if you're doing what we're trying to do in the house which is bring to the floor bills in a bipartisan manner, conservation. that would be like energy efficiency, new source review, forest management practice from washington state. you understand the concerns. if we do more forest management practices, maybe some of our fires would be less. so innovation, advanced nuclear power, carbon capture, utilization, sequestration, which we spoke about in the amendment previously. and also pump storage batteries. also from washington state, you know the benefits of hydropower.
9:55 am
if we can pump that water back up and have a continuous cycle, that's a pretty green use of power. ed a aptation grid modernization, re-- adaptation grid money modigliani earnization. crops that can change -- grid modernization. crops that can change. right now we have drought-resistant corn. we need to have corn that grows in wetter conditions. that's part of the adaptation that we talk about. we appreciate your amendment and the chance to discuss these issues. i support voluntary action. the idea this amendment will be better served focusing on examining the cost of these commitments, like some of our republican amendments tried to do as we moved this bill outside of the committee. with that i'd ask to oppose this amendment and i yield back my time. the chair: the question son the amendment -- the question son the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from washington -- the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from washington. those in favor say aye.
9:56 am
those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. ms. schrier: mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from washington will be postponed. it is now in order tore consider amendment number 25 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. neguse: mr. chair, i rise to offer an amendment that's at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 25 printed in house report 116-42 offered by mr. neguse of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman from colorado, mr. neguse, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. neguse: thank you, mr. speaker.
9:57 am
mr. speaker, i'm offering an amendment today to provide a pathway to the secondary schools to include information of the impact on climate change. 86% of teachers say that hools should teach about climate change. it is essential we educate them on the causes and impacts of the crisis as well as equip them for finding solutions to combat it. climate change is a threat in my vureks that we must be tackling head on. science is perfectly clear we have a very short runway to avoid catastrophic consequences for our planet and this requires bold action now. the bold policies our countries require to combat this crisis must begin with education. while it's our duty to get the ball rolling on policies that will mitigate climate-related issues, make no mistake, it's our children that will feel the brunt that our scientific community has outlined time and time again. when my daughter, natalie, who
9:58 am
is now 8 months old, is attending middle school, climate change and its impacts on our planet will be her reality. she should have the tools. and that begins with education. this amendment underscores the important porns of state and local efforts to teach our youths the causes and effects of climate change. again, the science is clear. it's the utmost of importance that the next generation is presented with the facts of this crisis. ith that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chair. i rise in opposition to the amendment and i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. neguse: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield 30 seconds of my time to the distinguished chairman of the foreign affairs committee, representative engel. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. engel: i want to first of all thank the gentleman for yielding. i will say on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and the energy and commerce committee, we both committees support this very good amendment.
9:59 am
and i also want to thank the gentleman for working with the committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado. mr. neguse: mr. speaker, i want to thank the chairman for his distinguished leadership in chairing the foreign relations subcommittee -- excuse me -- full committee, and for his leadership in shepherding this important resolution to the floor. with that i'd reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. neguse: mr. speaker, i would hope that my colleagues across the aisle could come to consensus on this amendment. i think it's a commonsense, reasonable amendment that ensures that our children, that the next generation are, as i said, well informed about the causes and the effects of climate change so that they can work with all of us to try to stop it and to try to deal with the planetary crisis that we find ourselves in. with that i'd reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from illinois.
10:00 am
mr. shimkus: i'd reserve my time, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman from illinois also reserves. the gentleman from colorado. mr. neguse: with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from colorado yields. the gentleman from illinois is reblingd. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate my friend for bringing it down. i taught high school for years. this is key. the paris accord was done without members of congress. it was an executive branch decision. we can debate whether the president had the authority or didn't have the authority, but we think what happened was there was not total buy-in. had it been presented as an agreement or had it been presented as a treaty, it wouldn't have passed either chamber, so i do agree that education is very, very important. however, i also believe in local control. republicans will always have a challenge with the federal government directing, dictating, and telling our
10:01 am
local schools what their curriculum should be. and with that -- that's why i oppose this amendment and i yield back my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. . those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chairs the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to can consider amendment number 26 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. van drew: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 26, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. van drew of new jersey. the chair: pursuant to house
10:02 am
resolution 329, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. van drew, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. mr. van drew: thank you, speaker. my amendment would add to the finding of the importance of averting, minimizing, and addressing loss and damages associated with the adverse effects of climate change. including extreme weather events. it is well-known that extreme weather events such as hurricanes and tropical storms are some of the most devastating and costly consequences of a warming world. displacing thousands of people at a time and costing government billions of dollars to recover. the good people 6 south jersey know that -- of south jersey know that climate change is occurring because the streets flood almost every time it rains in the coastal areas. unfortunately, we also have the painful reminder of superstorm sandy. on october 29, 2012, superstorm
10:03 am
sandy first struck the mainland in my district. pounding our coast with winds of over 70 miles per hour and 13-foot storm surges and ultimately killing 147 people. superstorm sandy was the most destructive natural disaster ever to strike the state of new jersey and ranks among the five costliest natural disasters in our nation's history. here's some of the damage caused by sandy. almost 350,000 homes were damaged. 1,400 vessels were sunk or abandoned. 70 drinking water systems were affected. 80 wastewater treatment plants suffered power loss or damage. the entire coastline experienced erosion. and untold billions were sucked out of our economy.
10:04 am
we need to recognize that climate change is exaserer baiting the intensity and frequency of extreme weather events that oftentimes cause the loss of life, property, and security. staying in the paris agreement is good for jobs and it's good for the economy. investing in clean, low-carbon technologies will help us expand and develop the industries of the future and help us compete globally against other countries that are already making significant investments in these fields. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment which simply acknowledges the need to reduce and avoid the human and economic toll brought on by the changing climate and that we need to develop our economy in a sustainable fashion. i now yield 30 seconds of my time to new york congressman engel. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i want to thank the gentleman for yielding and say
10:05 am
on behalf of the foreign affairs committee anti-energy and commerce committee we support this -- and the energy and commerce committee we support this amendment. new york also suffered tremendously from superstorm sandy. a lot of the repairs we are doing now to the new york city subway is a direct result of that. i certainly appreciate the gentleman's words and concern. this is a good amendment and i want to thank the gentleman for working with the committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. million van drew: i reserve the balance of my time. -- mr. van drew: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: i'd like to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. shimkus: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey. mr. van drew: i yield. the chair: the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. we appreciate this amendment. a lot of these amendments are putting the cart before the house.
10:06 am
it would have been interesting to have these debates about resiliency, efficiencies prior to the administration going into the paris accords. you do the research first and then go make a decision. now what we are trying to do is say ok we have this paris accord that the president has stepped away from. now let's evaluate what impacts are happening then. we did accept an amendment yesterday in this debate to look at both positive and negative aspects. which i think is a fair balance. there is going to be some areas of the country that will benefit. some areas of the country that will be disadvantaged. i think that is helpful in this debate. there's a lot of talk about a infrastructure bill coming up. we would hope that would be something we would move in a bipartisan manner. i know that it's always going to be how you pay for it. i'm willing to make the tough calls on how to pay for it. in that infrastructure bill it would be great if the resiliency of communities and
10:07 am
these concerns that are being addressed could be wrapped up in something like that. this bill, leader mcconnell just said on the floor, they are not going to address it. even if they did the president wouldn't sign it. we will get to a point in time in this congress when we'll work together, republicans believe in conservation, innovation, and adaptation. this is part of the adaptation portfolio. we look forward to working with you as we move forward. with that. this amendment does nothing to affect co-2 reductions. with that i will oppose the amendment a and yield back. the chair: it is now -- the the gentleman yields back. the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. van drew: i would like a
10:08 am
recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey will e postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 27, printed in house report number 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. levin: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 27, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. levin of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman from california, mr. levin, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. levin: thank you, mr. chair. i rise today to mark a monumental occasion for this body and offer an amendment to h.r. 9, the climate action now
10:09 am
act. after years of denial, outright lies and inaction on the climate crisis under republican leadership in the house, we are finally taking meaningful steps to protect our planet for fuhr generations. while the president denies climate change exist, promotes fake scientists who believe pollution is good and pulls us backward, we are embracing the scientific consensus that climate change is real, driven by human action, and already having a detrimental impact on our health and planet. there are a lot of myths about climate change that we must dispel. one of the biggest myths i hear we can cannot -- week not clean up and grow our economy at the same time. in california we have seen strong g.d.p. in per capita income growth while also leading the country in the fight to combat the climate cry sis. we also know reviewable energy options are more affordable for consumers than traditional fossil fuels. that's why my amendment to the
10:10 am
climate action now act adds three key facts about our ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and maintain affordable energy options at the same time. first, the greenhouse gas emissions reductions spurred by the paris agreement have driven innovation for reliable and affordable forms of energy, which demonstrates that emissions reductions in affordable energy are not mutually exclusive. second, the united states long term greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy under the paris agreement, counted energy efficient improvements as a way to cost-effectively reduce emissions and lower energy bills. and third, this strategy has had the support of both industry and consumers. this amendment is very simple. it should not be controversial. members of both parties should be able to agree we can can reduce greenhouse gas emission, invest in clean energy alternatives, and maintain affordable energy options at the same time. i strongly urge my colleagues to recognize this simple fact and support my amendment to
10:11 am
h.r. 9. ultimately this is about the planet we leave behind for our children and our grandchildren. with the 5 and 6-year-old at home i am proud to co-sponsor the climate action now act and support bold and commonsense solutions to the climate crisis. thank you, mr. chair. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois he seek recognition? mr. shimkus: i rise in opposition and reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. levin: i yield 30 seconds to the distinguished chair of the foreign affairs committee, mr. engel. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i thank the gentleman for yielding to me and want to gladly say on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and also the energy and commerce committee we support this amendment. it is a very good amendment and important amendment, and i want to thank the gentleman for working with the committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. levin: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman
10:12 am
reserves. the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. shimkus: mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. phillips. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. for one minute. mr. phillips: thank you, mr. levin. mr. chair, i rise in support of representative levin's amendment and h.r. 9, the climate action now act. i know when you think of minnesota the first thing you think of is snow, it is true we know how to handle a snow yinter. this year the midwest was hit with record levels of snowfall. when it melted it led to record levels of flooding. farms and homes across the entire region have been devastated and it is because of climate change, one of the greatest threats of our time. we must lead and we must be on the right side of history. so i cannot understand why the president pulled us out of the paris climate agreement. i support h.r. 9 to recommit to us this agreement because we should be running towards sustainable solution, not away. i yield back my time.
10:13 am
the chair: gentleman from california. mr. levin: mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. first of all appreciate my colleague one that i have gotten a chance to know. i look forward to working with him on issues down the road. i want to also take this time to reject the premise that nothing has been done. in the debate a while ago i mentioned that 15 or 20 bills that passed the house in a bipartisan manner. these were signed into law. a lot of the hydroelectric extensions, h.r. 2122, h.r. 2292 to extend the project the federal energy regulatory commission involving the cannonsville dam. hydroleak trick power is clean, renewable. i can go -- hydroelectric power is clean and renewable. coy go through a list. just because we don't put the stamp of paris or climate
10:14 am
change on a piece of legislation doesn't mean that will help reduce our carbon exposure. our country is the largest reduction of co- than any industrialized nation from 2015 to 2018. having said that, i also would readily admit, and the chairman's heard me say this many times, that in 2019 our emissions went up. but that was because we have a thriving economy. more manufacturing. this debate is still very important. this amendment suggests that the measures under the obama administration was putting into place to meet the commitments on the paris agreement were affordable. and a lot of us would reject that premise. when you look at the cost for kilothe watt hour of generation base load versus green. we have always tried to be kind of an all of the above. actually in part of my congressional district, which is very large, i have one of the more biggest wind farms in
10:15 am
illinois. that's just in the shame paine county area in southern illinois. i also solar power because the actions our state, general assembly has done. we got a lot of solar power construction going on. all of the above approach would be what we would hope for and we look forward to the time when this too shall pass, this debate on this bill which will go to the senate and die. and then we work back with my friends in the foreign affairs committee, chairman engel is actual also on the energy and commerce committee. he knows we will eventually get to the aspect where we can can move in a bipartisan manner. with that i urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
10:16 am
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it's now in order tore consider amendment number 28 printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? mr. crow: mr. chair, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 28 printed in house report 116-42 offered by mr. crow of colorado. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman from colorado, mr. crow, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. crow: thank you, mr. chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise today to highlight the continuing work at the department of defense to procure renewable energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and make our military more resilient in the face of
10:17 am
climate change. the american military is the strongest in the world and is also the world's biggest consumer of energy. in 2017, our armed forces consumed over 85 million barrels of fuel to power ships, aircraft, combat vehicles and bases. as a combat veteran, i know firsthand that our reliance on fossil fuels at home and on the battlefield makes us very vulnerable. current and past leaders say it has exposed vulnerabilities of critical operations. they have argued climate change san urgent national security -- is an urgent national security threat and i agree. warming oceans leads to higher tides, putting our nation's critical infrastructure at risk. severe weather has already wrought half ak, including tyndall air force base, which will be at about $5 billion after hurricane michael.
10:18 am
migrations have affected the stability of nations and will put our national security and that of our allies at risk. the put of my amendment is nike the d.o.d.'s contributions to the sustainability effort surrounding h.r. 9. and the d.o.d.'s accomplishmented should be laweded. they have invested in grids, fuel-efficient vehicles. last year's ndaa required the litary to build on its efforts nor its install -- for its installation and operational standards. there is more to be done. going forward we have the unique opportunity to support sustainable policies, supporting taxpayer money and protecting the environment. one of the best examples is fort hood, texas. they have invested technology to harness renewable energy and ensure power is being efficiently managed.
10:19 am
microgrids and renewable energy will save fort hood $100 .illion in energy costs we must scale smart, practical solutions like these at the d.o.d. to make our force more resilient, agile and efficient. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield 30 seconds to the chairman, mr. engel from new york. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. engel: i want to thank the gentleman for yielding and i'm happy to say on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and the energy and commerce committee we support this amendment. it is a very good amendment. i also want to thank the gentleman for working with our committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my ime. mr. crow: i reserve the balance. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: mr. chair, i claim time in opposition and reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman
10:20 am
reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. crow: mr. chair, simply put, the federal government cannot meet its obligations under the paris agreement without the d.o.d.'s past and future ongoing contributions to this effort. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to recognize this fact and support my amendment. this is very simple. this is an opportunity for a win-win-win which is often hard to come by these days, but this is good for the american taxpayer. it will save us hundreds of millions, if not billions of dollars by promoting these efforts and increasing energy resiliency and efficiency. it's a win for our national security, because it's one of our largest vulnerabilities, our bases are subject to cyberattack and are vulnerable to continuity, decreases in our nations. and it's a win for the environment. this is something that we have to do. we have an obligation to do in support of our national security. again, i would urge everyone to join in supporting this amendment.
10:21 am
mr. chair, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from colorado yields back. the gentleman from illinois is ecognized. mr. shimkus: i want to thank my colleague for his service. war. ed during the cold it's a band of brothers. we appreciate your service. we know the national defense authorization act passed in the last congress has been helpful so that's another example of, it wasn't couched in climate change but it was couched in national defense and that's where, again, i will continue to make the argument and the comments that things have been going on. i don't want to read the full list of bills and stuff that we have passed over the last congress. the military is also looking at small module nuclear reactors in isolated locations.
10:22 am
that's areas in the innovation area that republicans could be very, very supportive of. we look forward having those debates. forward operating bases of solar power, solar technology helps keep our war fighters prepared and able to communicate. it's just the smart thing to do versus trying to haul crude oil and generators to places where it would not be in the best interest of our war fighters to have. so the focus is good. the republicans, again, believe in conservation, innovation, and adaptation. i can go through those buckets. when we move a bill that will get a chance to be heard by the and we work together, the goal would be to get something on the president's desk that he'll sign. this is not the venue because the senate is not going to move it, the president's not going to sign it, but i would encourage my colleagues to stay engaged, not just with armed
10:23 am
services committee but the energy and commerce committee and colleagues on this side because i do think there is a merit to the debate. an acknowledgment of what the department of defense has done with focus by the previous commander in chief. the paris climate mandates instituted by the obama administration, through the paris agreement and the outdated executive order, would have increased energy prices and wasted taxpayers' dollars. as a result, we cannot support the amendment. that would condone and reinstitute some of the costly measures. i would ask my colleagues to vote no on the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.
10:24 am
it is now in order to consider amendment number 29 printed in house report 116-42.
10:25 am
does the gentleman from new york rise as the designee of the gentleman from california? mr. engel: yes. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. engel: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk made in order by the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 29 printed in house report 116-42 offered by mr. engel of new york. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i thank you and want to say very strongly that on behalf of the foreign affairs committee and also the energy and commerce committee, we support this amendment. it's a very good amendment. the paris agreement, signed in
10:26 am
2015, is the first truly universal agreement among nations to tackle climate change, and rarely is there consensus among merely all nations on a single topic. with the paris agreement, leaders from around the world collectively agreed that climate change is driven by human behavior, that it's a threat to the environment, and all of humanity, and that global action is needed to stop it. it also created clear framework for all countries to make emissions reduction commitments. at present, 197 countries, every nation on earth, with the last signatory being war-torn syria, have adopted the paris agreement. this agreement includes the series of mandatory measures for the monitoring, verification, and public reporting of progress towards the country's emission reduction targets. but the emission reduction targets themselves are voluntary. each nation sets their own, respect of sovereignty, and there is no penalty for missing the target.
10:27 am
the idea is to create a culture of accountability and maybe peer pressure to get countries to reduce emissions. i now yield to the gentleman from california, mr. cox, the author of this amendment. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. cox: mr. speaker, i'm honored to be here today to introduce my amendment to h.r. 9, the climate action now act. my amendment takes into consideration the various populations, regions, industries, and communities affected by climate change while reducing any possible impacts on american jobs. we all know that climate change has impacted countries, communities throughout our country and the world. over the past few years, we've seen the devastating effects on it on the waters of the caribbean sea, fueling powerful storms like hurricane maria, which devastated puerto rico and took the lives of close to 3,000 people and displacing
10:28 am
another 300,000 from their homes. in my home state of california last year, it led to the deadliest wildfire season in history. according to the national climate assessment, rural communities, like the ones i serve, face challenging obstacles in responding to climate change because they are so highly dependent on natural resources. my constituents, the people of california's central valley, live in the -- in one of the most economically distressed parts of our country. we've been forgotten and left behind, but it's my constituent who is have seen the direct impacts of climate change with our recent heat waves and droughts, and it's only going to get worse if we don't work together and address this issue head-on. h.r. 9 is the first step we must take in addressing this challenge, and this would prohibit federal funds from being used to take any action in advancing the withdrawal of the u.s. -- from the paris
10:29 am
agreement. the u.s. committed to joining the paris agreement because we're a leading nation. it's unfortunate that this president is taking us backward. instead of fighting climate change, the president and this administration have proposed to slash funding from the department of energy's efficiency and renewable energy offices by over 85%. they even propose to cut energy funding from our states. my amendment would help create a clean energy economy that would provide good-paying jobs to millions of americans, cleaner air for everyone, and a safe, sustainable future for our children and grandchildren. what we continue to hear from our republican colleagues is that a number of coal jobs will be taken away from americans. and i can tell you, as somebody who's worked in the mining industry, who's worked downground, i know it's -- underground, i know it's not the way to go. we know that mining sdwrobs jobs to help your family, so
10:30 am
was whaling. the more time we waste on clinging to jobs of the past the more time we waste in making progress. nationally, there are over 240,000 jobs in the solar industry alone, and only about 53,000 coal mining jobs. reports find that the paris agreement would create and generate over 24 million jobs worldwide. in the state of california, we have over 519,000 clean energy jobs. it's critical, more than ever, that we continue to connect workers to jobs, to these jobs that we're creating for the 21st century. my amendment does just that, by requiring any climate plan to consider the impact on jobs, wages, and pay. we have the opportunity to be global leaders in the clean energy economy and ensure so many of these jobs are created right here in the united states, not in other countries, no the in india, not in china, and we cannot afford to take steps back on the fight on climate change and we must keep our word to the rest of the
10:31 am
world. i ask my colleagues to support my amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. . the chair: the gentleman from new york -- mr. engling: i referee:. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: claim time in opposition. i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman has the only time remains. the gentleman from new york's time has expired. the gentleman from illinois. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i wanted to make sure i submitted this statement into the record. i'm going to read it. this is from the international energy agency, global energy and co-2 status report, 2018, published march of 2019. it's fresh off the press. it addresses some of these issues that i have mentioned during this debate today about how we have been doing things. how overall emissions are
10:32 am
decreasing. and how public policy has helped and the like. one of the paragraphs i would like to read, in the united states, this is on page 10, in the united states the emission reductions seen in 2017 were reversed with an increase of 3.1% in co-2 emissions in 2018. that's what we addressed about the economy going up. more co-2 emissions. despite this increase, emissions in the united states remain around their 1990 levels. 14% and 800 metric tons of co-2 below their peak in 2000. this is the largest absolute decline among all countries since 2000. so i think that's instructive when we are here debating a bill that's not going to be reviewed by the senate, the president's not going to sign it. we look forward to working with my colleagues on the energy and commerce on things that we can can can do to work together --
10:33 am
we can do to work together to make better strides than what we already have in this country. we don't get a lot of credit because we don't couch it in as i said before, mr. chairman, climate change, paris accord. facts are important. data is important. and the energy information agency as n independent agency underneath the department of commerce. it's evaluating all countries and all emissions. republicans believe in conservation, which would be energy efficiency, forest management, innovation, advanced nuclear power, carbon capture, sequestration. my colleague who brought the amendment up. i don't believe coal will be dead. i think if we bring technology and we use carbon capture, utelelization, and sequestration and -- utilization and sequestration, we can still have a coal mining sector. we can can can still have energy -- we can still have energy electricity. i hope so because i'm from a
10:34 am
coal mining region. i'm not going to walk away from the jobs in southern illinois. the adaptation which we have had a lot of debate about today which is grid modernization, resiliency, crops, and the like. the amendment of my colleague is opposite to what dr. burgess and i tried to do in the committee when we marked up this bill. we wanted to have the research and analysis done before we go back to a climate agreement. what good does it do if you go to an agreement and then you find that jobs have been lost? wages have gone down? it's too late. you are in the agreement. let's do the research prior, which was our amendment, wasn't made in order for the floor, dr. burgess and i, to say let's do this research so if we are going to move and go back into the climate paris accord, if we are going to affect jobs and the economy negatively, we
10:35 am
should know that beforehand. this amendment does not do that. so with that i ask a no vote on this amendment. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields. the question is now on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. engel: on that i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york will be postponed. the committee will rise informally to receive a message. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by senate to inform the house that the senate has
10:36 am
passed s. 406, to establish a federal rotational cyber work force program for the federal cyber work force in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the committee will resume its sitting. the chair: committee will be in order. it is now in order to consider amendment number 30, printed in house report 116-42. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? mr. krishnamoorthi: mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 30, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. krishnamoorthi of illinois. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 329, the gentleman
10:37 am
from illinois, mr. krishnamoorthi, and the member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois. mr. krishnamoorthi: thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of amendment number 30 to the climate action now act. we are already seeing the economic benefits of taking action on climate change. in the united states, we have already created millions, i say millions of jobs in the clean economy from installing wind turbines and solar panels to retrofitting buildings, making them more efficient, energy efficient, to assembling fuel efficient vehicles and manufacturing the component parts for all of these clean energies technologies that can help drive down emissions. my amendment acknowledges the important role clean energy jobs play in meeting the united states' commitment under the paris agreement. there are currently more than 500,000 jobs in the renewable energy industry alone.
10:38 am
just an example of the millions of jobs we are creating in the clean economy as we work to meet our emissions reductions target. by taking a leadership role in global climate action, we can harness these benefits and see even more economic growth and opportunities for communities everywhere, including in southern illinois. and we need to make sure we do this in a way that not only creates jobs but creates good family sustaining jobs for working families throughout the country, including in my home state of illinois and in the eighth district of illinois. economic growth, work force development, and climate leadership go hand in hand. as co-founder and co-chair of the bipartisan congressional solar caucus, i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. at this time i'd like to recognize the gentleman from new york, for 30 seconds, to speak on this amendment. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. engel: i thank my friend for yielding. i want to say on behalf of the
10:39 am
foreign affairs committee and the energy and commerce committee we strongly support this amendment. it's an excellent amendment. i also want to thank the gentleman for o working with the committees on this amendment. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from northern illinois. mr. krishnamoorthi: thank you for your excellent remarks. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from southern illinois seek recognition? mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. chairman. i claim time in opposition. reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from northern illinois. mr. krishnamoorthi: i have no further comments. does the gentleman yield? mr. krishnamoorthi: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from southern illinois is recognized. mr. shimkus: i think that's the first time i have been directed to my region of the state of illinois. i appreciate t illinois has 10 counties. i represent 33 of those or parts of 33. it is a little different than
10:40 am
north of i-80 as the chairman knows anti-author of this amendment. you had me at a disadvantage because i have great kinship and friendship with my colleague who is offering this amendment. i would pause to say sometimes we have a hard time defining clean. what is clean energy? for me, some of this debate is no co-2 or very limited emissions. that's in the paris accord. in the climate change, global warming debate. it's all about co-2. we have had some folks, colleagues come here and talk about the four criteria pollutants and stuff. this is about co-2. we also think that not just solar but we ought to make sure we do geothermal provisions. we ought to look at pump storage provisions. we should do the hydroelectric provisions. and as my colleague knows, mr.
10:41 am
chairman, and you know being in the chicago land area, illinois is the largest production of electricity through the use of nuclear power. six locations, 11 reactors. how much does it emit of co-2 into the atmosphere? zero. major base load energy that's beneficial in this debate because we can't meet these standards unless we have some major generation, some major base load. so i think if we look forward to moving forward in a bill that would have a chance to move to the senate floor that we want to get to the president, we actually look forward to working with you on provisions and helping us grapple with the definition of clean. if the definition is little to no co-2 emissions, solar is great. wind is great.
10:42 am
they are small parts of a large portfolio of nuclear energy and hydroelectric, which are the predominant clean energy electricity producers if that definition is co-2. with that i would ask my colleagues to vote no on the amendment respectfully and yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman from illinois have both yielded. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlemen from illinois. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceed also now resume on
10:43 am
those amendments printed in house report 116-42, on which further proceedings were postponed in the following order. amendment number 2 by mr. espaillat of new york. amendment number 10 by mr. gosar of arizona. amendment number 11 by mr. gosar of arizona. amendment number 14 by ms. porter of california. amendment number 22 by mrs. fletcher of texas. amendment number 24 by ms. schrier of washington. amendment number 26 by mr. van drew of new jersey. amendment number 29 by mr. engel of new york. the chair will reduce to two minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report number 116-42 by the gentleman from new york, mr. espaillat, on which further
10:44 am
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. espaillat of new york. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, 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.]
10:45 am
10:46 am
10:47 am
10:48 am
10:49 am
10:50 am
10:51 am
10:52 am
10:53 am
10:54 am
10:55 am
10:56 am
10:57 am
10:58 am
10:59 am
11:00 am
11:01 am
11:02 am
11:03 am
11:04 am
11:05 am
11:06 am
11:07 am
11:08 am
11:09 am
11:10 am
11:11 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 237. the nays are 185. he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 10 printed in house report 116-42, by the gentleman from as a as, mr. gosar, on which further proceedings were postponed, on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the
11:12 am
amendment. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. gosar of arizona. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for 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 two-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.]
11:13 am
11:14 am
11:15 am
11:16 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas 234.89, the nays are
11:17 am
he amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 11 printed in house report 116-42 by the gentleman from arizona, mr. gosar. on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 11 printed in house report 116-42 offered by mr. gosar of arizona. the chair: a record vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-minute vote.
11:18 am
[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.]
11:19 am
11:20 am
11:21 am
11:22 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 189, the nays are 234. he amendment is not adopted.
11:23 am
the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 19 printed in house report 116-42 by the gentlewoman from california, ms. porter, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 19 printed in house report 116-42 offered by ms. porter of california. the chair: a resorted vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-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.]
11:24 am
11:25 am
11:26 am
11:27 am
11:28 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas re 260 and the nays are -- the chair: on this vote the yeas 163. 2 and the nays are he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 22 printed in house report 116-62 by the
11:29 am
gentlewoman from texas, mrs. fletcher, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 22 printed in house report 116-42 offered by mrs. fletcher of texas. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-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.]
11:30 am
11:31 am
11:32 am
11:33 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 305. the nays are 121. the amendment is don'ted. -- adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 24, printed in house report number 116-42, by
11:34 am
the gentlewoman from washington, ms. schrier, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 24, printed in house report number 116-42rks offered by ms. schrier of washington. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. this will be a two-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.]
11:35 am
11:36 am
11:37 am
11:38 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 295. the nays are 132. he amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 26, printed in house report 116-42, by the gentleman from new jersey, mr. van drew, on which further
11:39 am
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 26, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. van drew of new jersey. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-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.]
11:40 am
11:41 am
11:42 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 257. the nays are 167.
11:43 am
the amendment is adopted. the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 29, printed in house report 116-42, by the gentleman from new york, mr. engel, on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes he prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 29, printed in house report number 116-42, offered by mr. engel of new york. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and be count canned. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a two-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
11:44 am
expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
11:45 am
11:46 am
11:47 am
11:48 am
the chair: on this vote the yeas are 259, the nays are 166. the amendment is adopted. there being no further amendments, under the rule, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: mr. chair. the chair: madam speaker, the committee of the whole on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 9 and pursuant to house resolution 329, i report the bill back to
11:49 am
the house with sundry amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 9, and pursuant to house resolution 329 reports the bill back to the house with sundry amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule, the previous question is ordered. in a -- is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the committee of the whole? if not, the chair will put them engross. the question is on the adoption of the amendments. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendments are agreed to. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.
11:50 am
the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to direct the president to develop a plan for the united states to meet its nationally determined contribution under the paris agreement and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the ouse will be in order. the house will be in order. embers, please clear the well. take your conversations off the -- out of the house floor, lease. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
11:51 am
>> i am in its current form. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. barr of kentucky moves to recommit the bill, h.r. 9, to the committee on foreign affairs with instructions to the report the same back to the house for thewith with the following amendment. at the end of the bill, add the following new section. section 6, effective date. this act shall take effect on the date that the president certifies that meeting the nationally determined contribution of the united states under the paris agreement will not result in a net transfer of jobs from the united states to china. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members, the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. barr: madam speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill. it would not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted, the bill would immediately proceed to final passage as amended. this motion makes a small but important change to the bill. a change that is necessary to preserve the economic strength
11:52 am
of the united states. the amendment simply states that the act shall not take effect until the president certifies that the united states will not on net lose jobs to china as a result of meeting the emissions commitments required under the paris agreement. if, as the majority believes, the paris agreement will improve america's economic and technological competitiveness, this should not be a problem. madam speaker, i do not disagree with my colleagues that climate change is a problem, that this nation and other nations need to address. in fact, i believe it's important that we continue to have discussions about serious solutions on how to mitigate these risks through american innovation, conservation, adaptation and preparation. but, madam speaker, h.r. 9 is not a serious solution to these problems. the truth of the matter is, the paris agreement would hurt our economy, cost millions of
11:53 am
american jobs, weaken our sovereignty and put us at a disadvantage among international competitors, especially china. my home state of kentucky relies heavily on fossil fuels. and the coal industry provides our state with thousands of jobs d delivers over 83% -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman may proceed. mr. barr: the coal industry in kentucky provides our state with thousands of jobs and delivers over 83% of our power. this enables kentuckians to enjoy some of the lowest cost electricity rates in the country. and tennessee is not only state that re-- and kentucky is not the only state that relies on carbon-based fuels for our energy. nationally our energy is made up of 5% intermittent and unreliable sources such as solar and wind. let's think about the feasibility of hitting the goals outlined in the paris agreement. to cut greenhouse emissions by 26% to 28% by 2025. or to push the debate even
11:54 am
further, those goals outlined in the democrats' other climate proposals, such as the green new deal, to eliminate fossil fuels completely. a proposal that just yesterday every member of the majority voted against bringing up for debate. that's because the green new deal is nothing more than an absurd socialist fantasy that would devastate our economy. as policymakers -- as policymakers, our goal should not be to embrace at all costs the most green energy. our goal should be to promote the best energy, the most effective energy, the most reliable energy, and the most affordable energy. now, despite massive technological advances in innovations, any drastic move away from fossil fuel consumption is -- consumption is dangerous it. would mean decreased reliability. house house electricity expenditures would increase up to 26%. it would mean manufacturing and
11:55 am
energy-intensive jobs moving offshore. we would see a shortfall of nearly 200,000 manufacturing jobs and 400,000 jobs overall. it would mean economic decline and stagnation in communities, yielding an aggregate g.d.p. loss of over $2.5 trillion. and a total income loss for a family of four of over $20,000. it is only common sense that we ensure that these economic outcomes will never come to fruition before entering into this agreement. which is what this simple amendment would do. remember, between 2000 and 2014, the united states reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 18% without being subject to any international agreement. we should continue to focus on reducing emissions, developing and exporting clean coal technologies, and making our communities more resilient. but 1,000 more pages in the federal register will not change the weather. scientist and technological innovation fueled through free enterprise can. finally, if we want to be
11:56 am
serious about a global solution to climate change, we need to address the world's largest carbon emission offenders who have refused to meet the agreement's goals. this agreement fails to address those real polluters. china, the number one country in the world for greenhouse gas emissions, is perhaps our greatest strategic economic adversary. it is a nation that has been growing in manufacturing and industrial dominance. under the paris agreement, china has been allowed to increase emissions until 2030. this gives china a leg up. they'll spend that decade stealing our jobs. that hits people in my district the hardest. it hits those who can least afford it. as we confront china economically, we must be sure our environmental goals do not put us at a strategic disadvantage or force us to commit economic self-destruction. we must ensure that our policies do not raise electric rates and drive energy-intensive businesses offshore.
11:57 am
and we must make sure that china, with its are a patience appetite for dominating all industry and sweeping efforts to steal u.s. ideas, does not have new reasons to take advantage of american workers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. barr: madam speaker, socialism and central planning never will solve the problems of the human race. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. barr: vote yes on the motion to ro commit. -- to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i rise in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> madam speaker, our republican colleagues are right about one thing. china is taking advantage of us. but it's not taking advantage of america being in the paris accord. it's taking advantage of our retreat. china is a strategic competitor. and it should pain all of us that everywhere around the world
11:58 am
china is being treated like a leader in fighting climate change. it should pain us that china is investing more money in renewable energy than any other country. it should pain us that they are surging ahead of us in electric vehicles. it should pain us that they are racing to dominate the global market in lithium batteries, that they have 2/3 of the world's high speed rail and have spent over $100 billion on it in 2018. why is china spending hundreds of billions of dollars to make the transition to clean energy? let me tell you. it's not because the chinese communist party loves trees. mr. malinowski: it's because they want to within the -- win the future. i want america to win the future. i wants to -- us to reap the economic -- i want us to reap the economic benefits and jobs that goes to whoever wins the race to a clean energy future. and how do our republican colleagues propose to win that race? i have looked at their record in the years when they controlled this house. i searched in vein for one free
11:59 am
market-based plan. what did i find? nothing. apart from a tax bill filled with giveaways to oil companies. to allow more oil drilling, legislation to allow methane emissions, to gut the clean air act, to roll back the clean power plan. that's it. that's all you did. and do you know who has left you behind? do you know who wants us to stay in the paris accord because they know our economic future depends on it? i'll tell you who. the dow chemical company wants us to stay in paris. bank of america wants to stay. dupont wants us to stay. procter & gamble wants us to stay. general electric wants us to stay. cargill wants us to stay. citigroup wants us to stay. johnson and johnson wants us to stay. coca-cola wants us to stay. exxonmobil wants us to stay. the walt disney company wants us to stay. not a lot of socialists on their board. though i do have my doubts about
12:00 pm
goofy from time to time. so that's our choice. we can cling to the past, we can let china win this race, or we can stand with our american companies, our american scientists, our american innovators and let them lead us into the future. madam speaker, i yield to the gentleman from south carolina. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. as a former ocean engineer i rise on behalf of south carolina's first congressional district, the low country, and i rise, quite frankly, as someone who typically votes with republicans on these motions. but not today. i hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would want to engage in a constructive dialogue that addresses the
12:01 pm
devastating impact of flooding and -- flood, intensifying storms, rising sea levels. but not today. this is not the way that it used to be. president teddy roosevelt established 150 national forests in five national parks. president reagan, president reagan signed into law 38 bills that added more than 10.6 million acres to the national wilderness preservation system. all with the support of the distinguished members of the grand old party. mr. cunningham: but not today. the grand old party has an ill lust res you history with environmental -- ill lust res you history with environmental -- illustrious history with environmental conservation that it should be proud of but not today. this republican party does a
12:02 pm
disservice to that record by turning a blind eye to science and facts. there are certain things that go beyond politics. impacts that touch each and every one of us regardless of party, regardless of ideology. climate change is one of them. the low country know this is more than most. in downtown charleston, our medical district, home to charleston's v.a. hospital and medical university, is the area most prone to flooding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house is not in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. cunningham: during a recent hurricane, the medical forced to float surgeons in john boats to treat parents and children. paris island, the only base that makes female enlisted marines in our country, parris island,
12:03 pm
madam speaker, parris island could be flooded. madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the time has expired. the gentleman has. mr. cunningham: the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: order please. the gentleman's time has expired. the chair will remind all persons in the gallery that they are here as ghoves house and any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceed sgs in violation of the trials of house. without objection. the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the notion recommit. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. >> madam speaker. madam speaker, 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
12:04 pm
ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of passage. 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.]
12:05 pm
12:06 pm
12:07 pm
12:08 pm
12:09 pm
12:10 pm
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 206, the nays are 214. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor, please say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed.
12:11 pm
>> madam speaker, i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. 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 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.]
12:12 pm
12:13 pm
12:14 pm
12:15 pm
12:16 pm
12:17 pm
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 231, the nays are 190. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.
12:18 pm
the chair lays before the house answer rolled bill -- the house n enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 1222. an act to amend the pittman-robertson wildlife restoration act, to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded public target ranges in certain states. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee on the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 962, the born-alive abortion survivors protection act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: under guidelines consistently issued by successive speakers as recorded in section 956 of the house rules and manual, the chair's con strained not to entertain request -- entertain the request.
12:19 pm
the gentleman has not been ecognized.
12:20 pm
for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 2:30 p.m. tomorrow and, further, when the house adjourns on that day, it adjourns to meet at noon on tuesday next for morning hour debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.
12:21 pm
the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise to address for what my constituents is an urgent concern. the rising cost of health care. mr. mcadams: i hear about it everywhere i go. health care is personal. having access to quality, affordable care is central to our quality life and our ability to decide where we live and where we work. at a health care town hall i held last week, i heard from people such as a small business own who are worried that while the very poor and wealthy have coverage options, she struggled to find affordable -- an affordable policy for her family. she said, please don't forget about people like me. another woman talked about how complicated her co-pays were for the drug treatment prescribed by her doctor. another asked about the confusion surrounding billing
12:22 pm
codes and invoices. health care is probably the most complex issue we will address in congress. my top goals include to ensure that federal law continues to protect people with pre-existing conditions, to promote coverage and enrollment, and to find solutions to bring down costs. i believe that a good first step would be passing three bipartisan bills to make the drug market more competitive and prices more transparent. the creates act, which addresses an outrageous action by some name brand companies to unfairly stop generics, and the blocking act, to stop first generic drug parking, and the drug price star act, to improve transparency. with the cost of prescription drugs increasing dramatically, we need to take steps now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.
12:23 pm
>> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to bring attention to the national day of prayer. a day that exists to encourage prayer for america. since our country's founding from washington to lincoln to kennedy to trump, prayer to our creator has served as our most important resource during times of celebration and days of trial. with the same spirit as those who fled the shores of europe to escape religious persecution, we welcome this day as one in which we can come together as a people in gratitude for our freems and prosperity, but also an you are nest petition for giveness, unity, guidance and favor. the national day of prayer is a day for all americans to reflect on our many blessings and to recognize where our ultimate source of strength and hope comes from. mr. spano: our creator. at a time in history when our nation is more divided than ever, i call for us to commit ourselves to prayer this day, to seek the god who has wless -- blessed this nation for 242 years, and to begin again to live out this year's theme, to
12:24 pm
love and serve one another. madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to give honor to a great public servant, judge damon keefe. judge damon keefe, who was a judge of the united states court of the house of appeals -- united states court of appeals. he was born in 1922, a fitting day for someone who so believed in american democracy. he attended howard and was mentored by the future supreme court justice, thurgood marshall. in 1967, he was nominated to the seat of the united states district court for the eastern
12:25 pm
district of michigan by president johnson. mrs. lawrence: this nomination came at the suggestion of the michigan senator, phil hart, the remarkable namesake of the hart senate building. judge keefe's career was spent fighting for civil rights and civil liberties, particularly for communities within the 14th district. he stood for transparency in government. judge keefe will be sorely missed. but his years of tireless service as a champion for civil rights will never be forgotten. in 2002 he issued an opinion on the secret hearings for alleged terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. he famously wrote -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. mrs. lawrence: democrats died behind closed doors of the i yield -- doors. i yield back the balance of my time.
12:26 pm
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to honor and remember the entrepreneurial spirit and compassionate philanthropy of ray extine who passed away on april 20, 2019, at the age of 93. after receiving a law degree from mar the question university, -- marquette university, ray founded wisconsin barge line. he later formed the -- sold the business and formed marquette transportation, leading him to locate to kentucky. mr. comer: his business has had a profound economic impact and brought numerous jobs to the region. he and his wife touched the lives of many through the establishment of the ray and kay extine charitable trust. the couple's generosity has no doubt had a tremendous impact on the local community. over the years they have gifted the area they loved with the hospice care center, regional cancer care center, and a heart
12:27 pm
and vascular institute. all named in their honor. mr. extine was warmly known for his warm, compassionate spirit and devotion to his family. i join with those who knew him to ex prs our gratitude for his outstanding contributions to western kentucky. may god continue to bless the many members of his family through whom his memory lives on. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: thank you, madam speaker. as we enter the month of may, many of us will be gathering at the end of the month to honor and recognize those who have fallen. in mid month, we will celebrate the mothers of this nation. many of whom are veterans and who have died in battle. i rise today to speak about
12:28 pm
veteran suicide. and to view it as a national crisis. it is told that there are 20 veterans a day committing suicide. as i stand here today, tragically a man or woman who has worn the uniform, who is willing to sacrifice themselves for this nation, for the freedom of our people, for democracy, are taking their life. this is such a national crisis that i believe that this should be a major issue for all of us. to enissue you are that we find the resources -- to ensure that we find the resources and the resources for family members, early counseling, and a helping hand to ensure that those veterans who find themselves leonie -- lonely or homeless and feel there's no other way out but to commit suicide, many of them young, that we will find a way to legislate, but to also to protect the men and women who stood for us.
12:29 pm
i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i request to speak out of order, to inquire to the majority leader the schedule for next week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scalise: i also move to ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scalise: with that, i'd yield to the majority leader. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. on tuesday, madam speaker, the house will meet at 12:00 p.m. for morning hour debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m. on wednesday and thursday the house will meet at 10:00 a.m. for morning hour debate and 12:00 p.m. for legislative business. on friday the house will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business. we will consider several bills under suspension of the rules, a complete list of suspension
12:30 pm
bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow. the house will also consider h.r. 986, protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act of 2019. on october 22, 2018, the trump administration continued the republican assault on affordable, quality health coverage by issuing new guidance to carry out section 1332 of the affordable care act. that new guidance, madam speaker, undermines patient protections and threatens coverage for americans with pre-existing conditions. h.r. 986 blocks implementation of that guidance so as to preserve protection for pre-existing conditions and to ensure health care remains afordable. in addition, the house will consider h.r. 2157, the supplemental appropriation act
12:31 pm
of 2019. it would provide relief and recovery assistance for americans affected by recent natural disasters. it includes an additional $3 billion above that which we passed and sent to the senate some weeks ago to address flooding in the midwest and tornadoes in the south that occurred since we passed the first disaster relief bill in january which unfortunately has languished in the senate. lastly, the bill includes an extension of the flood insurance program until september 30, 2019. i yield back to my friend. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman for yielding back. i would point out that the president's executive order does nothing to change the protections in law for people with pre-existing conditions under obamacare, as the gentleman know the law protects people with pre-existing conditions from facing any kind of discrimination.
12:32 pm
section 1332 waivers have nothing to do with that. what they do is allow some state, and there have been a number of state who was requested, the ability to be more innovative and focus on lowering premiums while protecting pre-existing conditions. those state that was taken advantage of that waiver have used it to, number one prorkvide health care in different ways, more innovative ways for their medicaid population which is something we should all encourage because medicaid in many states is the worst form of health care in many cases, doctors don't even take medicaid policies and don't see medicaid patients so they can't get access to care and these waivers are a way to help open up more access to care at lower costs in many cases while protect preg existing conditions. with that said, when the gentleman laid out the schedule, i didn't see anything on the president's request for supplemental funding for the border crisis, specifically there was a $4.5 billion request that came down from the white
12:33 pm
house that requested additional funding to address this wave of people that are coming into our country illegally and in many cases they have run out of detention beds. they are overwhelming the system. it's been reported very widely about that. that's why the president made the $4.5 billion request. i wanted to ask the gentleman if that might be included in this supplemental for the disasters that we would surely like to see addressed. i yield. mr. hoyer: i appreciate the gentleman's comments. i won't respond to his initial comments. obviously we have a disagreement on the impact that the administration has had on pre-existing conditions and on the section to which we are referring. swreel a full debate on that next week when we consider the bill. with respect to the gentleman's question as it relates to the president's proposal for supplemental funding for border
12:34 pm
security, which by the way was sent down yesterday, and is now being reviewed, the gentleman knows that we are strong supporters of border security. we want to make sure that the border is also humane. the gentleman did not mention but i want to point out that in the bill that we adopted to fund the government that was shut down for 35 days, in the bill hat we passed, there were $755 billion for construction an technology at ports of entry. where most drugs come into the country illegally. we want to make sure that those drugs stop. we want to have border infrastructure that allows for not only security but checking people who are coming into the country to make sure they do not have ill list substances with them either for their own use or for sale. in addition to that we had $415
12:35 pm
million for the border patrol and the customs agents. and for humanitarian relief. which obviously was anticipating the problem that currently confronts us. and to make sure that people who come across our boarderer treated humanely and with respect. in addition there was $30.5 million in alternatives to detex in family case management which we think is important and in addition to that there was a half billion dollars, $563 million, for immigration judges to reduce the backlog of cases. and lastly, half a billion dollars again, $527 million, to assist central american countries which has had a positive effect on reducing crime and violence which is one
12:36 pm
of the major reasons people are fleeing those countries, particularly in the northern triangle countries, fleeing those countries and seeking asylum in the united states of america pursuant to american law. but we are e-- reviewing. we want to make sure our boarders are secure and we are treating people consistent with american law, not separating children from their families which we -- the president says he wants to perhaps renew that policy. we are vigrussly opposed to that policy. and we think the president is wrong in setting previous administrations in separating children. they did so in very few instances, almost exclusively when they were concerned with the safe i have to the child because of the parent's actions toward the child. so i will tell the gentleman we are going to be reviewing the president's request very carefully.
12:37 pm
ms. roybal-allard who chairs the committee, and mr. thompson who chairs the homeland security committee, both will be looking at it carefully and we'll be making recommendations in the near future as to the disposition of that proposal. i yield back. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman. of course the final end of year spending bill we got a start on addressing the problem of border security. we had very intense negotiations. and the president laid out the multitude of things that need to be done to actually get full control over the board cher we do not have. that was a start. as the gentleman knows it surely hasn't stopped the flow of people who have been coming across and especially these caravan, these organized caravans in the thousands per day. per day. which is overwhelming our system. i wish it would stop. i wish we would address all the interior security problems and magnet laws like catch and release and asylum loopholes that are encouraging people to
12:38 pm
come here illegally and in many cases overwhelming our own system. but as the gentleman reviews that supplemental, hopefully we can come to an agreement on how to, at least in the interim, address the problem but ultimately long-term we need a solution and we will continue to work on that i'll yield. mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield, the point of reciting the dollars that were included just some weeks ago to the administration is to point out that they have clearly significant sums with which to operate now and we'll see what funds they need in the future but i wanted to point out that the -- that we have not been negligent or sleeping. with respect to both border security and the humanitarian treatment of those who come across our border seeking asylum. so that as i say we'll review it and see what determination is
12:39 pm
made on what further resources are necessary. mr. scalise: that debate will go on. i want to ask the gentleman finally about legislation to confront b.d.s. movement, a major threat to our ally israel, attempts to undermine their economy. there's legislation and of course there's a bipartisan resolution, schneider-zeldin legislation which i strongly support which at least calls out the b.d.s. movement but as we've also seen we actually need teeth. we need real tools that we can provide not just our friend israel but also statesmark states that are also trying to confront this problem and push back against the b.d.s. movement. and the mccaul bill addresses that. very to a senate bill that passed with over 70 votes, very bipartisan, and in fact i believe there's legislation, there's amendments being put together to make the mccaul bill
12:40 pm
identical to the sthath bill and then the question is, can we get some kind of commitment? i know we've talked about this before, to bring that bill to the floor so we can finally, truly confront this problem this growing problem of b.d.s. movement across not only the nation but within our country and do it with real treeth like the bipartisan mccaul bill and i yield. mr. hoyer: as the gentleman knows, i thank him for his observation, madam speaker, the bill to which he refers has essentially four parts. memorandum of provision with reference to the m.o.u. for israel assistance package which we strongly support. strongly support the levels of that. that was not controversial. also the syria sanctions bill. of course we have passed the syria sanctions bills and we're working on other bills that relate to that unfortunately, they are being held up in the
12:41 pm
senate by some republican senators and the syria sanction bill has not been moved in the senate, unfortunately. it also has the jordan m.o.u. which is not controversial. andit has the syria, jordan m.o.u. are the three factors. one is controversial. it's controversial because whether or not it comports with the law there have been substantial number of state cases that have been ruled that state actions taking on this issue have been held not to be consistent with the law and the constitution. we're concerned about that because i share the gentleman's view, i am an opponent of the b.d.s. movement. i think it harms one of our most important allies. and it is inconsistent with, i frankly think, the welfare of the people in israel and
12:42 pm
frappingly the palestinians in the west bank. but having said that we are strong supporters of the resolution. that resolution has got bipartisan support, i think, if it comes to the floor it will have bipartisan support. the gentleman indicated that. and we intend to come forward with that. but we are trying to work to make sure that other suggestions are consistent with law and we may move with those as well. but we haven't made that determination yet. i yield back. mr. scalise: i appreciate, i understand that there hasn't been any determination yet through best a growing frustration that this needs to be atresed by the congress. there's a move to initiate a discharge petition to get that bill brought to the floor and so those discussions will continue, hopefully we can address the problem of b.d.s. not only in resolution but also in legislation that has teeth in law to help those states that
12:43 pm
want to confront it and also to help in a bigger way our ally israel. final point is on the process that we've seen. of course this week, only one bill that came under a rule. farce amendments go, we've seen a growing trend toward shutting out republican amendments and if i can just go through with the gentleman as we have looked in this congress, as we are, of the amendment that was come out of the rules committee, 74% of those amendments were democrat amendments, 14% were republican amendments and 12% were bipartisan. if i can compare the last congress when we were in the majority, there were in fact more democrat amendments than republican amendments aloud. 45% of the amendment wide receivers democrat, 38% were republican, in our republican majority and 17% were bipartisan. so when you compare last congress when we were in the
12:44 pm
majority, we actually let more democrat amendments to the floor than republican amendments, so far we have seen a complete reversal of that where our amendments have been shut out at a very high level. again 74% to 14%. i would just ask the the gentleman can look at addressing this problem and try to bring some parity to the floor process as it relates to that disparity and i yield. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his comments. of course what the gentleman didn't say is the last congress has the -- had the most closed rules of any congress in which i have served and had the most closed congress that we've served in, according to outside observers. but mr. mcgovern, chairman of the rules committee, there were 30 amendments available to this bill. i'm not sure how many were asked on the democratic side or the republican side, frankly, but having said that, there were republican amendments made in order. and we intend and mr. mcgovern,
12:45 pm
the chairman of the rules committee, has said he intends amendments made in order as they believe consistent with getting our work done. so i would say to the gentleman, unlike the last congress, i don't think -- i think you'll see closed rules be very much the exception while frankly they were very much the rule in the last congress. but i take the gentleman's point andville discussions with mr. mcgovern. but as you know and i know he's one of the fairest members in this house and we'll p trying to accommodate members. i will also say the gentleman's statistics include the appropriations process where there were a lot of amendments. on both sides of the aisle. we have not gotten to the appropriations process, as you know, it's my intention we get to the appropriations process and frankly try to conclude the
12:46 pm
appropriations process next month. i'm sure there are going to be a lot of amendments on -- coming from both sides. i hope when we get to that appropriations -- mr. scalise: i hope when we get that appropriations process there are open rules. you don't have to worry about your side breaking the closed rules since there was only one rule this week. hopefully more starts moving through the process. when we look at last congress we passed over 34 rule, 50 rules, i'm sorry, 50 rules last congress. so far this congress only 34 rules. we actually had 30 bills signed into law at this point in the congress, last congress. 30 bills signed into law under our majority. only 16 signed into law here. so hopefully we see more productivity as well as more openness in that process. i would yield.
12:47 pm
mr. hoyer: i think that the viers and the members of congress are probably being glazed over right now with these numbers but i'll tell the gentleman there was not a single open rule in the house that was presided over by paul ryan. not one. not one. check your record. as i say, mr. mcgovern has clearly said that we want to soe amendments made in order that both sides can get a fair hearing. and i think he will -- he's been doing that. i think he'll continue to do it. and i'll yield back the balance of my time if the gentleman is -- i'm prepared to yield back if the gentleman -- mr. scalise: as eyes are glazing over, for clarity, there were many rules where every single democrat amendment was included. so if you want to call it a modified rule, closed rule for
12:48 pm
people watching, when republicans and democrats go to the rules committee to try to amend the bill, when every single democrat amendment is allowed in, that is an open process. today, for example, the only rule today, over 30 republican amendments were shut out. over 30 were shut out. so many times we had rules where every single democrat amendment was allowed in the last congress, more democrat amendments were allowed than republican amendments. but this hopefully can get addressed and corrected and maybe when we get to an appropriations process it will be more fair in that regard. i would yield if the gentleman has anything else -- mr. hoyer: at the risk of -- mr. scalise: at the risk of the five people watching. mr. hoyer: i yield back the balance of my time. mr. scalise: with, that i look forward to next week, hopefully -- with that, i look forward to next week, hopefully getting some of those things done. with that, i yield back the balance of my time as well, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.
12:49 pm
under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2019, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. gohmert: we had an interesting debate, an interesting vote today regarding the paris climate change greement that -- it is a treaty. hasn't been properly treated like a treaty. just like the iran treaty was a treaty. and no matter whether the house
12:50 pm
or the senate agreed to violate the constitution and treat the iran treaty in exactly the opposite format as required by the constitution, doesn't matter. it was a treaty, it was never properly ratified. doesn't matter whether it was a republican or a democrat that came up with the bill. it was a republican senator or house member cannot come up with a bill that changes the constitution. said, you know what, we're going to take this treaty and act like you have to have 2/3 vote it down instead of 2/3 to ratify it. but that's what they did. so the president did exactly the right thing. it was time to stop giving
12:51 pm
billions of dollars in both direct money aid to the largest sponsor of terrorism, iran. and it was also time to reimpose the sanctions that have basically brought iran to its knees, begging for help. well, the obama administration helped them in two ways. to r one, allowing them pursue nuclear capabilities, just doing it privately. i'm one of three people that met with the two main inspectors in europe andover , regarding the question of -- and they would issue the statement each time that they had seen no evidence that iran was developing nukes, but in
12:52 pm
response to the question, did you see the military facilities that they keep so hidden in secret, and where their nuclear development would be occurring, and they said, no, you know, gee, they gave us a video that they said came from there, but we've never been allowed to amine the facilities, so the iaea was not allowed to examine the facilities where the nuclear development, nuclear weapons would have been developed. probably were being developed. and from iran's standpoint, based on howry dick louis the agreement was -- on how ridiculous the agreement was, they certainly in knowing their mentality of cheating, certainly they would have been pursuing nuclear weapons. whether or not they would wait for 10 years before actually going public with actually having nuclear weapons, but i
12:53 pm
even ask, ok, the obama administration sent them $150 billion in cash, let's say we hetically iran decided will just take some of that $150 billion and buy us one, two, three, four, five nukes from north korea, from pakistan. we know that during those final years of the obama administration that iran had met with pakistani officials, with north korean officials. so that was certainly a possibility. at i wondered if the iaea had capability of noting and to overing if iran were import a nuclear weapon from,
12:54 pm
ay, north korea or russia or pakistan. nd apparently unless the iranian the brought their new nuclear -- iranians brought their new nuclear weapons immediately near the detection equipment, there would be no way to know that iran bought nuclear weapons. so, to anyone who used reason in dealing with the largest supporter of terrorism in the rld, responsible for killing so many precious american , itary members and others president trump did a great thing. did he the right thing. it was a great thing to do for america's fewer you to -- future safety. it was a great thing to do for the world's safety.
12:55 pm
and it was absolutely a helpful thing to do for the nation of israel. so, that was smart. we've had these different climate accords and what so many of them have in common basically as, gee, we will pay the world lots of money, supposedly some type of guilt money, even though we have been more philanthropic than any other country in the istory of the world. and to any astute eye examining the state of the world and world history, it becomes very clear the only countries that are able to do anything about pollution on the planet are countries that
12:56 pm
ave a strong, vibrant economy. countries that are struggling, they're doing all they can to survive, to work, to they just don't -- can't spare the money to clean up the environment. you got countries like china and india, massive polluters, and under these accords, heck, china wouldn't even have requirements kick in for them to clean things up until 2030, and by then there would be all new agreements that would probably give china even more time. these accords appeared to be geared for one thing. do damage to the economy of the one country that's doing so much to clean up carbon emissions, to
12:57 pm
clean up pollution. an article here back from "forbes," this was back in the fall of 2017, yes, the u.s. leads all countries in reducing carbon emissions. that was 10 months into the obama administration. but as the environmental protection agency announced, we are leading the nation, excuse me, we are leading the world with respect to our co-2 footprint in reductions. "the washington post" fact-checked this claim and rated it three pinocchios, which means they rate claim mostly false. they further wrote, pruitt's uses of data appear to be a del deliberate effort to mislead the public. but the data mostly supports pruitt's claim. you have to consider the source,
12:58 pm
just like during my days on the felony judge, major civil litigation t all about the credibility of the witness. as we've seen, "the washington post" is exceedingly biased, slanted in their reporting. and so we need a source that gives pinocchios to the "the washington post." ecause if you look at the 2017 b.p. statistical review of world energy, since 2005, annual u.s. carbon docks -- carbon dioxide emissions have declined by $7 -- 758 million metric tons. that is by far the largest decline of any country in the world over that time span and is nearly as large as the 770 million metric ton decline for
12:59 pm
the entire european union. by comparison, the second largest decline during that period was registered by the united kingdom, which reported 170 million metric ton decline. so we had 758 million metric ton decline in carbon emissions. in that year. and u.k. was second. not quite up to our 758 million metric tons. they were at 170 million metric ton decline. but at the same time china's carbon dioxide emissions grew, that's grew, by three billion metric tons and india's grew by one billion metric tons. so we're over here in the united states trying not to destroy our economy, and yet cleaning up the
1:00 pm
environment more than anybody else in the world, and this ridiculous accord, really a treaty, allows the biggest polluters in the world to keep polluting much more, just either one of those, than the rest of the world. it's just phenomenal. the article goes on, the "washington post" gets into per capita emissions and indeed, despite the declimb, the u.s. per capita emissions are still among the highest in the world. however "the washington post" story claims, quote, the united states may have had the largest decrease in carbon emissions but is still the largest per capita emitter. that's not accurate either. according to the world bank data, u.s. per capita carbon dioxide emissions rank 11th among countries, so we're not
1:01 pm
the larblingest per capita emitter but we do emit 2.2 times as much on a per capita pay sis as china. but china has 4.3 times as many people and that matters. from an overall emissions perspective. china's lower per capita carbon dioxide emissions are more than offset by its greater population, so china emits over 70% more carbon dioxide annually than the united states. so there's a lot of manipulation as to what's going on, but it's ridiculous for the united states to p part of a treaty in which the united states is punished and our economy punished and the american people punished even though we are cutting the rate
1:02 pm
of carbon dioxide emissions more than any else. pete onarticle from liz the hill, carbon emissions prove trump right on the paris agreement. this is from last year. thing horrifies the intell hentsa than president trump' withdrawal from the paris climate change, but based on new information on china's emissions it increasingly looks like the president made the right call. just last week, an analysis from greenpeace indicated that china's 2018 -- and the numbers we were quoting before were from the year before. indicated china's 2018 emissions were on a trk to grow at the fastest rate in six years. the study, based on government data, regarding the use of coal
1:03 pm
and other energy sources, shows carbon output rising 4% in the first quarter of the year. analysts are projecting very gains over the next several quarters. the weak thovepbs paris agreement was that it was lopsided, requiring little from china and a great deal from the committed nt obama to the united states to reduce carbon emissions in 2025 by 26% to 28% which would have meant a substantial jump in electricity costs. by contrast, china committed to boosting nonfossil fuels to around 20% of its overall energy mix by 2030. and i hope that emissions might peak at that time as one analyst commented in the "new york times," quote, what china is
1:04 pm
pledging to do here is not a lot different from what china's policies are on track to deliver. so the president really did do the right thing for the american public. we lost a great man, a former member of this body, in john dingell. he and i have disagreements over some issues but i knew john dingell, i knew and i know he was an honest man, he was an honorable man, he was a very decent man, he was a genuine asset to this legislative body, he followed the rules, he made others follow the rules, and yet he was removed as chairman of
1:05 pm
energy and commerce even though he was looking forward to working diligently on a health care bill, he was removed as chairman of the committee because he made a state thament can still be found on youtube, like i said, he was an honest man. he did not want to move the cap and trade bill out of his committee. as he said, that cap and trade bill basically big thing, it was a carbon tax, he said that cap and trade bill is not only a tax, it's a great big one. and he had talked about how when you skyrocket the cost of energy , you know, the rich people are inconvenienced. but it's the poor in the nation, it's the lower middle class, it's the senior citizens on a
1:06 pm
fixed income, on social security, where they may go for years without getting a cost of living increase and even if they get one, it doesn't keep up with skyrocketing energy costs. hurting ld not abide poor people, hardworking, lower middle class people, with skyrocketing energy that they couldn't afford to pay and that's where so many of these things lead. we're going to have compassion on the people that are the working poor, for hetch's sake the last thing you want to do to them is skyrocket the cost of what they absolutely have to have just to exist. in america today you've got to have energy. whether it's electric energy.
1:07 pm
whether it's natural gas energy. gasoline, diesel. you've got to have energy. even a woodburning stove, you've got to have energy. and these kind of bills that sh for these kind of efforts devastate the working poor in this country. so here's an article from justin sikes. it also is from 2017. but analyzing obama's paris agreement and the title says, all costs and no benefit for the united states. so i am pleased that president trump with drew us from the treaty that was never properly ratified.
1:08 pm
and that would continue to send jobs to china and india from the united states. we have a president who understands, before america can continue to be the most philanthropic country in the world, helping those less fortunate, you need a vibrant economy and simply bringing the u.s. economy down to the almost no rate of growth during the obama years is not going to help us help other countries. so the economy, some may recall, you can go back and see president obama talking in terms of basically the 3% growth is a thing of the past. economy can't grow that. need to get used to the new normal. well, thunder president, the new normal is over 3% growth. and the only chance we have to
1:09 pm
overcome our massive deficit and growing deficit is to get the economy going so strongly that it grows in enough, sufficient manner that we are able to start paying down our deficit if we will just quit the massive overspending. now we have had quite a show, really more of a circus, in our judiciary committee the last couple of days. really been outrageous. ought toiary committee be, if anything the last bastion of civility in this town. judiciary committee should be he committee from which good ules emanate, that inspire
1:10 pm
others in the country and around the world that we have a model that can be followed. what occurred in our judiciary committee in the last two days the ade a mockery of .egislative process and something that our committee under our new majority, democrat majority, has not been willing to focus on that is a threat to our first, second, fourth, fifth amendment rights is the overreach by the department of justice, by the f.b.i., potentially by the intel community, in taking away americans' right to have privacy
1:11 pm
in their phone conversations, in their emails, their right to have a court system in which the judges are not closer to being prosecutor than they are actual evenhanded judges. and one of the things that is a huge concern for me should be a huge concern for all americans, i know it used to be a big concern with our now-chairman, nadler, my first term here in 2005 and 2006, at that time congressman nadler was a great stalwart in pushing for privacy rights. civil liberties. to make sure the government, under the bush administration, didn't overreach. but an interesting thing happened on the way to their majority and having though ba ma
1:12 pm
administration in charge. seemed to be a complete loss of interest in protecting civil the ies of people whom obama administration those to spy on. i know that the attorney general has said he's going to be following up with critically important investigations now. but i would hope, maybe the majority just really doesn't want to protect americans' rights, more focused on trying to destroy the current president, but there are things that have now arisen, evidence is clear, massive, widespread abuse at the top of the f.b.i.,
1:13 pm
top of the d.o.j., potentially in the intel area, and even to the point that we would have a special prosecutor, robert words of o in the wilford brimley once said, last time we had a leak like this, noah built himself an arc. -- an, a. that seems to be -- an ark. that seems to be what has happened under mueller's watch when he was at the f.b.i. under mueller's watch as a special counsel. and a good example is in this article from buzzfeed. they're certainly no fan of mine. but the editor, the news editor in chief, ben smith, has this article from april 18, 2019, and
1:14 pm
in this article he says, our reporters, talking about the buzzfeed reporters, went back to the two senior law enforcement sources who had told them, as the article put it, that, quote, donald trump directed his longtime attorney michael cohen to lie to congress about negotiations to build a trump ow for the moscow. according to two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter. unquote. that means that's got to be a couple of -- couple of people on the mueller team leaking information that turns out was not accurate but leaking information for one reason obviously since it turned out not to be accurate. to do harm to the president of
1:15 pm
the united states. that is not the job of the department of justice or the f.b.i. further down in the article it says, this is the news editor in chief talking about buzzfeed. our story was based on detailed information from senior law enforcement sources. that reporting included documents specifically -- get this -- specifically pages of notes that were taken during an interview of cohen by the f.b.i. now we got to looking at this issue back regarding witness statements that are taken down by the f.b.i. and it's really time that the f.b.i. came on up not he 20th century, i'm
1:16 pm
even asking them to come to the 21st century, but a practice of the f.b.i. has been and it is advantageous to law enforcement who does this, it's not really honorable, but it is advantageous, they don't like to film or record statements made by witnesses. they prefer to have an f.b.i. agent take notes of their interpretation of what the witnesses -- witness is saying. if they recorded it by video or audiotape, then when there was a question, which is right, the f.b.i.'s agent's notes or the actual words coming from the witness' mouth, you could go to the tape and find out what is
1:17 pm
actually accurate. but when there is no recording, then the advantage goes strictly to the benefit of the government agent, because, gee, they got no convictions, they come into court. saw so many felonies in my court. i tried felonies many times. but you know which way the jury is going to go, they are going to believe the law enforcement officer, especially prior to the last few years back when the f.b.i. had a much higher well thought of of reputation. been devastated in recent years. but they come in and testify and the witness says that's not what i said, you don't get to see a video or audio of what the witness actually said. what you have to decide between is this f.b.i. agent that's never been convicted and looks
1:18 pm
good on the stand, sounds good on the stand. and this defendant, probably has a criminal record. that usually goes in the direction of the f.b.i. agent. but now most state and local law enforcement offices have done more and more to record statements, to record what happens so the juries can see for themselves, so they don't have to judge between the credibility of law enforcement or a defendant. they see for themselves, hear for themselves what was said or done sm the f.b.i. doesn't like to do that. they much prefer to have agents make their notes of their interpretation of what the defendant said. and mueller particularly loved that during his 12 years as director of the f.b.i. because his people always got the benefit of the doubt and they were able to convict people because the f.b.i. agent who may
1:19 pm
have completely misinterpreted what was said in his or her notes, they get the benefit and the defendant gets convicted. so that's been a great strategy for law enforcement. some people felt like i was a judge.m high-type felony you have to have fairness. because of the credibility issues of the f.b.i., i feel comfortable christopher wray won't do it. he's more interested in trying to rebuild the image of the f.b.i. without actually correcting anything. so i'm sure he has creggetted some things. but certainly he is not changing the witness statements taken down in writing as the f.b.i. agent's interpretation.
1:20 pm
t -- and there are other indications he is more interested in trying to have a good front and making it look like the f.b.i. is better now. but their actions do need to be taken. t this story going back to that reporting included documents specifically pages of notes that were taken during an interview of cohen by the f.b.i. in those notes, one law enforcement source wrote that, ote, d.j.t. personally asked cohen to say negotiations ended in january and white house counsel office knew cohen would give false testimony to congress
1:21 pm
sanctioned by p.j.t., joint lawyer team reviewed lawyer that cohen sent about his testimony about trump tower moscow knowing it contained lies. well, it turns out that the notes that were taken by f.b.i. agents were not accurate, which, again, causes problems for credibility. but the real problem is the fact that you had investigators, which must have been f.b.i. working for the mueller team and they're turning over documents that at least were law enforcement sensitive and probably classified to some level. and as we know, as people look into it after former f.b.i. director comey basically admitted a crime that he had
1:22 pm
leaked information that he had taken down or typed up in a memo based on his conversation with the president, well, under the f.b.i. rules and regulations, that's not his property, that's not to be leaked and yet, he leaked it to a professor friend so that the professor friend could get it out to the press. i think it was the "new york times." regardless, get it out to the press for the sole purpose of trying to get a special counsel appointed to that rass president trump. you have the former f.b.i. director, what kind of example is that? comey's knowingly leaking information that was potentially criminal to leak. and when you have the f.b.i.
1:23 pm
director potentially committing overt crimes himself, what do you expect that to do inside the f.b.i. as an example? i know from talking to f.b.i. agents from all over the country, they were and still are amazed at the things that top people in the f.b.i. in f.b.i.ton did to destroy credibility. than of course, i think part of that was the result of robert mueller's five-year policy, he used it to eliminate people in the f.b.i. that had more law enforcement experience than him. he ran off thousands and thousands of years of xperienced ethical, moral, upstanding f.b.i. agents.
1:24 pm
might wonder why would a f.b.i. director run off the most experienced agents from all over the country. and really, the only reason i can think of that you would do that, you know young guys coming right out of school that are patriotic, they come in and they take their orders and don't have the experience to know when it's a stupid order or maybe an improper order. and so they are not going to talk back but salute mueller and do what he said where he knew that people that had been around when he ordered one of his ridiculous policies into effect that he later would have to repeal, he didn't want the experienced f.b.i. agent saying, sir, i know it's a good idea but 15 years ago we tried that. here was the result.
1:25 pm
it won't work out. mueller didn't want anybody to do that kind of thing or knew more than he did. he ran thousands of years of experience. i can not help personally but think if mueller had not run off so many thousands of years of f.b.i. experience, there would have been people around inside the f.b.i. who could have nudged an f.b.i. director like comey to avoid committing crimes. could have encouraged an idiot like peter strzok and maybe a great law enforcement officer at one time, but clearly, immoral, illegal in its conduct and a disgrace to the f.b.i. and a guy that can lie with a smirk on his
1:26 pm
face. that was pretty impressive. but there would have been people around to say you can't do that. and if you don't stop, i'm going to report you. well, mueller ran those guys off. he didn't want people like that. a good example is the f.b.i. agent that after ted stevens, under the mueller f.b.i. was tried and convicted of a crime that he did not commit right before the election, so he lost his seat in the u.s. senate, we had an f.b.i. agent came forward, filed an affidavit that he swore to. the f.b.i. had in effect manufactured a case against ted stevens that did not exist. that he did not accept hundreds of thousands of improvements to
1:27 pm
his home. he paid for them. he overpaid for them. but the f.b.i. did their raids and hid evidence that he needed to -- it would have exonerated, not just raise a reasonable doubt but completely exonerated. and the f.b.i. said they participated in manufacturing that crime. what happened with mueller as director of the f.b.i. when he find out if he already didn't already know that he had a supervisor agent who manufactured a case to convict an innocent man, well the mueller f.b.i. ran off the guy that filed the affidavit because he had a conscience and people didn't want people of conscience in the f.b.i. under him. he wanted people who would salute mueller and salute the flag and do whatever he wanted
1:28 pm
done and apparently in that case, even manufacturing a criminal case against a u.s. senator, the longest serving republican in the senate at that time. and of course, you have the case of dr. stephen hatfield. ueller had no evidence whatsoever that stephen hatfield was guilty of the anthrax crime that killed and harmed people after 9/11. and at one point, the nonexistence of any evidence caused apparently from reports president bush to call mueller in and say, doesn't look like any evidence here. are you really sure that dr. hatfield is the anthrax defendant guy? and mueller reportedly said i am 100% certain. there was no evidence.
1:29 pm
none. he just had a feeling. he basically framed an innocent man and ultimately the u.s. government had to pay $6 million in settlement to dr. hatfield. he didn't get his life back. we still talk about him in terms of anthrax. but when mueller was asked, did he have any regrets, apologies. he said absolutely not. e didn't care he ruined an innocent man's life. and ted stephens was on a plane and killed that he wouldn't have been on if the f.b.i. hadn't manufactured a case against him. it shouldn't come as a big surprise here that you have the doing team mueller was this investigation. and they are leaking their own
1:30 pm
documents that are not to be leaked, well, unless they are directed to by mueller. well, i guess that's a possibility. but any way, leaking this to the press. and it wasn't just one f.b.i. agent, according to the buzzfeed news editor-in-chief. because he says in the story he wrote and i'm quoting, senior law enforcement sources. liberal gave buzzfeed, news organization, being kind here -- gave him the f.b.i. tes to try to bring pressure that's the reason normally that law enforcement does this, to buildup public
1:31 pm
hysteria against somebody and hatred for someone so that they ultimately give up and agree to testify however they are asked to testify. this buzzfeed editor also said at the time, the sources asked reporters to keep the information confidential but with the publication of mueller's report they have permitted its release. that is so outrageous. i mean, was nothing learned from the f.b.i. framing the wrong person in the atlanta bombing case? apparently not. what happened to kirk weldon. he used to come speak from this very podium, multiple times, in -- it was in my first term, i think it was mainly in 2006.
1:32 pm
and he kept alleging that the f.b.i. had information that they knew there was going to be a terrorist attack just like what happened on 9/11. and i didn't know whether congressman weldon knew what he was talking about he sure seemed to. and he kept making these allegations that the f.b.i. didn't do their job. they could have saved 3,000 american lifes on 9/11. anyway, it was very tough allegations at the f.b.i. and as freshman i'm thinking, wow. mull ear's got to come back and respond to. this -- ulmer -- mueller's got to come back and respond to this even though he only took over shortly before kevin, it makes his f.b.i. look back, mueller has to come out and address this. apparently f.b.i. director
1:33 pm
mueller did address the allegations of congressman kirk weldon because two weeks before his election that year in 2006, there was a raid of weldon office, his daughter's law office, and it was early morning. and the press was all there. gee. had to have been the f.b.i. they're doing the raid. they got the press all there. and in no time at all, there were protesters with already-made signs at kirk weldon's office calling him all kinds of thief and different things. that occurring two weeks before the election. caused him to narrowly lose. then some months later they were notified by the f.b.i., oh, by the way, you can come get all that stuff we seized during our raid. we didn't yale use it for a grand jury or anything. they apparently used it to
1:34 pm
defeat kirk weldon as a member of congress who made them feel bad. and intelligent person might ask, well, look, if that's what the f.b.i. has done to people in the past, hatfield or weldon or stevens, aren't you concerned doing qust what kirk weldon did? and the fact is it should be a matter of concern. we are seeing even from buzzfeed how the f.b.i. will disclose information that's not even accurate to bring down public opinion against both a witness and in that case, the president himself. just to smear nb's -- somebody's name when it's not accurate. it should be a matter of concern. if people don't stand up in this body, actually the way jerry nadler used to years ago, about
1:35 pm
concerns with federal law enforcement activities. if we don't stand up here, nobody is going. to and it isn't going to get better. so it's a risk we've got to take. because somebody's got to speak up about these outrageous abuses. and they truly are abuses. now the evidence continues to come out, what appears to be quite clear was not that there was collusion or conspiracy between the trump campaign to ring downhillry clinton as a candidate. but the russian effort has not changed. not when they were the soviet union and now that it's an independent country of russia. they want to cause as much
1:36 pm
problem and division in the united states as they can. and boy, did it work this time. just a little over a week ago, agent, y, former mi-6 secret agent, no 007, that's for sure, but christopher steele, hired by fusion g.p.s., also hired nellie ohr, who was the wife of a top f.b.i. official med bruce ohr, and she was digging up dirt, whatever she could find, that was why she was hired, on donald trump. and christopher steele who hated candidate donald trump, was hired to dig up dirt on donald trump. as i understand it, he didn't
1:37 pm
even go to russia. he's calling, emailing, whatever he kneads to do to communicate nd word gets out around russia this british agent now working for the clinton campaign through with g.p.s. and working at least one f.b.i. top official , he's looking for dirt on donald trump in russia. steele is now basically admitted, you know what, it could well be that the people that gave me this dirt about prostitutes and donald trump that's now turned out to be 100% fabricated, it's possible that those could be agents for vladimir putin. you think?
1:38 pm
you bet. russia was able to divide this country and had plenty of willing accomplices in what turned out to be an outrageously corrupt top in the f.b.i. and some in the d.o.j. said he rosenstein, was joking when he said he would wear a wire into the oval office to try to trap donald trump as president so they could try remove him as president. they're working on a coup. from what i understand he was not joking because there was a andy meeting in which mccabe and another person, at least one more person, were there when rosenstein brought it up on his own again.
1:39 pm
hey, i wasn't kidding, i really am a team player. i know you're mad at me for the memo about comey that allowed him to be fired but i'm a team player. i want to be part of the team. i'll wear a wire into the oval office to try to trap the president. i'm really willing to do that. and minnesota cabe -- and mccabe, apparently, blown away that rosenstein would offer to do that again, gos back and has a meeting with his subordinates and said you won't believe, rosenstein brought up again, he's willing to wear a wire into the oval office, i don't know what's wrong with that guy. well there is a massive stench that is -- that has existed, came about during the obama administration, came about when robert mueller ran off so many of our incredibly qualified, upstanding f.b.i. agents, and i was hoping that when christopher
1:40 pm
ray came in, he would help clean up the mess, get rid of the bad actors, but he's been more of hold what you got and try to make the picture look rozier. why would i say that? because i know from having talked to the individuals that found the information, they knew that hillary clinton's private server was hacked by a foreign country and it was not russia and i knew at the time i was asking peter strzok questions but i didn't mention the country, but now it's come out, that a chinese intelligence agency had embedded instructions in her private server that every email coming in and every email going out was to go to this chinese intelligence agency. and it happened. and we also now know there was
1:41 pm
classified information that came and went through her private server. but the inspector general for our intelligence community was o concerned, he told his investigator, frank rucker, frank, you got to get over there and tell the f.b.i., they don't know that her private server was hacked. you got to go tell them. and this didn't come out in the hearing, i didn't bring it up, but i did ask strk strzok, because we the from his private texting that he was doing everything he could to exonerate hillary clinton and doing everything he could to prevent donald trump from becoming president. and so it had to come as an incredible blow to peter strzok when the intelligence communities investigatoring
1:42 pm
their i.g. investigator comes over to the f.b.i. as directed by the i.g. and he has to tell peter strzok because he's director of counterintelligence, at the f.b.i., and they have their liaison there, dean chappell, and they have another person there. and the i.g. also sent over their -- one of their top lawyers, janette mitchell and rucker said i needed to get you this information and you weren't responding so here it is. we now have proof positive that hillary clinton's private server was hacked and it was hacked by chi -- by china. and every email coming in and going out is going to their intelligence agecy. this didn't come out in the hearing but the fact is, he was shocked at the response by peter strzok. because he just looked at him. he showed no surprise.
1:43 pm
and is peal and strzok thanked frank rucker for the information, shook his hand and sent him on his way. as if it were no big deal. so where does christopher wray come in there? our that came out, that united states intelligence i.g. had proof positive that hillary clinton's private server had been hacked, and after it was exposed what a detriment, possibly criminal activity by peter strzok and after it came out that they were instructed that her private server was hacked what does christopher wray's f.b.i. do in they release an official statement that the f.b.i. still has not seen any evidence that hillary clinton's private server was hacked.
1:44 pm
that was despicably dishonest. all they had to do was contact the intelligence community, i.g.'s office they could have gotten the information but christopher way was more interest -- christopher wray was more interested in trying to preserve the old reputation of the f.b.i. that he continued with the facade, well, yeah, we're -- we put on our blinders, we see no evil, we hear no evil, we don't know about any evil. we're not going to go look at the evidence that absolutely unequivocally shows her private server was hacked. we'll just ignorantly and intentionally mislead the american people and say, we haven't seen any evidence that her private server was hacked. this is a dangerous, dangerous time in our history. and people can throw all the rocks at bob barr, i didn't know the guy, i don't think i've ever
1:45 pm
met the man. i had concerns because he was a private friend of bob mueller. and his wife was a friend of mrs. mueller. i had concerns. and now that he is trying to get to the bottom of all the corruption within the f.b.i. and top of the d.o.j., the rocks are being hurled but this should be a time when we come together to try to root out the corruption because if it -- if they can attempt a coup of a duly elected president, whether you like the electoral college or not, they can do it to a republican, then e day can come when you have conservative people who disagree with a liberal president and the side to take him out the way they made so much inroads in almost taking out donald trump. this is a scary time in our
1:46 pm
history and i literally hope and pray and i know there are people that make fun of the prayers, but i truly believe prayers have brought about god's blessing on this country and we've got a chance to fix things here. . it is goings to take courming for people willing to stand up to the f.b.i., corruption at the top. there are still people at the f.b.i. who do not like donald trump and they're still there and still would like to cover for people that were helping try to if he can tu ate this attempted coupe on donald trump. they need to go, but we need people -- i mean, it used to be and i know personally, assistant u.s. attorneys that are career, f.b.i. agents that were career,
1:47 pm
most the time you don't know if they did vote, because they had one interest getting to the truth of whether or not the probable cause a crime was committed and if so who probably committed it, that gets them an indictment and go for a conviction. that's what they were interested the forceic -- enforcing law. then james comey became an instrument to abuse enemies and it has to be cleaned up. and i have seen no indication that chris wray is interested in doing that. maybe he is doing things internally that i'm not seeing, but he's not the answer. for the sake of continuing this little experiment in self-government, we need to clean up the mess that the f.b.i. and washington d.c. and
1:48 pm
the mess that still has existence in the top of the justice department and then we can have a chance to keep this little experiment of self-government going. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom illinois seek recognition? without objection. >> i rise to praise this body for passing h.r. 9 the climate action now act of which i'm a proud co-sponsor. climate is the greatest threat a our species and also unequivocal opportunity to replace fossil fuels with clean energy. the white house is failing to seize while walking away from our international partners who are committed to this challenge.
1:49 pm
of all the misguided decisions of this administration, few has been as reckless as withdrawing. it is environmentally foolish we economically naive and have a defining challenge of our time. h.r. 9 is a reclamation of that mantle and demonstration that americans are determined to lead even if the white house is refusing to do so. i'm proud to be part of this effort because it's the kind of leadership into the breach that has long defined true american greatness. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.
1:50 pm
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> make a motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands adjourned until >> the house has passed a bill theeep the united states in paris climate agreement on climate change. live coverage when the house returns here on c-span. >> today on capitol hill, the chair for attorney general
1:51 pm
william barr sat uning on -- unoccupied in the house judiciary committee room. he was expected to testify before the committee today on special counsel mueller's report on russian interference in the 2016 presidential elections but yesterday he informed member he is would not testify. the committee met despite his decision. here's what happened. mr. nadler: the chair is authorized to declare recesses of the committee at any time. we welcome everyone to today's hearing on oversight of the u.s. department of justice report by special counsel robert mueller iii on the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and related matters. i will

34 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on