tv U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN May 17, 2019 8:59am-1:48pm EDT
rights history and cya people said african-americans should not have equality. look at history and i think you will see some of the same arguments made and hopefully you might want to revisit why we want to treat everyone equally, no matter who they are racially or by their sexual orientation. pocan, democrat of wisconsin. you can learn more if you go to his website or follow him on twitter. thank you very much for the time. the house will be voting today around 11:15 am on the equality act. they are coming in momentarily on c-span to start the legislative day. we can see the door and people are about to walk through it. live coverage here on c-span.
[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker: the house will be in order. the player will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. he we give you thanks, o god, for giving us another day. we ask your blessing this day upon the members of the people's house. may their labors be graced by your gifts of wisdom, patience, and charity that truth and righteousness might prevail in all their proceedings. we take special note at the end of national peace officers memorial week of the 126 peace officers who have died this past year in the line of duty. we ask that you grant them
eternal rest for having paid the ultimate price and protecting us. give their families in mourning their loss. may they be assured that we as a nation hold them in your hearts and understand we will always be indebted to them. may all that is done within the people's house this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his pproval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on the spombl of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the jourge. so many as are in favor say aye.
those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: madam speaker, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote on the yeas and nays will please rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yain -- yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause h of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from georgia, congresswoman mcbeth. miss mcbeth: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each
side of the aisle. for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from georgia seek recognition? mrs. mcbath: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized or one minute. mrs. mcbath: black women are three to four times more likely to die from pregnancy related complications, and this disparity exists across socio-, economic, and educational levels. i heard of a story of a constituent in my district, her name is pfeiffer. after a failed emergency surgery, she was confined to bed rest 20 weeks into her pregnancy and her doctor failed to address her mental health. at 30 weeks she gave birth to a beautiful baby boy. but for a year after she struggled with mental health. she said, i know that my story is unremarkable.
unremarkable. unremarkable because mothers are suffering in silence, black mothers are suffering in silence daily. i am proud to be a founding member of the black maternal health caucus because we need to address this crisis. i look forward to working with my colleagues to make sure that women, like pfeiffer, receive the proper care that they need and deserve. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia 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. mr. carter: madam speaker, i rise today to recognize mr. stuart slass senior for winging the savannah morning news unsung hero award for 2019. presented annually within the first congressional district of georgia, the award honors individuals who una assumingly offer their time and rear
sources to local high school sports teams so they can perform at the highest level possible. this year's recipient founded the member morerial foundation in honor of his 16-year-old son, a standout athlete at savannah country day school in both baseball and football, who tragically passed away in a car accident. raising money in his memory, the foundation has contributed over $50,000 to schools athletics across the savannah area and other organizations in the state like the ymca. the donations have gone toward purchasing pitching machines or baseball teams, new new jerseys for football teams and much more. thank you, mr. sly, for your work in our community. congratulations for winning the 2019 unsung hero award. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> request permission to revise
and extend. address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, the lgbtq community cannot wait any longer. mrs. maloney: for their full rights and equal protection to be guaranteed across this country. we must pass h.r. 5, the equality act. only 29 states have laws explicitly barring discrimination based on sexual orientation and employment, housing, and public accommodations. only 20 states have these protections for gender identity , and that is unacceptable. being able to be your true self should not depend on where you live. your protections and equal rights should not depend on where you live.
all lgbtq americans deserve nothing less than full rights and equal protections under the law and that's exactly what the equality act will do. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this historic civil rights bill to guarantee full equality for all. it will be on the floor later. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, tomorrow, may 18, our nation celebrates armed forces day. recognized the third saturday in may since president truman armed forces day is a time for to us pay special tribute to the brave men and women serving in all areas of the military. it is also time to educate the public on the impacts our service members have on
communities across the country. as a proud father of a soldier, i'm endlessly grateful for the selfless actions of our service members and their devotion to country. our service men and women serve throughout the world as a beacon of light carrying with them our values of liberty and justice. this service is often done on foreign lands and away from family and friends, but their willingness to defeat any threat that seeks to harm american values and interests never waivers. madam speaker, with this day we hope to show our appreciation to those honored so those-- so those honored are aware of how much we think of them and their sacrifices. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california 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 inute. >> madam speaker, i rise today
to recognize the importance of buying american grown flowers, whether it's celebrating a wedding, graduation, or sending condolences, fluers have been used to mark significant he occasions for thousands of years. i have seen the value of this industry adds to our economy and communities during my visits with our hardworking central coast farmers and workers. the cut flower industry generates thousands of jobs and produces $1.2 billion in economic activity each year through flower farmers, distributors, and florists. california grows an astonishing 75% of american grown flowers, and yet only a fraction of the flowers sold across the country were grown here. that must change. this week senator feinstein and i introduced the resolution to designate july as american grown flower month and to encourage consumers to buy flowers with with the certified
american grown label. mr. carbajal: by passing h.r. 379, we will honor the beauty this industry brings to our homes year-round and help keep our american grown flower industry prosperous. i urge my colleagues to join us in this effort. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent it address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today with a heavy heart as the city of kennewick and the greater tri cities mmunity mourns the loss of former councilman and mayor steve young. he served the people for nearly a decade. but his service went far beyond those years, outside of his continued service as
councilman, steve's footprints stretched far and wide across not only the city of kenniwick and tri cities but the entire state of washington. his vision, his advocacy, and passion for serving the community will continue on through the many contributions he provided for the tricities. mr. newhouse: the long list of community organizations, the nonprofits, and the local and state boardser that steve served on rightly demonstrate just how passionate he was about serving his community. my deepest condolences go out to steve's wife. my thoughts and prayers go out to her and the entire young family. rest in peace, my friend, we will miss you. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. velazquez: madam speaker, a
mile from my district is the stone wall inn, the site where five decades ago americans took to the streets to fight back against hate and launch the modern movement for lgbt rights. in a few hours this house will pay homage to that struggle as we vote on historic legislation to protect the fundamental rights of millions of americans. the equality act will extend anti-discrimination protections to lgbtq americans. sadly, from education to housing to credit, in so many areas this discrimination based on sexual orientation or identity remains legal. that is wrong and this bill will at long last change that. madam speaker, this is an issue of moral character. it speaks to who we're as a nation. this vote speaks to who we're, not just as legislators, but as
human beings. i implore all my colleagues to what you know is right in your heart. vote for equality, vote for respect, kindness, and love. vote to end bigotry and discrimination. vote yes on the equality act, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. walorski: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today with america's friend and ally israel asking -- rising against a tide of anti-semitism and the dangerous boycott divestment and sackses or b.d.s. movement. it's a form of economic warfare aimed at marginalizing the world's onlyle jewish state. this radical agenda rejects israel's right to self-defense
and seeks to destroy its economy. the house must stand with israel and pass h.r. 336, the strengthening america's security in the middle east act. this commonsense bill would combat the b.d.s. movement by supporting state and local governments that choose not to contract with companies that discriminate against israel. it already passed the senate with strong bipartisan support. sadly, speaker pelosi refuses to allow a vote. i'm a proud co-sponsor of h.r. 336, and this week i signed a discharge petition to ensure it gets a vote on the house floor. madam speaker, republicans and democrats must send a strong signal against anti-semitism and the anti-israel b.d.s. movement. we need a vote on h.r. 336. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask permission unanimous consent to speak to the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, the new house majority has passed several important bills.
mr. evans: including bills to protect the american health care. one of those important bills coming up is the equity act. first as a legislator and now as a member of congress i supported equal rights of lgbtq people for over 20-plus years. today in america lgbtq people get married on sunday and fired on monday. our fellow americans should not have fear of losing a job or an apartment simply because of who they are. i'm proud that this house will pass the equal act today. . let fellow americans be free from discrimination and from sea to shining sea, let freedom ring. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for
one minute. >> i rise to commend the federal railroad administration and trump administration for putting a stop to the wasteful spending on the california high-speed boondoggle. it can be used to help america's transportation system. mr. lamalfa: at a time on tax increases on every mile you drive that are being contemplated, how can we waste dollars on a project that has failed to comply with the terms of the 2010 agreement and failed to make reasonable progress. it is not even a high-speed project and doesn't connect san francisco to l.a. but terminates north of bakersfield. it has tripled in price when put in front of the california voters and that $70 billion will not be coming from this congress. let's channel these dollars into
highway dollars or water storage or just about anything else. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler, seek recognition? mr. nadler: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution 377, i call up h.r. 5 the equality act and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 34, h.r. 5, a bill to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity and sexual orientation and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 377, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on the judiciary printed in the bill is adopted and the bill as amended is considered read. the bill as amended shall be debatable for 90 minutes equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on the judiciary. the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler and the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock, each will control 45 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. nadler. mr. nadler: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. nadler: i yield myself three minutes. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 5, the equality act, which amends the civil rights act of 1964 and other core civil rights statutes to explicit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. today is a historic day. e first time a comprehensive lgbtq civil rights bill has come
to the floor of the house. this legislation will provide members of lgbtq americans protections from being denying medical care or being fired or thrown out of their homes. much of the history of the united states has been about expanding the definition who is understood to be included in the declaration of independence. when words were written, the phrase did not include black and latino men, native americans, did not include women and did not include lgbtq individuals. at this moment, we have the opportunity to continue our march towards justice to enshrine our nation's laws protections, to ensure that everyone can participate in key areas of life and to provide them recourse in the face of discrimination. despite opponents -- despite what opponents may say, we need these protections can work. we know that our existing
federal nondiscrimination laws have helped millions of americans. we know protections have worked in more than 20 states and in these places, women still have rights, religious freedoms still protected, parents are still involved in their children's health care and doctors are free to exercise their professional medical judgment. transgender individuals play sports and sometimes they win and sometimes they lose, just like everyone else. but the ability to have a job, to receive medical care or to rent a home should not depend on who someone is. we cannot accept the situation where anyone in this country can get married on sunday and legally be fired on monday because of who they love. for decades, the lgbtq community has been coming to congress. we heard a transgender woman being fired, lesbian couple himself being kicked out of their home and gay men being
denied medical care. it is time to stop coming to the capitol to defend their existence. the question before us is not whether they face immoral discrimination, because the record show it clearly does. the question is whether we as congress are willing to take action to do something about it. the answer goes to straight to the heart of who we want to be as a country and that answer must be yes. to the thousands of lgbtq people who shared their stories, i say thank you for your bravery and thank you for reliving your trauma to build the case for this legislation and expanding freedom in this country. we hear you, we see you and believe you and we will continue fighting you. i thank representative cicilline in introducing this bill and get it through the legislative process. i urge my colleagues to support this landmark legislation and i
reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcclintock: there are some fundamental principles that we ought to agree on, don't hurt other people, respect the right of doctors to do know harm, respect the right of parents to protect their children. now the bill before us today could have afffirmed the right of every adult to declare their own gender consistent with these principles. unfortunately, it violates these principles in the most fundamental way. and this isn't speculation. many states have adopted similar laws so we can see firsthand the result of them. this bill harms people in so many ways, destroying safe spaces tore women, undermining women-owned businesses. let me concentrate on one aspect, the destructive impact it has on women's sports wherever these laws are imposed.
trand gender men have been dominating. a 16-year-old talks about qualifying for the middle town invite. she said eight of us lined up, but when six of us were only about three-quarters into the race, two gills were already across the finish line. what just happened. two boys identifying as girls happen. fair is no longer the norm. the chance to win has been all over for us. i missed the chance to compete in the new england championship this past season because of this. d she goes on to say, the c. cacc won't listen to my voice, but i hope congress will. is will open sports to any state. this will take away scholarships
and dreams. we know this will happen because it already has. and we know the intent of the bill, congressman steube said nothing in this act to face competition from a biological male in any sporting event and the democrats voted it down on a party-line vote. sorry, see lena, you have to come to the wrong place. this bill could have protected the professional judgment of doctors. at our hearing, mr. cicilline said what h.r. 5 ensures that transgender people, including young people, are not denied care because of their gender identity. cross sex hormones, pube earth blockers and surgery, refuse to provide it on the self-diagnosis of a child and you have just broken the law.
johns hopkins university stopped the practice because they saw the long-term harm it did to their patients. and we know that's the intent of the bill as well, because i offered an amendment that nothing in this act should have the self-professed identity of a minor and the democrats voted it down. listen to one anguished parent elaine tell her story. if you take your child to a clinic to seek help, affirmative care means that the professional must accept the self-addressed identity. questioning the child's identity is now illegal. if a little boy is five years old and believes he is the opposite sex, affirmative care means going along with his beliefs and can refer to him as their daughter and choose a
feminine name. teachers are told to let him use the girls' bathroom at school. is it really harmless to tell a child who still pleebs in the tooth fairy he is of the opposite sex? if a 10-year-old girl is uncomfortable and suddenly said she is a boy, affirmative care means blocking this girl's pube earth with powerful drugs. we know this is the intent of the bill because congressman johnson offered an amendment that nothing in this act or any amendment made by this act may be construed to denny a parent's right and the democrats voted that amendment down on a party-line vote. elaine says, i'm speaking out because i love my daughter. and it's because of her that i know what i have told you is true. she has been a victim of gender-affirming medical
procedures and i was powerless to stop doctors from harming her. i'm sorry, elaine, the house majority doesn't care and isn't listening. this is the brave new world that democrats propose under the name of equality. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i yield three minutes to the the gentleman from rhode island, the sponsor of this legislation, mr. cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized. mr. cicilline: i rise to support h.r. 5, the equality act. i have to stop for a second and take in this momentous occasion. i have the honor of being on the floor of the u.s. house of representatives speaking in favor of a bill that i worked on for the past five years that will finally give full legal equality to the lgbtq community here in america. this is truly historic. i want to thank chairman nadler hob an ally and supporter of lgbtq rights throughout his
career and speaker pelosi and steny hoyer and representative clyburn. and i thank my lgbtq caucus co-chairs who have shown extraordinary leadership and means friends and partners in this fight. i want to thank our colleagues in the senate for their extraordinary leadership and we wouldn't be here today without the determined advocates and allies in the lgbtq community who bnded together to fight for dignity and equality under the law. throughout my life, i have seen firsthand the struggles that many in my community have achieved, the right to live freely without fear of persecution and discrimination. nd many felt was impossible. we are about to vote on this legislation which has the bipartisan support of 241 members of the house is an
achievement. it was not easy to get here. only four short years ago that the supreme court struck down the defense of marriage act allowing members of the lgbtq community. don't ask don't tell was the law of the land until six years ago. and this administration is attacking the lgbtq community. together, we are stronger. we made great strides in fighting for lgbtq rights but make no mistake, there are many people in this country who are actively working to undermine our gains. it is significant that we have strong and diverse support for the equality act. i don't mean just 241 co-sponsors, but look at the co-responsors and businesses in every state in the country have endorsed the bill and advocacy groups, faith groups back it.
the equality act has the support of the majority of the american people in every state. let that sink in. every single state in the country, the american people think it's time to protect the lgbtq community. there is nothing more central to the idea of america and nothing contributed to the exceptionalism of our country and prosperity of america than the guarantee of equal protection of the law for every single american. and they support this bill all across this country because it makes sense and common sense and adds sexual orientation and gender identity to protected classes ensuring that the lgbtq community enjoys the same protections than everyone else. nothing more and nothing else. . 4 there's been a lot of misinformation about this bill bloat floating around and i want want to ensure my
colleagues and the american people what they are are. it doesn't eliminate women's colleges, fraternities, or so roarities or other programs. the equality act doesn't prevent parents of having control of their children's medical decision or force doctors to provide treatment against their best judgment or religious beliefs. the equality act doesn't force churches to act as public accommodations or eliminate the ability of religious institutions to accept federal money. it ensures every child of an lgbtq parent will not be turned away from the pediatricians office. transgender teenagers can can attend school without fear for their safety. and lgbtq employees can't get married saturday, post pictures sunday, and fared on monday. it is a lifesaving bill that addresses some of the fundamental inequality that is still exist. the time is now, the moment is
here, fuhr generations will look back on this day as moment our elected leaders showed what side of history they are on o. we're on the right side of history. pass the equality act today with overwhelming bipartisan support. i thank the gentleman for the additional time. the speaker pro tempore: gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: i yield three minutes to the gentlelady from arizona, mrs. lesko. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from arizona virginia tech. mrs. lesko: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in opposition to h.r. 5. madam speaker, h.r. 5, the so-called equality act, should really be called the forfeiting women's rights act. according to multiple experts, lawyers, and organizations h.r. 5 would, indeed, prohibit in all circumstances under penalty
of federal law any acknowledgement of the reality of biological sex. would allow anyone at any time to declare that he or she identifies as the opposite sex without any medical or psychlogical diagnosis. it would erase women and girls' rights by requiring facilities such as schools, churches, dormetories, domestic violence shelters, homeless shelters to allow biological males who identify as women in women's bathrooms, women's and girls' shelters, women's and girls' showers. and in women's locker rooms. this will, indeed, violate women's privacy and can ultimately violate their safety. the danger to women when biological men seek to claim
female identity should seem obvious. but it is being ignored by proponents of this bill. h.r. 5 puts women at risk by promoting a federal law that would overrule any restriction on genderer identity claims and abolisher the protections of biological sex specific practices and spaces. h.r. 5 will eliminate, eliminate women and girls' sports by requiring that men and boys be allowed to compete in women's and fwirls' sports. this is already happening. -- girls' sports. this is already happening. h.r. 5 will also require, require doctors to provide sex change surgeries and sex change hormones to adolescents without parental consent and without a medical or psychlogical diagnosis. this could permanently sterilize young girls.
h.r. 5 denies constitutional religious protections by totally, totally eliminating the bipartisan religious freedom restoration act, which was supported by so many democrats back then. this is being done for the first time ever since the act was passed. congress should only pass laws that protect women, not threaten, silence, or abandon them. in fact, h.r. 5 puts everything that women have worked so hard o gain opportunities and protections at risk. i believe in our society law should seek to protect the safety and privacy of every oman and girl. mr. mcclintock: an additional 30 seconds. mrs. lesko: thank you. this bill actually does the opposite. h.r. 5 prioritizes the rights
of some americans over the rights of others. this is not equality. this is far from it. madam speaker, i speak before you now willing and desiring to o work with any and all my colleagues on policies that will truly promote women's rights and equality. however, this bill, unfortunately, does neither. with that i urge opposition of this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i now yield 2 1/2 minutes to the chair of the education and labor committee, the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, today is an historic day. 65 years ago today the supreme court ruled in brown v. board of education that racially segregated schools were inherently unequal and therefore unconstitutional. today is also an historic day
for the lgbtq community because today the house of representatives will pass the equality act. over the last decade we have made progress in securing rights for the lgbtq community, including marriage equality and the repeal of don't-ask, don't-tell. however, many legal barriers still remain. only a handful of states have explicit laws barring discrimination based on sexual orientation and employment, housing, and public accommodation, and fewer have protections for gender identity. the inconsist ten patchwork of state laws leaves millions of people vulnerable to discrimination at work, school, and many other parts of their daily lives. as chairman i was proud to hold a hearing on --on this important civil rights legislation in the committee on education and labor. witnesses testified that all too many americans are experiencing discrimination in they are everyday lives, especially the workplace, and
even in the educational system where many of them were experiencing discrimination and even elementary school. this is not acceptable. this bill assures -- this bill also ensures that the religious freedom and restoration act or riff a could not be used as a free pass to discriminate. rifra was originally enacted as a shield to serve as a safeguard for religious freedom but recently has been used as a sword to cut down the civil rights of too many individuals. freedom from discrimination is a core american value. passage of this bill is long overdue. we must affirm that all americans are equally protected from discrimination under the law. and i therefore urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation. yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: i yield four minutes to the gentlelady from north carolina, ms. foxx. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina
is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my friend from california for yielding. and for his tireless work exposing the deep flaws in this bill. i rise as the leader of the republicans on the education and labor committee which should have had an opportunity to consider this legislation fully. considering its vast implications for educational institutions and employers. we did not have that opportunity. instead we had a single subcommittee hearing. as a fierce advocate for the education and labor committee, i would never deem any subcommittee unimportant, but it was the subcommittee with the smallest membership. on top of that, somehow the decision was made to bring this bill to the floor under a closed rule with no amendments. so i commend my colleagues on the judiciary committee for their work on behalf of all of us. this bill may have equality in
its title, but it does not serve all people. its mandates for specific accommodations and shared facilities puts job creators, particularly those in small businesses, schools, and other community serving facilities, on the hook for washington's half-baked ideas. its vague and circular definitions of gender identity will lead only to uncertainty, litigation, and harm to individuals and organizations that will be forced to comply with the law the authors don't even seem to understand. this is a classic example of passing something now and figuring out what it actually means later. we have been here before. if the devil is in the detail, we're in for a lot of devilish surprises. this is no small price for some greater good as the bill's proponents have argued. opening schools and workplaces
to expanded liability based on, s the bill states, a "perception or belief even if inaccurate, of suspected discrimination." madam speaker, i'm going to repeat those words because they are so unbelievable. a perception or belief even if inaccurate of suspected discrimination. how can we write legislation like this? would have untold chilling effects on hiring, career advancement, and one could easily see discourse in the classroom. where the bill is alarmingly clear, however, is in its meticulous and intentional destruction of religious freedom protections. american employers and educators have grown accustomed to clumsy and misguided mandates coming down from
washington, shrouded in good intentions. other laws under the jurisdiction of the education and labor committee are littered with them. but this time something is different. the provision in h.r. 5 that guts the religious freedom restoration act of 1993 is clear in its intent. this bill is a brazen attempt to replace timeless, inherent, religious liberties with the identity politics of the moment. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle could have been given the benefit of the doubt on the rest of this bill. careless and shortsighted legislation is what they have done best for many years. but this fevered grasping, this historical clawing at individual americans who hold personal religious convictions represents a major departure from where the debate in this chamber has been before. i sincerely hope it's temporary
for the sake of this body and more importantly for the sake of the people we represent. i hope this bill, which faces certain failure in the senate, will be remembered as a failed experiment and oppressive legislation and not the first -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. ms. foxx: new sussstaint attack on religious freedom. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: madam speaker, i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the co-chair of the equality caucus, the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. pocan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. pocan: thank you, madam speaker. this is not about a red herring about men wanting to play in women sports. please, this is about people like my husband phil and i. we have been married for almost 13 years. we're a pretty boring married couple, probably not all that different than most people in congress. we try to sleep in a little on
the weekends. we sometimes argue over what to watch on tv, and we cherish the limited time we have with our friends and family. and we're really lucky because would he live in wisconsin, the first state in the nation to pass a gay and lesbian civil rights bill back in 1982, and it was signed by a republican governor. but that's not true for a majority of america. if we pass the equality act, people like phil and i can be free to love who we love, and we can live where we want to live, and work where we want to work without being fired or evicted simply because of who we're or who we love. that's pretty simple. pretty normal. pretty american. today we here in congress can protect our lgbtq constituents who want to live a life like phil and mine. like yours. free of unfair prejudice and discrimination. i hope that you will do the right thing today and join me
in supporting the equality act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. mcclintock: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins, the ranking member on judiciary, control the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from mr. collins: i yield myself such time as i may consume. thank you for this morning. thank you the gentleman from california for being here today and covering for us. madam speaker, we talked about this. the democrats in this bill pushing something quickly and we talked about this many times. i feel that if we go through this, we look at it however well intentioned, it is not coming under full scrutiny. considering four amendments, the chairman requested the house consider this bill under a
closed rule and his request was granted. now we can disagree about politics but hard to argue this bill wouldn't have been improved without full debate about what the bill says and as many amendments as possible. americans all agree no one should be mistreated by his employers, co-workers or anyone else. when lawmakers propose amendments to federal law, we must avoid doing harm. d we shouldn't pass rights laws that hurt women and children. h.r. 5 does all these things. this bill would do much more harm than good in many ways and the people who would bear the most damage are women and children. we could have disagreements, but without a full vetting on the possibility of what it would or
would not do gets under the scrutiny of what the law says and that's the part that i have the most problem with. not the intent, not the desire. that is something we fight about and it's the goodness i never questioned, it's how you go about it. i made this statement. what makes you feel good doesn't always heal you. in the end it will probably not do what we intend it to do and i'm concerned the way the bill has been coming to the floor. we considered two sports and two male athletes won the top two spots. one of the females finished eighth. in her words, we know the outcome of the race before it even starts. allowing men to compete against women in women sports and it is demoralizing because it makes their talent irrelevant. i don't say this. this is not doug collins'
opinion but tennis great who explained the threat that it poses to women's sport. there can be no blanket inclusion rule. there is nothing stereotypical about this, it's about fairness. and that came after she made initial comments and went back after being criticized for them, reviewed it and looked at everything and came back with this statement. she basically again double down and agreed. and this is one not to back away from those with needing equality. if h.r. 5 becomes law, what did we do at this moment when we had a chance to look at a bill and maybe fix it or make it better, but we never didn't. never in history has a political party tried to rewrite the civil rights laws to include a ideological term called gender identity in the u.s. code
applicable to any entity that receives federal assistance, elementary schools, colleges and health care centers. it would make self-reporting a protected class under federal law and educators to blindly llow the self-reporting of young add utilities. hey would be superseded by supremacy law in the constitution. i know they have debated it. but the plain reading of the text says it's true. we have heard proponents call people who oppose it that we are either ignorant, big gotted, oppressive or hateful. i will not make similar character isizations. we have a disagreement here. this is a closed rule here today and relatively closed in the process up until this point. i would implore my colleagues to
list i yield back to the stares of the transgender boys and gist. we may be allowing doctors to give them health care. and they could medicalize children without consulting their parents. they are begging congress to listen to them. h.r. 5 endanger the rights of every single american because the bill makes no provision for religious beliefs. christianity, islam and judeyism. who wantargeting those to live their lives accordingly. we must listen to the lgbtq and recognize that they have raised concerns about this legislation. h.r. 5 in the words of the women liberation.
and it would endanger the millions of american women and undermine fundamental rights in faith, real depon and science and put children at risk without parental involvement. i would urge all my colleagues to join me in opposing this bill with this bill being rushed to the floor. and believe carefully consider what is being put before them. think about what we are asking here. for the first time something was raised in our committee hearing that said do you think people commit fraud by going through medical procedures and everything ta they would do that simply to commit fraud. anyone listening this morning, this bill does not require any of that. it requires nothing except a self-admonishment or acknowledgement that i am what i say i am today. so many of us are asking, is there a better to do this?
i don't know. probably not. this is not right and it is being rushed. as i started the day, i will end as well. sometimes what makes you feel good and i understand the majority's desire to bring this forward and fulfill a promise. i get it. but in the end is it going to do what you want it to do in the long run or unintended consequences that we don't want to acknowledge today. sometimes it's better to back up and make sure it's right before we can fulfill a promise. and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: i yield two minutes to co-chair of the equality caucus, the gentleman from new york, sean maloney. mrs. maloney: >> i will not repeat the eloquent things about the importance of the proposed legislation although i thank the
gentleman from new york and rhode island. nor will i refuse the many false things said on the other side. this is landmark and essential civil rights protection for those who don't have it. it is no more, no less than others enjoy. it respects the first amendment and the exercise of religion in exactly the same way as we do for every civil rights context. mr. maloney: those who continue to face discrimination, based not on their character but who they are. many others have said this better than i have. i do want to speak to one group of my colleagues, those who know this is a good bill and yet today will vote no. to those colleagues, i ask you to consider the score. in this chamber, we are familiar with scores. a score is some powerful group is what they fear because we will vote for the right thing to
do. we believe a vote is right, but don't vote that way, they say, or we will score it against you. that's how washington scores. but history scores differently. conscience has its own rules. deesens si sees things beyond aagenda as. history records the good. conscience alliance with what is right. decency protects what truly matters. this is a good and simple bill of extraordinary historical importance. it sits high above our daily consideration. each of us in our careers will be lucky if we come to this floor on a single day when history is made, on a day by our vote we can count ourselves among those who have cared for, who have nurtured the original promise embedded in our founding documents.
on the battlefield -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. maloney: in their daily dignified to love their neighbors as themselves. i know you are decent people. let conscience guide us to the right and please support this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: at this time, i yield four minutes to the the gentleman from alabama, mr. byrne. mr. byrne: i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 5. there are a number of troubling issues with this legislation. in my mind, perhaps none is more troubling than the bill's explicit carveout from the religious restoration freedom act. under the first amendment, americans are blessed with the freedom of religion. this is much more than the freedom of worship.
not only do americans have the right to worship as they see fit, their faith is not concxds con find to what happens inside their place of worship. they have the right to practice their religion every day as they see fit. for many years, there was strong bipartisan agreement that protecting this right was of the utmost importance. the civil rights act of 1964 religious protections enjoyed bipartisan support. likewise, rifra was heralded as a historic bipartisan achievement. in the wake of the supreme court's 1990 decision in employment division versus smith which rolled back constitutional protections for religious liberty, the congress came together and restored barred protections for religious freedom under rifra. rifra was introduced by then chuck schumer and senator ted kennedy and passed unanimous in the house and by a vote of 97-3
in the senate and signed into law by president clinton. for nearly two decades rifra has been the hallmark of protecting religious freedom against the weight of a powerful federal government. contrary to some of its opponents claim, rifra is not an opt out of any law of people of faith. it provides a commonsense balancing test between religious pleff and government action. first an individual challenging the government must show they have a sincerely held belief that is being substantially burdened by the government, that is there is a real matter of faith actually being affected by the government's actions. if the individual successfully shows that, they do not automatically win their claim. the government may show it has a compelling interest. that is a good reason to interfere with the individual's religious rights and the interference is the least restriggettive means to
accomplish the government's roles, that is the government doesn't have a better alternative. this test provides fairness for both sides. unfortunately, today, the house proposes to bring this historic protection and say that rifra will not apply to the equality act. it is clear why they have done this. without rifra, it is less likely that faith-based charities and organizations will be able to uphold the faith of their organization when it runs counter to evolving norms. christian colleges will be able to teach marriage and human sexuality. without rifra, less likely that parents in public schools will be able to opt their children out of mandated education that teaches human sexuality contrary to their religious faith. the modern democratic party has decided that mandating its beliefs on everyone is more important than upholding the
rights of people of faith who possess contrary beliefs. madam speaker, that is truly radical and deeply troubling and it is unprecedented. it is contrary to the values and the foundational freedoms of this country. i urge my colleagues to reject this legislation. protecting the rights of some cannot come at the high cost of stripping away the rights of others, particularly when it comes to protecting religious liberty. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield two minutes to a senior member of the judiciary committee, the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from texas is ecognized. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman very much and i thank mr. cicilline. let me refute the suggestion
that this floor had a bill that was rushed to the floor. is is a work that has been coming for five years-plus. we have watched and engaged in meetings and discussions in collaboration to ensure that the bill would reflect all of what america is about. i want to speak to my religious friends, that is all of us claim a religion of some form. and i want to say to you religious liberty is not dead, but it is alive. this bill focuses on saving lives. it focuses on understanding what it means to be transgender and denied the right to serve in the united states military or stands up for african-americans transgender women who have been killed in the south in the region that i live in. and it stands up for the person who knocked on the door and could not get housing because of
their status. . i ask my friend who are other religions how would you feel if you knocked on a door and you could not get in? if they had no plates for you at the inn. i am well aware of the restorative act dealing with religion passed in 1993. but i'm also aa wear of the supreme court case, the hodges case, in 2015 that said they asked for equal dignity in the eyes of the law, the constitution grants them that right. that is what this bill is doing. and a the constitution will protect those who are involved in the religious practices as it has indicated, we, the people, organized to form a more perfect union. and then you go to the bill of rights and it has, as the amendment number 1, the congress shall make no law respecting an individual's right of religion or the practice thereof.
the constitution will be alongside the equality act and we'll be a able to have fair housing and civil rights and we will be able to deal with this issue. it is important. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. nadler: i grant the speaker an additional 30 seconds. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman very much. it will allow with this constitution alongside the equality act the idea that the civil rights act stands for those in the lgbtq community. the civil rights act in title 6 and title 2 and title 7. they will stand alongside the aclu and naacp and the urban league and all of the civil rights groups. they will stand alongside those of us who have been fighting for fair housing time after time so that when we knock on the door no matter who you are in this country you will have the constitution and the
equality act. i ask my friends and others in the religious community to support the equality act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. spano. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. spano: i happen to be a christian. and i'm grateful. i'm grateful to have been born in a nation where my beliefs and those of every other american are legally protected by our constitution. it's no coincidence that the very first amendment to the constitution guarantees religious liberty. our nation was settled by men and women from all over the world with divergent beliefs and convictions. we were catholics, puritans, lutherans, jews, baptists, hindus, quakers, and muslims. this rich and diverse cultural
melting pot was the soil in which the guarantees of the first amendment were planted, sprout the, and grew very strong. and over these last 230 years the freedom of americans to worship and believe as their conscious and god dictates has become deeply and firmly rooted in our nation's heritage, laws, and juresprudence. t all -- juris proceed dense -- jurisprudence. the first amendment was adopted long ago. but freedom, freedom is always a new idea. coretta scott king wisely said freedom is never really won. we earn it and win it in every new generation. h.r. 5 is bad for freedom. you see, it would immediately expose churches, religious schools and universities and
faith-based organizations to legal liability for simply following their earnest beliefs. it would essentially allow the government to place its hard and unyielding fist inside the church walls to force compliance with the convictions and dictates of the state instead of a church. h.r. 5 is bad for freedom t would force small businesses, small business owners all across this country to provide services or products to the public that may violate their deeply held faith-based convictions. again, allowing the state to essentially impose from above topdown its own moral codes and rules in place of those of the individual. h.r. 5 is bad for freedom. it's a large leap backward for parental rights, pitting physicians against parents. the generous religious
convictions of parents when their child seeks life altering irreversible sex reassignment treatment before that child has even developed physically or emotionally. once again, government inserting its ridged fist and iron will. this time directly into the family unit. h.r. 5 is bad for freedom. it would in one fell swoop deliver a crushing blow to the base of the tree of religious liberty. the tree that has grown strong and provided shade and protections -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida's time has expired. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, anybody who says that this bill would dictate the churches what they may preach or practice doesn't know what he's talking about. i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the chair of the democratic caucus and senior member of the
judiciary committee, the gentleman from new york, mr. jeffries. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished chair and i thank my good friend, david cicilline, for his extraordinary leadership on this incredibly important legislation. when the words we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, they were eloquent in their articulation, but incomplete in their application. as the legendary barbara jordan once observed, those words did not originally apply to african-americans. they did not apply to people of color. they did not apply to native americans. they did not apply to women. hey did not apply to members of the lgbt community. we have come a long way here in the united states of america, but we still have work to do. if you truly believe in liberty and justice for all, support the equality act. if you truly believe in equal
protection under the law, support the equality act. if you truly believe that everybody is created equally and that we're all god's children, support the equality act. love does not discriminate. and neither should the law. regardless of sexual orientation and regardless of gend -- gender identity. it's time to support the equality act and let's continue our nation's long necessary and majestic march toward a more perfect union. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from kentucky, mr. comer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. comer: mr. speaker, i rise today representing districts in
which school sports are at the heart of community gatherings. in kentucky, basketball is a a way of life. in my district students practice their whole lives to have the chance to attain athletic scholarship opportunities from universities they would otherwise be unable to attend. these students go on to accomplish great things and give back to their communities because of the scholarships they gain from athletic competition. this legislation was essentially subvert the purpose of gender divisions in these competitions by allowing biological males who identify as female to compete against girls in the same division. we have already seen instances where young women were denied scholarship opportunities because biological males competed in the same category with them and placed higher on the podium in track competitions. a bill with a name like the equality act sounds like a bill that in some way advocates for all people. that's what we strive for in
this country. equality before the law. that's why over the more than two centuries this country has existed, we have thankfully past right aws to wrongs, and treat all people with the dig net they deserve. as i look at h.r. 5 i'm deeply troubled and i believe most americans would be deeply troubled by what's really there. i serve as ranking member for the civil rights and human services subcommittee for education and labor. in our subcommittee we held a hearing on the equality act and what became abundantly clear was that this legislation would alter federal nondiscrimination law in way that is will have unintended effects we can cannot know today. this bill is following in the tradition of others we have seen so far throughout this congress. a clever name and allegedly noble purpose, but a vehicle for serious harmful
consequences. equality and freedom must coexist. h.r. 5 totally redefines one and delivers a serious blow to the other. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i now yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the judiciary committee, the gentleman from maryland, mr. raskin. mr. raskin: thank you, mr. chair. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. raskin: i want to strike a bipartisan note and invoke republican president who made america truly great. abraham lincoln who served in this body and spoke of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. all the people. in 1964 our predecessors in the house stood herer and voted 333 to 85 to pass the civil rights act of 1964. the vast majority of democrats and the vast majority of republicans voted for it. we changed america by bringing down the walls of racial and ethnic discrimination in employment, housing, public
accommodations, and education. our predecessors rejected the familiar hysterical arguments that equal rights for african-americans in restaurants and hotels and lunch counters meant discrimination against the religious rights of the owners of the restaurants and the motels and lunch counters, which was precisely the argument made back in that day. today we legislate equal rights under the exact same act for mlts of americans in the lgbt community -- millions of americans in the lgbt community. this is a glorious moment for the house of representatives and united states of america. but our friends who now occupy the seats of lincoln's party tell us that children will be able to get surgery without their parents' consent. this is false and this is propaganda. every state in the union requires parental consent before their minor children get surgery. and nothing in this act will affect any of the state's laws in any way with respect to parental consent.
let's honor abraham lincoln, let's honor the best pra contiguouses -- best traditions of the united states of america. let's bring down the walls of discrimination against all americans. pass the equality act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. it is now my pleasure to yield 4 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from missouri, mrs. hartzler. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from missouri is recognized. mrs. hartzler: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in strong opposition to h.r. 5, a deceptively named bill that is anything but equalizing. in fact, this bill legalizes discrimination. government imposed top down discrimination against those with time honored views of marriage and gender. this bill should be renamed the inequality act as its policies at the state level have already been used to eliminate safe spaces for women irreparably harm children, trampled parental rights, undermine the free exercise of religion, and
dismantle female athletics. as a mother, teacher, and form track coach i'm deeply concerned about the implications of this bill on and off the playing field. title 9 of the civil rights act, the provision guaranteeing garlse the same educational opportunities as boys and which launch competitive female sports into the arena is rendered irrelevant and outdated under the inequality act. under h.r. 5 high school female athletes will miss competitive opportunities because boys take home the medals. selena from kentucky trained hard, set goals, and persevered but couldn't overcome the biological advantage men have over women when two biological boys who identify as females outpaced her in a recent girls track meet. on average there is a 10% to 12% performance gap between elite males and elite females in athletics. the gap is smaller between elite females and nonelite males, but still
insurmountable. it's no surprise that men are taking home the gold in women's sports. in future olympics, it would only take three biological males who identify as female to prevent the best female athletes from reaching the medal stand. and eight to keep them off the track entirely. if we continue down this track, how long will it be before nations recruit men identifying as females to outmedal other countries and ultimately uproot the ancient tradition of the olympics. to put this in perspective, olympic world and u.s. chane tori, 100 meter lifetime best time, was beaten 15,000 times by men and boys. in another carks, olympic world and u.s. champion al lection felix best was outperformed more than 15,000 times by males n case after case men identifying as women are out compete, running, and out cycling women.
welcome to the brave new world of women's sports under h.r. 5. and the importance of title 9 is just not found on the field. as duke law professor coleman testified before the house judiciary committee, tens of thousands of girls and women are now eligible for college scholarships ensuring educational opportunities that for many wouldn't be realistic otherwise. unfortunately, h.r. 5 erases these educational opportunities further disenfranchising women. women only scholarships would be a thing of the past if this bill passes. mr. speaker, either we want a level playing field for american women or we don't. i want to he remind my colleagues that next week marks the centennial anniversary of this chamber's historic passage of the 19th amendment granting women the right to vote. it's an honor and a privilege for me to stand herer on this house floor 100 years later celebrating this milestone. i find it eerily ironic that
today many of my colleagues will exercise their 19th amendment right to turn back the clock on women and girls across this country. a vote for this bill is a vote against women. ofbers members from both sides the aisle who claim to be pro-women and pro-child need to stop this devastating legislation. the future of our girls' rights, protection and athletic potential depends on it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. mr. collins: reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from texas. >> mr. speaker, i rise today in full support of h.r. 5 equality act. we have made much progress in
recent years, but the reality is that many still face discrimination because of who they are and who they love. as has been well documented during the legislative record for h.r. 5, there are currently no federal protections for lgbtq people in the united states. let's refocus on what this bill is about. in 30 states. lgbtq can be fired, refused housing or denied services simply because of who they are. the equality act would debately extend civil rights for this community providing protections across areas of life including employment, housing, credit and jury duty. in texas, that means having an explicit protections for lgbtq people for the first time, the first time in our history. it will tear down barriers to prosperity and lead to better out comes for families and loved
ones. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. nadler: i yield 30 seconds. >> this legislation will benefit one million people in texas. imely in texas when we say you all, we mean all. mr. speaker, as a woman and a catholic, i know i'm not forfeiting any of my rights, not my women's rights or religious rights. we need to go bag and make sure we pass this bill because for once when we say justice for all at the end of our pledge, it should mean justice for all. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i yield five minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert. mr. gohmert: i appreciate the efforts my friends across the
aisle who believe that they are acting on behalf of equality. i realize that they believe that their way of approaching things includes much more wisdom than that of moses, who is the only great law giver depicted in this chamber with a full face, rather than a side. i would humbly submit we are not wiser at this time than moses, but i have heard comments from my friends, including my friend, former law professor, that he was impressed with the ability of the courts to sort out these civil rights issues. but as my friend justice scalia once told me, if you guys are
going to screw up legislation over in congress, don't come running to us all the time, because you don't know how to make laws that are fair. and that's what we have here. in an effort borne out of best intention, we want to help the feelings of people who are ender confused or just suffering gender discxds difficulties for yeah, we don't want to hurt their feelings. we are going to take 25% of all women who suffered sexual assault and the literature is clear that women suffer post-traumatic stress disorder after sexual assault at three to four times the rate that soldiers do, and that they are traumatized and retriggered by being in a confined space like a dressing room or rest room and have a biological man come into
their private area, we are going to say to those women, you know what? you just got to get over your trauma because less than 1% who think they may -- biological man or may think they be a woman, they are confused gender-wise, we don't want to hurt their feelings, so you have to get over your trauma. this is what is going on here. and if you look at the women's shelters around this country, who pays for most of those? it sure appears to me the ones i see, christian, salvation army, catholic. i have been told by these folks by many of them, we are just barely surviving financially. and this will force us to change our accommodations and we'll go out of business. we cannot -- we believe as
christians that moses had it right, males and females. and though there are people wiser in their own eyes than moses and jesus who said exactly veer bait imwhat moses did, if an orthodox synagogue says, we think men should be rabbis and they don't hire the biological woman who says i feel like i'm a man today, then they can not only be sued but this bill gives the claimant the ability to sue, but allows the attorney general to come in with the full force of the united states government and destroy that synagogue, that christian organization. and i know there are people here who think i do a whole lot of good than these christian organizations. but, do you really?
this is borne out of good intentions, but it is going to be so destructive to common sense and to people -- women who have been hurt and as we heard in our committee, from the second woman to get a scholarship under title 9, you are going to destroy women's scholarships and had a chart, the three top times for the 400 meter in the olympics in 2016 and said there are thousands of men that have better times. and i know my friends in the hearing said, gee, we know that men would never act like a woman just to get a massive amount of money and scholarships. i don't want to hear the majority say, wow, we didn't think it would happen. it is already happening. and if we are going to preserve the gains made by women under title 9, this needs to fail and not become the law, to preserve
what we have already made in the way of gains for women. i urge a no vote and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, the speaker of the house, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker: i'm so proud that as are in the chair as well the others who will preside in this historic debate today. mr. speaker, i thank the distinguished chairman of the judiciary committee for giving us the opportunity tore us today to expand freedom in america. i commend congressman cicilline for his extraordinary leadership, his courage and his persistence in introducing this legislation. so important to our country and
doing so, the support of the congressional black caucus, to to him stand there, honored join congressman john lewis a while back, two years ago and now in the majority for us to have the privilege to bring this legislation to the floor. thank you, congressman cicilline for being a champion of equality in our country. i salute the congressional black caucus and mr. lewis and mr. cleaver who will speak later today. it is a deeply powerful moment to be on this floor to talk about this important legislation. what i would like to do is take the time allotted to me or that i will use to salute the countless activists -- advocates and organizers and mobilizers who have courageously demanded
the full rights and justice of all americans. we have been on this floor, mr. hoyer, we all go way back when we fought for funding for hiv-aids and we were successful not only because of our inside maneuvering but the outside mobilization. we were successful in passing a fully inclusive hate crimes legislation. barney frank led the way inside. but the outside groups mobilizing, mobilizing. and under president obama, we salute him, we were able in the congress in the majority to pass the repeal of don't ask, don't tell and putting that into the dust bin of history, successful because of the activism of our outside groups and advocates and then the horrible defense of marriage act. i don't know what marriages they were defending, defense of
marriage that was proposed by some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, the supreme court gave us that answer about justice in our country. and then ending the hateful ban on transgender military service. this congress, this has been a scene where we have fought the fight on legislation, fought the fight presenting the case in the court of public opinion and to bolster the case in the supreme court. and on this monumental day, my houghts with phyllis lyon, meantors to so many of us in san francisco about civic engagement, some of that civic engagement related to lgbtq rights. they were an inspiration to many of us. when people say to me, it's easy for you to be for some of these things because you are from san
francisco and you are tolerant. that is a condescending word. this is not about tolerance, this is about respect of the lgbtq community. this is about taking pride and that is what we do. r phyllis and dell and older lgbtq workers striving to provide for their families, young people, this is a transform mative moment. after they stook took to the streets to fight against harassment and hate we take pride in the progress we have fodged together. our founders wrote in the preamble the blessings of liberty referred to be the birthright of all americans. to bring our nation closer to the founding promise of liberty and justice for all. we today pass the equality act
and timely fully end discrimination against lgbtq americans. lgbtq people deserve full civil rights protection in the workplace, education, housing, credit, jury duty, service and public accommodations. no one should be forced to lose his or her job or live in fear because who they are and who they love. this isn't personal -- it's personal. not just about policy but about people. i received a letter from a transwoman lick in san francisco who faced threats, stalking and harassment because of who she is. she says in her communication, the fear is very much there. all i want to do is live my life like anyone else. please keep seeing me. today and for all days, we say to all of our friends, we see you, we support you, we stand
with you with pride. we look forward to a swift, strong successful and hopefully strongly bipartisan bill today for equality. this is not just an act of congress that we are taking for the lgbtq community. this is progress for america. i urge an aye vote and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i yield four minutes to the gentleman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized. four minutes. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition to h.r. 5. i would like to echo the comments of my colleagues and express my deep concern for the grave consequences this bill would have for religious freedom. this bill would deny religious organizations their religious liberty rights guaranteed under the religious freedom restore act of 1993 and force many religious institutions to o go against their beliefs or risk being in violation of the law.
as a nation we can can cannot -- we can not turn our back on religious liberties. while the religious aspects of this legislation are by far the most egregious there is another area of can concern. the effects of the legislation on female athletes at all level of sporting competition across our country. twice during the consideration of this bill i have offered an amendment to ensure that our daughters are provided an equal playing field in sports for generations to come. and that female athletes are not competing against male athletes for athletic scholarships and title 9 funding. twice partisan politics have stopt this commonsense proposalle from being added to the bill. this provision would have guaranteed that biological women are not forced to compete against biological men at all levels of athletic competition. science has proven time and time again there is a significant performance difference between biological males and females from puberty jooned ward. from body fat to joint angles, the bodies are distinctly
unique. there is an average 10% to 12% performance gap between elite biological males and female athletes. these differences are largely due to the large influx of it's testosterone males have. testosterone is the reason men perform better than women. that's why men and women dope with drugs high in testosterone. there is 30 times more testosterone present leading physical characteristics that almost guarantee a higher rate of success in sporting events. don't take my word. c.c., a biological male who won three titles in the northeast 10 championships for women's track and received the most outstanding track athlete award. or fallin fox, a biological male who shattered female fighter's eye socket and gave her a concussion can. brent said she never felt so overpowered in her life. or gabriel, a 50-year-old,
6'8", 235 pound biological male who led the college basketball team to national championships with the most rebounds. the list goes on and on. i for one don't think it's fair or equal to make young biological women compete against biological male. this bill claims the fight for equality but seems to be far from equal for the young female athletes across our country. i urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to a distinguished member of the judiciary committee,er the gentleman from arizona, mr. stanton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized for one minute. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 5,er the equality act. mr. stanton: i want to thank my friend and fellow recovering mayor, congressman cicilline, for his strong and unwavering leadership on this historic civil rights legislation. when it comes to equality, there is no doubt we have come
a long way. but following the landmark supreme court ruling that legalized gay marriage in all 50 states, the hard truth is that discrimination based on sexual orientation is still permitted under the law. lgbtq individuals face this reality every day. that they may receive different unfair treatment in employment, housing, public accommodation, public education, and more. we are better than that. we're a nation that believes all are created equal, that this truth is self-evident. i rise today iner if vant support of the equality act because everyone should be treated equally no matter who they are, who they love, how they express themselves. whether you are in phoenix or philadelphia, mesa or montgomery, you deserve to be scene, to be heard, and to be welcomed. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia.
mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from utah, mr. mcadams. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcadams: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. speaker, i would like to ask mr. cicilline if he will engage with me for the purpose of a colloquy. mr. cicilline: i would be happy to engage with my colleague from utah. mr. mcadams: i want to confirm and clarify in our debate today that h.r. 5 does not change our nation's long-standing first amendment rights to free religious exercise, speech, and association. i understand that houses of worship will not be affected in their religious observances by the public accommodations provisions in h.r. 5. current exemption in title 2 of the civil rights act remains in place so chapels, temple, synagogues, mosques, and other houses of worship will continue to have legal certainty to practice their religion, conduct services, and affiliate with fellow members of their
religion as well as engage and welcome others not of their faith in their houses of worship for religious activity or faith practice as they do now. mr. cicilline: that is correct. h.r. 5 adds protected classes to title 2 of the civil rights act but does not revise the exception for private establishments not open to the public. meaning houses of worship can can continue their practices as before, including limiting admission or attendance to members of their faith. mr. mcadams: is it your understanding nothing in h.r. 5 compels a clergy member to perfect torm a religious ceremony in conflict with their religious beliefs. that is faith groups can continue to perform marriages, blessings, baptisms, and other practices for their own members and consistent with their beliefs, consistent with the first amendment rights, correct? mr. cicilline: h.r. 5 does not nor could any legislation supersede the first amendment. h.r. 5 allows the standards set by prior civil rights law to not interfere with worship and
religious practices by religious organizations. mr. mcadams: thank you, congressman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i yield myself one minute i would like to give speens. none of us have, especially myself, have said anything about houses of worship. we do know that's a bridge too far. what we're concerned about in the bill is where it says any of these groups affiliations, who get federal money to do other things, they would come under this. this is where the rfra protections is something. the conversation it was nice provide add great cover but did not answer the question that many of us have asked in this process as we go forward. i get that. also as we look at this further this is why we have asked to see if we could do this in a different way and do it in a better way to define these terms and protect all parties in this and not just run hastily into something that could could cause problems in the fuhr. this colloquy was nice but did not answer the underlying question. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york.
mr. nat letter: mr. speaker, i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentlelady from oregon, ms. bonamici. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from oregon is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. miss bonna beachy: i rise today in strong sprofert -- ms. bonamici: i rise today in strong support of this act. in our committee on this important bill we heard powerful testimony from can kimberly, the mother of kai an 8-year-old transgender girl. kimberly is an evangelical minister from rural texas. her family and school were not supportive and in fact scoot administrators made derogatory comments about her. kimberly testified that regretfully she gave into pressure and attempted home conversion therapy on kai when kai was only 4. one day she found can kai praying for jesus to take her home to be with him forever. let me say that another way. a 4-year-old was suicidal. kimberly is now today a fierce
advocate for her daughter's rights and the rights of all transgender kids to go to school in a safe and supportive environment. this bill will secure that right for all the kids like kai around the country and will secure the right to be free from discrimination. for millions of lgbtq people in our country. and i want to o close with the wordser from federal judge michael mcshane and his marriage equality opinion, he wrote, many suggest we're going down a a slippery slope that will have no moral boundaries. to those who truly harbor such fears i can only say this, let us look less to the sky to see what might fall. let us look to each other and rise. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentlelady from michigan, ms. stevens. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentlelady from michigan is recognized for one minute. ms. stevens: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today in jubilant manner because every american deserves to be treated equally under the law. i rise today in support of the basic and common principles enshrined in our constitution of liberty and justice for all. that no person shall be denied, be discriminated by their sexual orientation. i rise tate in support of the equality act -- i rise today in support of the equality act that we must proudly pass today led by my friend david cicilline. for in this country, in this year 2019, we must choose acceptance to grow our economy, to promote the general welfare. i rise because it is time to pass the equality act for full civil rights protections for all lgbtq americans. so many sacrifice so i could
stand here today and speak these words. passing this bill would send a powerful, it will send a powerful bipartisan message to members of the lgbtq community that they are not second class citizens. today we must vote to pass the equality act. thank you. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. speaker, i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. langevin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. langevin: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: 1 1/2 minutes. mr. langevin: mr. speaker, as a proud member of the lgbt equality caucus, i rise in strong support of the act a
bill championed by my good friend and fellow rhode islander congressman david cicilline. every person deserves to be treated equally, no matter who they are or whom they choose to love. the simple fact of the matter is lgbt americans face discrimination in this country every day. whether it's in the workplace, the foster care system, or housing market. mr. speaker, discrimination is never justified. we can cannot let it stand. as a person who lives with a disability, i know what discrimination feels like. i have experienced discrimination many times in my life. i don't like when it happens to me. and i don't want it to be experienced by anyone else. it's just plain wrong. mr. speaker, let's celebrate our diversity by promoting a culture of tolerance, inclusion, acceptance, instead of one of fear and hate. let's treat lgbt people with the dignity and respect they deserve.
let's honor the strength and courage of the lgbt people throughout history and let's pass the equality act to forever secure the civil rights of members of the lgbt community. i thank my colleague, congressman cicilline, for his leadership on this issue. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized for a minute and a half. ms. lee: thank you. i want to thank chairman nadler for yielding and for your tremendous leadership on this issue. also i just got to acknowledge and thank congressman david cicilline for his steady and strategy leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. i, too, was at the first press conference with our great warrior john lewis. it has been so exciting and uplifting to see the progress and the process in bringing this bill to the floor.
madam speaker, as a co-founder of the lgbtq equality caucus along with our dear former colleague, congressman barney frank, i rise today in support of h.r. 5, the equality act. this critical bill would end discrimination against lgbtq americans once and for all. . it is my moral responsibility to fight discrimination wherever and whom ever against, wherever it raises its ugly head. the equality act will ensure that there is clear lawful protection for lgbtq americans under the civil rights act. once more, this bill ensures that no one will live in fear because of their gender identity and sexual orientation. in 30 states it is still legal
lgbtq inminate against every aspect of their lives. may i have another 30 seconds? mr. nadler: i yield to the gentlelady 30 seconds. ms. lee: this discrimination disproportionately affects lgbtq people of color. this is a shame. discrimination must end against everyone. and yes, mr. speaker, as a person of faith, my religion teaches me to love thy neighbor nd do unto others. pass the equality act today so there will be truly liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: it's my privilege
to yield one minute to the the gentleman from utah, mr. stewart. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stewart: i'm so disappointed in this legislation. i have been involved in my time of congress with leaders from lgbtq and other organizations representing good people as well as religious leaders in an effort to find common ground to satisfy two important priorities. yes, of course, of course, we should treat each other with fairness and with dignity. i believe all people in america should live their lives free of any discxds difficulties crill nation, but we have to defend the first freedom, the foundational liberty. the amendment and principle upon which all other lits are based. people of faith who are also good people, deserve the right to discuss their sincerely held religious beliefs without compulsion from the federal government. this bill unfortunately and more than unfortunately, i mean
sadly, this bill makes absolutely no effort to do that. it makes no effort to find common ground. what a wasted opportunity. and with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. lynch: good morning. first of all, i want to rise in support of h.r. 5, mr. cicilline's bill, equality act. i rise today as a christian. this bill will extend the legal protections provided by the equal protection clause of the united states constitution as well as the civil rights act against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and may i say it is about time. this groundbreaking legislation bans wrongful hurtful housing,
employment, education and other business and government sectors based on sexual orientation and gender identity. individuals from the lgbtq community are our fellow americans. many of them are christians, they are our brothers and sisters and it is shameful it has taken this very long to provide them with equal protection under the law. the declaration of independence is a guide and instructtive as it reminds, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. all means all. equal means equal. let's vote for equality. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. mr. collins: i reserve.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentlelady from maine, ms. ping agree. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. pingree: i thank my friend and colleague, mr. cicilline for his courage, perseverance and his political talent at moving this bill forward and bringing us here today and i'm not going to cry in my minute. i'm proud my home state of maine is among the 21 states that has already enacted these protections. for almost 15 years, equal access to housing, employment and public establishments for our lgbtq community. guess what? the sky did not fall. when we passed protections, and our state is a better more inclusive state because of it. having guaranteed civil rights for our lgbtq neighbors means we value the health, safety and
dignity of every mainer, but they should have the same rights they enjoy our state when they are outside of our state. this congress must stand together in recognizing the humanity and civil rights of all lgbtq people wherever they may live live or travel. this will ensure equal access to education, housing, credit and all public services, public services which their tax dollars fund, by the way. it is time to extend these civil rights to everyone no matter who they love or how they identify. i urge my colleagues to recognize we must equally protect all members of our community under the law. let's pass the equality act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield 1 1/2
minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. doggett: thank you, too many americans can be fired, evicted or denied vital services like health care solely because of who they love. the equality act protects core american values. btq rights are civil rights, human rights. participating and contributing equally regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation brings us closer to the self-evident truth -- -- mr. nadler, i'm going to ask to yield back for a moment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. nadler: thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the the gentlewoman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker and thank you congressman david cicilline. in florida and many other states lgbtq americans are still at rick being fired, aviggetted or denied services because of their xual orientation or gender identity. ms. shalala: they have harassment to the bias that older same-sex couples face. in the gallery today is christian baylor an openly gay and gender none conforming student who was barred from delivering his speech at his high school on account of his
sexuality. two nights ago, he was honored hefner first hugh amendment award for education. today, we will take a crucial step for standing up for people like christian bypassing h.r. 5. and the birth of the modern lgbtq movement. there is no better way to honor the decades' long struggle for dignity and equality for lgbtq people and our elected leaders in congress to pass this legislation. i'm proud to support h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: you are not allowed to reference occupants in the gallery. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, how much time do i have remaining?
the speaker pro tempore: 10 1/2. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. doggett: too many americans face severe discxds difficulties anymore -- discrimination because of who they love. they are participating and contributing equally regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation brings us closer to the self-evident truth that while we are not all created the same in a just democracy, we are all created equally. despite republican hostility, the city of austin ordinances have long protected against the same discrimination we are combatting today. city contractors have complied
with these ordinances and these requirements set the standard. both austin and san antonio enjoy quality intext scores from the human rights campaign. with this bill, we set the same type of standard for our entire country. 1400 businesses in texas, competes coalition, sent a clear message of inclusion and against discrimination. we need strong federal enforcement. that's what this bill does -- mr. nadler: additional 30 seconds. mr. doggett: we need strong federal enforcement since local governments have imperfect tools and have been stifled by narrow minded legislators. no american civil rights don't depend on their zip code. let's pass the equality act today. among many who have been strong advocates for this act, i honor
sam smooth with equality texas and julian and sissy with h.r.c. and our colleagues, congressman cicilline and congressman pocan. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the chair of the committee on foreign affairs, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. engel: i rise in strong support of h.r. 5, the equality act. it is legal to fire an individual, prevent access to credit or evict someone from their home just because they are lgbt. the equality act will guarantee federal protections by ensuring the lgbtq community is provided full protections under federal civil rights laws. no longer will our fellow americans be deprived from buying a home, fired from their
job or denied a male in a restaurant just because of who they are. i am pleased to help pass this landmark bill today just as i was back in 1996 when i voted against the discriminatory doma or defense of marriage act. join me in support of this bill. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i now yield one minute to the gentlelady from colorado, ms. degette. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. degette: thank you, mr. speaker. it's a fundamental precept of our beautiful country that we have equality for all. but sadly in this nation, we have not had equality for every person until now.
2/3 of the lgbtq community have faced discrimination and this is simply wrong and simply un-american. i thank mr. cicilline for bringing this important piece of legislation to the floor. how ironic our lgbtq constituents can get married to each other but still in 29 states can be discriminated against in their jobs, in public education and even in their jury service. this is wrong. this is un-american and today the equality act rights this wrong that has been so long in coming. congratulations to everybody. i urge all of my colleagues to send a strong bipartisan statement. this is america. everybody has equal rights in all areas. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from new york
reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to a member of the judiciary colorado, mr. neguse. mr. neguse: i thank the chairman for his leadership and representative cicilline for his courage and leadership in bringing this bill to the floor. it is long past time that we end discrimination against those in the lgbtq community and our country and i'm proud to support the equality act. fairness, equality, these are core american values. and yet, today, in many states across the united states, americans can be fired, can be denied a mortgage. obtain housing. all because of the sexual orientation or gender i had tenth. that ends with the passage of the equality act. every american is equal under
the law. and so i would say to my friends in boulder county back home, thank you for your activism and one colorado, thank you for your activism and every lgbtq american who has stood up and fought for equality, i say thank you. and to the members here today, let's pass the equality act today and end discrimination once and for all. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: i now yield one minute to a distinguished member of the judiciary committee, the gentlelady from pennsylvania, ms. dean. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. ms. dean: i thank you, mr. chair. there are hard votes and there are easy votes. the hard votes involve competing values and difficult tradeoffs. the easy ones give us a chance to express our core american values loudly and clearly. h.r. 5 is the right vote and i
thank representative cicilline for his harder work and his heart in bringing this piece of justice to us. in most states smeck couples can can be denied service in restaurants, fired from jobs, evict interested homes with no legal recourse. in other words, they can be mistreated or discriminated against and their government won't stand up for them. h.r. 5 will end that. this bipartisan legislation will ban discrimination against lgbt people in housing, employment, credit, public accommodation, and so much more. it says that we don't care who you love but we do care that you are treated with decency and respect. this legislation takes us the next step in a long american tradition of expanding civil rights and protecting. it affirms that in this country there is no us and them, it's just us. this is a historic day. i'm proud to be a part of it. let's cast aside old prejudices and cast a vote for justice and equality. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: how much time do we have left? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has five minutes reminutes. mr. nadler: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new mexico, mr. lujan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new mexico is recognized. mr. lujan: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of the equality act because equality and fairness are core american values. right now fairness is not codified in our justice system, and it's long past time to end discrimination when half of americans live in a state without legal protections for lgbtq individuals, that's not equality. when lgbtq americans can can be fired, evicted, and discriminated against because of who they are, who they love, or how they identify. that is not justice. the opportunity before us is a
historic one. i want to thank my colleagues who led the effort to bring this bill to the floor. my colleagues who vote no on this will be judged. this is something that we should be working on together, mr. speaker. we will pass the equality act. for the dignity of all americans. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to remove their conversations from the floor. he house will be in order. members will remove their conversations from the floor, please. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, the conscious of the house, mr. lewis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. speaker, i want
to thank my friend from new york for yielding. david, my friend, and my brother, thank you for your leadership. today is may 17. on may 17, 1954 the united states supreme court issued a decision, i remember that decision, i was 167 years old. thought i would be attending desegregated school. it never happened for me. today on o this day we have an opportunity to send a message. now to help end discrimination in our country. and set all of our people free. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman's time has expired.
the chair will remind all persons in the gallery they are here as guests of the house and that any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is a violation of the rules of the house. the gentleman from new york. reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new york. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i now yield one minute to the gentleman from maryland, the distinguished majority leader of the house, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i regret that the chamber is ot full of members or that the gallery is not jammed with people for this is an historic day.
many members have quoted that extraordinary doctrine of civil rights and human rights articulated by our founders 243 years ago. we hold these truths to be elf-evident. i tell people that they may beself evident but they are not self executing. today we will take another step in a long journey towards a more perfect union. and we will take a step hopefully as it was in 1957 when we passed the civil rights act that year, hopefully it
will be as it was in 1964 when we passed that civil rights bill. and hopefully it will be as we oted on the disabilities act in 1990. l of those bills were passed in a bipartisan fashion. and, yes, there were bipartisan votes against those bills, some from my party and some from my colleagues on the republican side. and my presumption is and my hope is that those who voted no on those civil rights bills look back and said i made a mistake. that was not the vote i should have made.
every democrat will vote for this bill. every democrat will stand up and say this is another step in the quest for a better america. a more just america. more accepting america. that is what we have the opportunity to do today and i hope that many, if not all, of my republican colleagues will stand not for party, not for policies of party or partisanship but stand for principles enunciated 243 years ago but still not yet fully realized. that's what this day is about. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of this bill which i
i hope it passes with a very strong bipartisan conviction and confirmation of the fact that we hold these truths to be self-evident. this is an opportunity for the house to come together and reject discrimination and exclusion. i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of the bill that mr. cicilline put forward. the equality act is about america. it's about who we're, what we're, and what we believe. i want to commend the lgbt q community and the equality caucus for being at the forefront of promoting full equality, equal justice, and equal opportunity for lgbtq
people and their families in this country. the rld looks to us as strongest supporter historically of human rights and equal rights. have we always been so? no, we have not. my party was the segregationist party for many years and we said no to that. e walked away from that. we said that was not the party we were going to be. of course all of us were not members of that part of the party, but this day we should all stand and say yes, we believe that all men and all women and all people are created equal by god and endowed not by the constitution, not by this body,
but endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. and among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. and the right to live as you are. yes we make judgments on what you may do, but not who you are. you may be black, you may be white, you may be a woman, you may be a man, you may be a homosexual, you may be a lesbian, trans, anything other than what i am but you are entitled from me and from your and equal pect treatment. as we said 243 years ago. sadly some states still permit discrimination against lgbtq
people in those areas that have been discussed. we need to put an end to that and ensure that all people in this country, no matter where they live, are protected , ainst hate and bigotry exclusion, and discrimination. the opportunities this country offers must be opened to everyone in our country. when i first ran for office in 1966 for a seat in the maryland state senate, fair housing was the issue. and the proposition was you didn't have to sell your house to somebody whose color was different from yours, even though they had the ability to buy it. and they wanted to move into that neighborhood. this issue that we consider
today is different in particular but not in the principle. that idea is that the very core of our american society that opportunities exist for all of our people. throughout our history we reinforce this idea with the baggage of the 14th amendment. the 19th amendment. the 1964 civil rights act, the american with disabilities act, and others. we uphold this commitment to fair and more just society with assage of this equality act. surely, surely we ought to be able to agree, republicans and democrats, liberals and conservatives, north, east, south, and west surely we can can agree -- we can agree that
all men and all women are created equal. and are deserving of equal treatment. let's come together and make that promise of our founders ring true. the bible says love your neighbor as yourself. . not love your straight neighbor , not love your christian neighbor, not love your white neighbor, not love your native born neighbor, not love your neighbor of some other distinction, but love your eighbor as yourself. that means, in my view, love your gay neighbor. love your lesbian neighbor. love your trans neighbor. it means love your jewish neighbor, love your
african-american, latino, asian american neighbor. ove your immigrant neighbor. love your neighbor. not your hyphenated neighbor. because we're all created equal. martin luther king, a century after the civil war, said to america, you are not living out he promise of america. he called us to conscience. he called us to be america. he called us to be that light to the rest of the world. so today we say we will judge .n content of character we will be america. we will be the best we can be of america.
let us, like we did on so many of the civil rights bills that have come before us again, let us vote overwhelmingly to confirm america's promise to its people and to the world. vote for this critically important statement of america's values, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: i'd inquire of my -- i would inquire of my chairman if he has more speakers or if we are ready to close. mr. nadler: i was going to ask you the same thing. we are ready to close. mr. collins: we are ready. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. collins: well, we went through a lot of debate. we heard a lot of issues. one of the issues i want to bring up today -- again, as i started out in my opening
statement this is not a matter that there's no one and no one who disagrees with this bill that says someone ought to be treated wrongly, badly. we struggled with that on the floor. i agree with this bill. the intent no one should be. my friend quoted a scripture. it was a good one. he says, love your neighbor. i agree with him. preached that many years now. but it didn't say, love your neighbor but agree. this bill gets not the intent, not what we want to do to make us feel better. it's actually how do we then legislate this and this bill is not a good attempt. it's an imperfect step toward making something that others want to be right. but in the end runs a real risk of causing others harm at the same time.
it is a risk that is brought on by rushing something. the legislative part has been rushed, mr. speaker. i understand the concern. i understand the anxiety. but let's make it right. let's at least have an open debate. let's discuss here. it's interesting to me we had to have a colloquy on the floor to have some members -- this bill would not attack a worship service or if a minister would actually have to do a service that would be against their personal faith belief. the bill does not talk about that, but it does leave it open, issue of public accommodation and how would someone actually look at public accommodation in a church setting. that's an honest question that needs to be answered. but it does bring up a lot of questions. what if a church or a religious organization accepts federal money? what if a catholic church who accepts school lunch programs, what if a jewish synagogue who accepts money from homeland security, is it for the programs they have to do because the bill actually says, if you receive federal money,
you fall under this, do they then have to violate their own faith belief? making one group of people deny their faith while trying to give another one a leg up is still wrong. it's not equal. so the questions that we have here today is honest disagreement. it's honest disagreement, not in the sense, you take this, you made a gender identity claim that's self-professing. also, just said a moment ago, we talk about great ideas like the civil rights and the a.d.a. the a.d.a. disability under the a.d.a. can be shown objectively. shown objectively. i agree, as a father of a daughter who has spina bifida, in a wheelchair, i can show objectively what that means and i am proud of that legislation. i was not here. i wish i had been. in this bill it says simply gender identity as i proclaim it at that moment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. collins: this is where our problems come. with that, mr. speaker, is why i would say vote no on a bill that's been rushed to the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: mr. speaker, this morning we have heard phantom fears about the allegedly farmful effects of the equality act on religious freedom and women's rights. if these fears had any basis in reality, the equality act would not have been endorsed by more than 500 civil rights, women's rights, religious, medical, and other national and state organizations, including the american medical association, the central conference of american rabbis, the episcopal church, the lawyer's committee for civil rights under law, the leadership conference on civil and human rights, the naacp, the national alliance to end sexual violence, the national coalition of anti-violence programs, the national women's law center, network lobby for catholic social justice, the united methodist church, general board of church and society. it's also been endorsed by dozens of business association,
including the u.s. chamber of commerce, the national association of manufacturers, and the sports and fitness industry association. mr. speaker, the time has come to proclaim liberty and equality throughout the land. mr. speaker, i now commend the bill to the judgment of the house and i commend the house to the judgment of history. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 377, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, and for ther purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 1-c of rule 19, further consideration of h.r. 5 is postponed. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the
speaker's approval of the journal on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. 1-c, further ause proceedings will resume. the clerk: h.r. 5, a bill to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation, and for ther purposes. the eaker pro tempore: ouse will come to order. he house will be in order. members will remove their conversations from the floor. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk.
the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? >> i am in its present form. the speaker pro tempore: qualifies. the clerk: moves to recommit the bill h.r. 5 to the committee on the judiciary with instructions to report the same back to the house forthwith with the following amendment. add at the end of the bill the following, section 13, rule of construction. nothing in this act or any amendment made by this act may be construed to diminish any protections under title 9 of the education amendment of 1972. the speaker pro tempore: the ouse will come to order. pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from florida is recognized for five minutes in support of his motion. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i want to make it abundantly clear exactly what this motion to recommit does so i am going to read it. it's very short. nothing in this bill act or any amendment made by this act may be construed to diminish any
protections under title 9 of the education amendments of 1972. mr. steube: the threat this possesses at women's sports is profound. as describe by the expert, professor coleman, she states there is a significant performance difference between males and females. testosterone is the prifere driver of that difference. there is a wide gap. no overlap between the male and female at the tost rone ranges. there is no scientific doubt that men as a group perform better than women in sports. indeed this is why men and androgens.with this will mean the end of women sports. as tennis great martina navratilova wrote in "the washington post," in its current form, the equality act will damage title 9 which governs sports --
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentleman is correct. the house is not in order. the gentleman is recognized. mr. steube: this would amend the 1964 civil rights act by redefining sex to include gender identity. without an exception the definition would apply to all amendments to the 1964 act including title 9. most schools, colleges, the naacp, and the olympic committee would be affected because they receive federal funds and operate in interstate commerce. the legislation would make it unlawful to differentiate among girls and women in sports on the basis of sex for any purpose. for example, a sports team couldn't treat a transgender woman differently from a woman who is not transgender on the ground that the former is male bodied. yet, the reality is putting male and female bodied athletes together is co-ed or open sport. in open sport, females lose. some equality act advocates argue this is hyperbole and outdated stereotype.
they say as the aclu has, that girls can compete against boys. starting in puberit and every sport except sailing, shooting, there will be a significant number of boys and men would beat the best girls in head-to-head competition. claims to the contrary are simply a denial of science. those are not my words. those are the words of female tennis great martina navratilova. in footnote 44. the democrat majority states that sex is a protected characteristics under title 6 of the bill, in relation to title 9 of the education amendment, it's the committee's intention not to alter in any way title 9 or the scope or availability of its exemptions as it currently stand. rather, title 9 in the revised title 6 should be read as being complementary provisions that provide overlapping protection against sex discrimination, unquote. but, of course, we all know that allowing biological males
to compete against biological females is not an overlapping protection. it is instead a violation of women's rights to engage in competitive sports on an even playing field. and to enjoy the protection of their own spaces reserved for biological females. and so this motion to recommit is essential to protecting the rights of women and girls in sports that h.r. 5 currently denies. even the obama administration wrote a letter to schools regarding title 9 enforcements, making clear they should continue to be able to enforce policies that are, quote, tailored requirements based on sound, current, research-based medical knowledge about the impact of the individual's parmings on the -- participation on the competitive fairness. this will not kill the bill or delay the consideration. if this motion to recommit is adopted, the bill proceeds directly to final passage. if h.r. 5 becomes law, our daughters will be asking us, what did you do when moves were made to eliminate women's sports? it's worth considering that
question now before it's too late. i urge all my colleagues to join me in protecting title 9 and protecting women sports and supporting this motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> i rise to oppose the motion to recommit with all of my heart. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> i can't believe that we're standing here and having a man tell me what kind of rotections i need in sports. this is fear mongering about trans women playing in sports. are you kidding me? i don't know if my colleagues on the other side of the aisle realize that they met trans people but they have, they definitely have, and i met many and this motion reflects nothing more than the prejudice of my colleagues. my staff have put together a lot of talking points for you
today, but it's much simpler than that. the equality act ensures that lgbtq women and girls who are lesbian, bisexual or transgender will all have the same opportunities as their peers. ms. hill: in sports, in housing, in jobs. the discrimination that trans individuals face just trying to live their lives every single day is something beyond what most of us could ever imagine. through my worth on the issue of homelessness, i saw trans women affected by discrimination at every single stage of their lives. they have higher rates of poverty, higher rates of sexual abuse, higher rates of homelessness, and i can tell you, no trans person is trying to game the system to participate in sports. that does not happen, and that is a sad scare tactic that has no place on the floor of the people's house. state of schools and organizations across the
country have found for many years letting lgbtq student athletes, including girls and women who are transgender participate in sports, does not harm women and girl's sports in any way. as an athlete, athletic success is based on so many factors like individual ability and strength and this varies widely for people that are not trans it doesn't matter if one is transgender or not. advocates such as the national women's law center, national women's sports foundation, women's leaders in college sports, and others, support trans-inclusive policies and oppose efforts to exclude transgender people from participating in sports. this is not a new concept. trans people have participated in sports for years. stop the fear mongering. this is 2019 and we are not afraid of the boogie man that you are trying to create. we are ready to move forward and tell all of our constituents, all of our communities, all of americans hat they matter equally.
you, my colleagues, are on the wrong side of history and we will be waiting for you on the other side when we reject this amendment and pass h.r. 5. and i yield to the gentleman rom new hampshire. mr. pappas: well, thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to my colleague, my fellow co-chair. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman from new hampshire is recognized. mr. pappas: thank you. thank you to my colleague, representative hill from california, my fellow co-chair of the equality caucus. as she rightfully notes, nothing in the equality acts act infringes upon women's rights. if it did we would not be supporting it so vociferously today. this m.t.r. is searching for something that doesn't exist. for those that have been involved in the fight for equality, this tactic isn't new or surprising. we've seen it before. we've seen the deliberate
distractions, the unsounded fears, the faulty arguments on our way toward progress. this legislation simply gives lgbtq individuals full equality. nothing more and nothing less. when we end legal discrimination in housing, employment, in public services, we will steer our nation closer to the full realization of its founding principles. and the notion we are all created equal. as a proud member of the lgbtq community, i can attest that attitudes in this country have changed for the better, and it's time our laws catch up. congress can send a message to lgbtq americans everywhere, that we see you, that we celebrate you for who you are. this vote will change laws and it will save lives. in passing the equality act today, we can say unequivocally that everyone matters, that everyone can be themselves, that no one should live in fear or be treated as a second class citizen in the united states of america, not today and not ever.
full equality under the law, nothing less and nothing more. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this motion to recommit. i welcome you to become a part of history. join us on the right side of history. do the right thing today. vote no on this m.t.r. and stand for full equality for the lgbtq community. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes have it. the motion is not agreed to. the gentleman from florida. mr. steube: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time
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.]
the bill is passed. the gentleman from georgia. >> mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: a record vote is 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 is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]
the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 236, the nays are 173. he bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the chair will remind all persons in the gallery that they are here as guests of the house and any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation of
he rules of the house. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, mr. speaker, can we have order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. . the gentleman will proceed. >> mr. speaker, mr. speaker, can we have order? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. he house will come to order. the gentleman is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent that the committee on 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 in recorded in section 956 the house is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships. the gentleman is not recognized or debate.
the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet on monday next when it shall convene at noon for morning business -- morning hour debate and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: the ouse will be in order.
he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana seek recognition? mr. scalise: i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for requiring from the majority leader the schedule for next week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scalise: mr. speaker, i also ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scalise: i thank you, mr. speaker. with that i would be happy to yield to my friend, the gentleman from maryland, to ask about the schedule. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. he house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. hoyer: on monday the house will meet at 12:00 p.m. for morning hour and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m. on tuesday and wednesday the
house will meet at 10:00 a.m. for morning hour debate and 12:00 p.m. for legislative business. on thursday, the house will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business. we will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. the complete list of the suspension bills will be announced by close of business today. the house will also consider h.r. 1500, the consumer first act. this legislation seeks to reverse the administration's efforts to dismantle the consumer financial protection bureau. in addition, the house will consider h.r. 1994, setting every community up for retirement enhancement act of 2019. the legislation is intended to increase the flexibility of 401-k plans and improve access to the accounts. particularly for small businesses and their employees. the bill includes a host of provisions aimed at encouraging small businesses to provide
private retirement benefits to their workers. and i yield back. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman for yielding back. i want to ask about the conversations and negotiations that are going on regarding the disaster supplemental. i know the gentleman is well aware that there are some good, i think, very fruitful negotiations going on. clearly we want to make sure that some of the things that weren't in the bill that went out of the house, especially as it relates to the crisis at the border, as it deals with unaccompanied children, as well as making sure that we get the right kind of help to our farmers who had devastation to their crops in these disasters, and with that i yield and ask the gentleman if he could give us a notification of a timeline. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his question. as the gentleman knows, we passed an initial bill some many weeks ago. the senate didn't pass that. we then passed more recently a
bill which did in fact take care of everyone we know who has had a natural disaster in the interim as well as those we had taken care of the first time around. so we think we have a good bill that was passed. however, as you also referenced, the president has asked for an additional supplemental, a little over $4 billion, reference for humanitarian issues at the border. that is being reviewed. as the gentleman probably also knows, an offer was made to our side. that offer has now been responded to with respect to both the initial and the supplemental. the initial, i mean the disaster bill. we are looking for an answer back at some point in time to
our response, but hopefully we can reach agreement. mr. scalise: thank you. again, i thank the gentleman from maryland. hopefully those conversations do continue on. i'm encouraged by the negotiations in terms of how both sides seem to be willing to get this resolved and hopefully quickly, ideally, if we can have a bill on the floor next week, that will be a very bipartisan bill to address this so we can get the relief. mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield? mr. scalise: i'll be happy to yield. mr. hoyer: clearly, if we get agreement, and that's a big if, but hopefully we can, if we do that we want to move as quickly as possible. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman for that. i do want to ask about the appropriations process because i know the gentleman from maryland had talked earlier this week about a desire to have the entire appropriations process completed by the end of june. also talked about a robust amendment process. i would just ask the gentleman, as we look at this week, the concerning trend we've been
talking about for a few weeks now, when amendments came out of the rules committee this week, 26 amendments came out that were offered by democrats and only one amendment was allowed by a republican. as the gentleman from maryland talks about a robust appropriations process, i would hope he would pay closer attention to fairness in that robustness because 26 democrat amendments allowed and only one republican amendment allowed. surely not a fair process. might be considered robust, but in a hyperpartisan sense. i hope as we get into the appropriations process, the gentleman, and especially the leadership from the rules committee, would take into account this is a process where the house should be able to come together and offer their ideas. let the house and the will of the house prevail but at least allow for that debate here on the house floor on as many amendments as possible in as
fair of a way as possible and i would yield. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his comment. we did have this discussion on a number of occasions. i'm convinced mr. mcgovern, the chairman of the rules committee, does want to in fact have the kind of process that we talked about and that you just referenced. he also knows that in the last congress we had the most closed rules of any congress in which i've served and perhaps in history, 103 closed rules. but having said that, i'm hopeful your side will come forthwith amendments that are, as you say, subject -- forth with amendments that are, as you said, not got you amendments. not alleging they are gotcha amendments. that's the concern you had when you were in charge and the concern we have when we are in charge. i know mr. mcgovern wants to have a fair process.
we're talking about that. and we'll continue to do that. mr. scalise: i appreciate that. again, we'll be watching and hopefully see that become more fair as we get into that appropriations process. finally, i'd like to ask the gentleman about legislation that has been filed that is a companion to the senate bill that passed the senate with a vote of 77 votes on the b.d.s. movement, to stand up against the b.d.s. movement. as we both know, and i know the gentleman has been supportive of these efforts, the concern is that israel continues to come under attack by many countries around the world trying to delegitimize their economy, delegitimize their status as a jewish state by this movement to undermine their economy, to boycott and divest from israel. and so we have legislation and the companion bill is h.r. 336
by mr. mccaul from texas, and doesn't have the concerns -- there were some concerns over the way that the senate bill came over, but at least we do know, because of the vote, 77 votes, it was a very bipartisan vote. strong concern by the senate to address this. strong concern by many members of the house, republican and democrat, to stand up to the b.d.s. movement, and not just in words. clearly there's resolutions out there. we can all give speeches and say we're against it, but it actually takes real action, real effort, things that are in the legislation that give teeth to our stand against b.d.s. and for israel and, of course, if you look at some of the examples in the legislation, not just words but $33 billion in military assistance to israel. security cooperation enhancements. things that ensure that israel maintains a qualitative edge to defend itself from the daily threats that unfortunately we
see from other countries and terrorist organizations that want to undermine their status as a jewish state. with that, could the gentleman give us an indication, would there be a timeline that we can establish to bring this bill to the floor short of the discharge at the digs, and there is a discharge petition with more than 180 signatures already on it, to bring this bill to the floor but it would be a lot better if it was truly bipartisan from both leadership sides saying we're willing to stand up against this movement, not just in words, but in deeds, and with that i yield to the gentleman. mr. hoyer: i would say, we all debate because we think words are important. having said that, i share the gentleman's view, as he knows, with reference to the b.d.s. movement, which is in contrary to the interests of our ally,
israel, and contrary to our own interests. i've been discussing this with mr. engel and he is, as you know, shares the view that i've expressed and you've expressed and he's -- the committee will be addressing that. i expect in the near term. when they do, we will decide what actions to take at that point in time. and i look forward to discussing it with the gentleman. mr. scalise: we'll continue to discuss it. i appreciate that. clearly, as we have an interest in not just expressing our words, like on many other important issues, we have to back that up with laws, legislation that gives teeth to the words and gives true support to our friends, especially israel, in such a time of need where this movement is growing, and we want to move as quickly as possible. and so we'll continue to have this conversation and hopefully get a formal time line as soon as possible. i'll yield. mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield. because he mentioned
components. there are four components to the bill which he referred. three are noncontroversial, as the gentleman knows. one of which has issues with respect to its constitutionality. without resolving that issue, the three that are in that bill i think enjoy bipartisan support. they were held up in the senate, as the gentleman probably knows, but we want to make sure all those three, certainly, are adopted. i yield. mr. scalise: clearly the senate looked at that as well, worked through that. they actually made some changes to the bill, which we conformed into this -- the discharge petition actually has a rule that would conform it to the senate to address those issues. again, the senate bill got 77 votes. highly bipartisan. especially on such an important issue. hopefully we'll continue those conversations and come to an agreement on a time line that's expedited.
with that, unless the gentleman has anything else, i would yield back the balance of my time. mr. hoyer: i yield back. i don't have any time but i'll ield back. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. chair. if we hold true to the idea that erica stands for equality, equity and diversity, then equal rights must a -- must apply to and be protected for all americans.
no american should be scrimmed against because of their -- discriminated against because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and yet despite the historic accomplishments towards equality over the past still lgbtq americans face systemic discrimination. mr. lowenthal: we know the fight for equality is always on the right side of history. and today's passage of the equality act is a much-needed step forward in that fight. today's vote allows us to see the moral arc of the universe as martin luther king jr. said, -- said bend towards justice. thank you, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i seek 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 today to honor one of arkansas' most successful football coaches. tommy tice of huntsville, arkansas, who retires this month after 42 years in coaching and athletic administration. coach tice coached more football games as a head coach than anyone in arkansas history, 454 games. he had a combined record of 288 wins, 160 losses, and six ties. and overall winning percentage of 63%. he was selected head coach of the arkansas all-star football game six times. womewome he had a state championship -- mr. womack: he had a state championship, 13 conference titles, and 19 playoff appearances. an arkansas sports hall of fame inductee in 2016, coach tice has been a teacher and mentor to dozens of coaches throughout the state of arkansas. he's one of my best friends and
i can't think of anyone more impactful on student athletes than coach tommy tice. i congratulate him on a remarkable career and i wish him well in his retirement. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom nevada seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. horsford: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to recognize the life of nevada sameablyman, tyrone thompson, who recently passed. tyrone's passion for service and community was reinforced by action. he was constantly on the front lines advocating for children and family court as a ca sambings advocate. through his life coaching and mentoring efforts, he spear headed the annual clark county summer business institute, providing summer college and career exploration for high school students. when tyrone had the opportunity
to be appointed and then elected to the nevada assembly in district 17, he made it his mission to propose new ideas to move nevada forward and bring an experienced and pragmatic voice to the challenges our states face. he became a leader and champion for increased funding for a more equitable education for all students and making our schools and communities safe from gun violence. tyrone was always present, leading the way to make the north las vegas community and the people in it stronger. whether it was working tirelessly to improve education, addressing racial equity and inclusion, volunteering with camp anytown, supporting project homeless connects, and family connects, to launching the my brothers -- my brother's keeper initiative. at the age of 52 he still had so much more to offer to his community and public service and, most importantly, to his family. i'm proud of the work my dear
friend accomplished and i'm honored to ensure that his legacy is permanently enshrined in the congressional record. rest in peace, my friend. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i rise to seek unanimous consent to address the floor for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. this week communities across the country honored law enforcement officers in recognition of national police week. police officers put their lives on the line every day to protect our loved ones and neighbors. these brave men and women experience daily trauma and injury. in fact, the stress endured by our mr. -- by our police officers contribute to a suicide rate that is 50% higher than the national average. that's why i introduced stoic act, with my democratic colleague from pennsylvania, ms. dean. this is a bipartisan bill to
better address the mental health need kneads of our law enforcement officers. mr. reschenthaler: -- needs of our law enforcement officers. mr. reschenthaler: i think that republicans and democrats, we should all be able to get together to fight suicide and have a worthy cause such as suicide prevention. just yesterday the senate passed their version of stoic with unanimous consent. i want us to work together to unite our country and hope we can vote on this legislation that has strong bipartisan support. i hope that my colleagues from across the aisle will work with us to address the mental health needs of our nation's law enforcement. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas 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 in support of the women of this country, for their health and for their rights. in this congress in this house,
we have worked to ensure women's access to health care, to protect women and men with pre-existing conditions, to lower the cost of prescription drugs, and to make health care more affordable and accessible. but in state houses across the country, women's access to their most basic health care is under attack. and it is not just their health care that's under attack. it's their equality. the law passed in the alabama state house this week is the most extreme and dangerous since roe v. wade, banning abortion at any point in pregnancy, threatsening doctors with life in prison. mrs. fletcher: but it is not just this alabama law, it's laws in georgia and mississippi and my home state of texas. and efforts of the current administration that result in a dramatic reduction in women's access to reproductive health care, to basic family planning services, and a denial of their reproductive rights. doctors and public health leaders agree that the cost of these laws will be women's
lives. we cannot let that happen. as we work to protect our care, we must support the women of this country and their right to safe, affordable, nonjudgmental reproductive health care. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. mrs. fletcher: we must commit to reproductive justice. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi 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. >> thank you, mr. speaker. earlier this week the 38th annual national peace officers' memorial service honored the men and women who paid the ultimate sacrifice, upholding the rule of law and protecting the people of our great nation. last year mississippi lost five officers in the line of duty. i would like to honor them as we remember their service and sacrifice. police join me in honoring police officer emmett paul morris, corporal walter zackary
moke, patrolman james kevin white, patrol officer lee anne simpson, and police officer robert mckeethan. there can be no more noble vocation than the protection of women's fellow citizens. mr. guest: may we remember these brave officers, their sacrifice to protect our communities, and the sacrifice they made for the people who call mississippi home. thank you, mr. speaker, and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. today i am proud to join my colleagues in passing the equality act, which ensures that lgbtq americans are treated equally. in more than half our nation, lgbtq americans can still be fired, denied credit, and evicted from their home simply based on who they are and who
they love. it happened to someone in my state. ms. delbene: he was a volleyball coach at a college in virginia. they finished their most successful season and he was fired without explanation. unfortunately in virginia there are no employment protections for being lgbtq. so he and his family moved to washington state, where there are protections for lgbtq workers. and they're thriving. but not everyone can just pack up and leave and they shouldn't have to. that's why we need to guarantee lgbtq americans have equal rights and protections in all 50 states. no exceptions. i urge the senate to take action and pass the equality act so all americans are treated equally. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom nebraska seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker.
i rise today to ask my colleagues to support h.r. 2378, the first responders family act. as we approach our four-year anniversary of an omaha police officer being killed in the line of duty, this legislation will show our first responders that we care about them and we have their back. mr. bacon: the first responders family act will amend the immigration and nationality act to allow for the surviving family members of a fallen u.s. citizen first responder to be naturalized upon compliance with all requirements, waiving any residency waiting period. this bill is simply extending the privileges to first responders that current law affords to spouses of u.s. military killed while serving our country. in 2015 officer roscoe was killed. her husband was going through the immigration process. his immigration status was put in jeopardy because his wife made the ultimate sacrifice protecting our community. every day thousands of first responders leave loved ones to risk their lives for our state -- safety. they need to have the peace of
mind that if something should happen to them, that their loved ones will be taken care of. i look forward to working with democrats and republicans alike to protect our first responders and their families by passing the first responders family act. it did pass unanimously last congress, we need to do it again and get it to the senate and get it done. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. for a-- mr. speaker, for allowing me to speak to the members of the house. on may 8, 2015, coast guard commandant admiral paul zonkoff proclaimed a county a coast guard community. an honor claimed by only 18 cities and only one other county in the entire nation. the designation, which is confirmed by the united states
coast guard, and the united states congress, is in recognition of a strong and special relationship between the people of the county and the local coast guard personnel. mr. van drew: making coast guard men and women and their families feel a sense of community in their home, away from home, it's an invaluable contribution to morale and service to excellence. south jersey is honored to have the coast guard as part of its community. and most of all, we should remember all that they went through during the recent shutdown. our coast guards should never have to suffer through those set of circumstances ever again and that's why we have legislation that we've sponsored to protect our coast guard in the future. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute
, to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize jason dumkowski who is retiring after 25 years of faithful public service with the west lafayette police department. jason has been a chief of police at the department for 11 years, serving his fellow officers and community with integrity and professionalism. he received his masters degree in tech noling, leadership and in-- technology, leadership and innovation and has completed the indiana law enforcement academy, the f.b.i. and national academy at quantico, and the u.s. secret service protection programs, among others. mr. baird: in addition to his remarkable career, jason remains a steadfast pillar in the community known for his commitment for leadership and service. he serves on the wyca board and has been a board member for the red cross lafayette crisis
center, the lafayette catholic diocese review board, and he also volunteers with the shop with a cop program and coaches a youth flag football team. he and his wife, christie, have four children and reside in west lafayette. congratulations on your retirement, jason. i know will you continue to serve our community well in the new capacity and i wish you the very best. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: are there any further requests for one-minute speeches? 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 heard a great deal of applause today from all around the gallery when the so-called equality act passed. equality, what it really means, is equality for some but if you believe the teachings of moses and jesus, then you are not only not going to be treated equally, you are going to be persecuted, prosecuted, tied up in court, you will have people try to destroy, not only you, but any religious institution hat tries to faithfully follow the teachings of moses and jesus. a he equality act is misnoemer as is the statement -- misnomer as is the statement this means the end of
persecution. somehow i hear al pacino in the background when it comes to persecution saying, oh, i'm just getting started. so i come before the house with a broken heart, as someone who has studied, loved history, studied history, continue to read more history constantly. this nation's in big trouble. we've gone from the days when, i guess the bible is still probably the most quoted book year after year in this body, somehow it often is used for without abuse or use giving real context and real
meaning. but above every door in the gallery is the side profile of what were once considered the greatest lawgivers in all of history. some of us learned about the code of homarabi. the just indian code next to him. i think there's two or three popes that were considered great lawgivers. some wonder why napoleon is up there but the napoleonic code is the law in louisiana. jefferson helped with a great many laws. of course, did most of the writing of the declaration of independence. but there was much in the constitution was -- a number of things were based on some things that jefferson had already worked on.
that is ly profile not a side profile is that of moses. facing. when prime minister netanyahu spoke last year from this podium behind me, this second level, some people wonder why the president or people like netanyahu speak at the second level and not the top level and that's because this is the people's house. to speak in here you must either be a member of congress or have been invited by the congress to speak here. that's why there is a second level. at the end of prime minister netanyahu's speech, paid tribute the fact that he was israelite, moses. it was considered at one time
one of the greatest lawgivers, in views of decisions over the last 50 years, we've had a majority of the supreme court, probably has reduced his 10 commandments down to four or five. t this bill today will allow persecution and prosecution of anyone who tries to faithfully follow the teachings of moses and jesus. when it comes to marriage, i know the supreme court has ruled. they've substituted a majority, at least five judges substituted their opinions -- and that's what they are, the ons -- for that of law, the constitution. because the constitution, if you really followed it, strictly marriage is not
mentioned as -- strictly, marriage is not mentioned as a power or something the federal government would have power over. so as the 10th amendment says, such a thing would be left to the states and the people. and many of us believe that's where it should have been left. but the supreme court, at least five oligarchs, decided to take that over and since they were so much wiser in their own eyes than moses and jesus, they substituted their opinion for the opinions of the people of 50 different states and just basically took over that function without amending the constitution, without even changing the law legislatively or referendum, any means lake that, they just substituted their opinion. because it was moses who said,
a man shall leave his father and mother, a woman will leave her home, and the two will become one flesh. when jesus was asked, and actually they were trying to otrick him, but he -- trying to trick him, but he quoted moses remember bait im. a man shall leave his father and mother, a woman will leave her home, and the two will become one flesh. but jesus said, what god has joined together, let no man put us under. nobody separate. but there is a video called " light winds," and in that video, research had done, indicated there's only been one when n recorded history
legal marriage was included same-sex couples. those that studied history think about historically about roman empire days when same-sex couples was widely accepted, ancient greece, same-sex couples were widely accepted. but according to the research, this indication was but they saw marriage basically as being an institution for procreation and so marriage was a man and woman, have whatever same-sex relations you want, but in those times and places, marriage was said to be between a man and a woman. if it was legal. some of us would think back to e days of sodom and gomorrah
when, the term sodomy comes from sodom. when same-sex relations were widely accepted, obviously no discrimination, but according to the research in the documentary, marriage, even in sodom and gomorrah did not include same-sex couples because marriage was for procreation, family. according to the research, there is one recorded piece of information about legalized marriage being same-sex couples. it was from a back lonian town that indicated -- babalonian town that indicated during the days of noah, marriage was legal between same-sex couple. -- between a same-sex couple. and so according to the search of that documentary
we're living in the days similar to noah in the days before the flood. we are now beginning in this country in recent years to experience what people fled to this country to avoid experiencing and that is discrimination against an individual because of their religious belief as christians. whether the pilgrims or so many other groups that came -- of course, there were some, even prisoners that came for other reasons, but in the settlement of north america, what's now 90% nited states, over accepted judeo-christian beliefs as appropriate and the
norm. some called jefferson anything but a christian, but he made the that he believed . achings of jesus stories did -- i did ask for opinion -- not opinion but facts from the congressional research service about this capitol being used as the largest christian church in washington, d.c. in the district of columbia and they came back with the information that it truly was. what we now call statuary hall, back at the time it was the house of representatives chamber for a majority of the 1800's. it was considered -- it was used on sundays for christian worship service. and thomas jefferson, as c.r.s.
verified, would come to the church service, nondenominational christian worship service that was held just down the hall each sunday that he was in washington during his time as president. stories told on one of those occasions he was riding his horse, as he normally did to come to church up here on top of capitol hill in the capitol, and someone saw him with a big bible and asked, where you going, mr. president? he said, i'm going to church up in the capitol. and the individual said, but you don't believe everything that they do. and he said, sir, i am the highest elected magistrate in this country. it is imperative that i set the proper example. so those were early beliefs. sometimes it's hard for us to concile those beliefs with
.he cruelity of slavery even jefferson, in the first version of the declaration of independence, what looks like the longest grievance against king george was jefferson saying, we have a right to separate from king george because of the fact that he allowed slavery to ever start in america. so on the one hand, jefferson actually understood how destructive slavery was and on the other hand, he had slaves. through if you look our history and how we improved strive now the great in civil rights, great victories in civil rights, have
push ased on powerful from churches, christian churches and from people who were guided by christian 1830's, 1840's -- sorry -- 1730's, 1740's, 1750's, sometimes referred to as the first great awakening in america, a powerful, power of time of revival. when throp is -- wenthron is said to have spoken to a majority of americans. they knew of him. and heard him speak. and he was a traveling evangelist. many historians say it was the great awakening and the belief
n religious freedom that drove -- belief in freedom that drove ose early americans to a revolution in standing for the rights given by our creator and acknowledging, of course, there is a creator and, of course, the constitution, written, ratified in 1787, 1789, but it's concluded, it's dated in the year of our lord 1787 referring to our lord. i'm sure if many judges, many federal judges had their way, we would strike our lord from the constitution as them thinking somehow unconstitutional to mention our lord in our own constitution. . but you look in the 1800's,
certainly there were secularists .ho saw the damage of slavery and there were some churches that supported it. but the movement toward abolition was driven by people most of ed in god, them in jesus christ. and as john quincy adams, who ran for the house after being president, stood up down the hall over and over to speak against slavery. he had written to a guy named william wilberforce in england. wilberforce had a spiritual, a christian awakening and ran for parliament. he believed god's call on him was to bring an end to slavery and all of the british empire. and that's what he spent his adult life in parliament trying
to do. he had a victory at one point, partially through his parliamentary career, in getting the slave trade outlawed, but still slavery persisted. just not the trade in great britain. and then three days before he died, in 1833, slavery was outlawed altogether. john quincy adams thought he was supposed to bring an end to slavery in america, the way wilberforce had fought and successfully done in england. but he didn't get it done. served in the house of representatives from 1831 until is massive stroke in 1848. happened when he was trying to get up and speak against the war with mexico. because he was afraid war with mexico would end up perpetuating slavery even longer. daniel webbster, one of the
great abolitionists, he would have crowds gather around outside his office during times when he would read the bible out loud from within his office. i've been here in congress since january of 2005. and i don't believe i've ever heard anybody reading out loud from the bible and having crowds gather around the outside of their office in the hall here at the capitol. but used to happen. daniel webbster was driven by his christian beliefs that slavery had to come to an end. he, adams, quincy adams, so many others believed that it was totally inconsistent. how could we expect god to keep blessing america when we were putting brothers and sisters in
chains? the church ordained ministers were such a powerful force in bringing an end to the evil cruelty called slavery here in america. and en in the 1950's 1960's, we didn't have a great awakening in the 20th century. but nonetheless there was an rdained christian minister named martin luther king jr., d he was guided, informed by his christian beliefs. and he was the most powerful individual force in moving our the ry into accepting what
constitution said. and in assuring that people ould be treated equally. but what congress has been doing is passing more and more legislation that will permit persecution of people trying to follow their christian beliefs. and that passed the house today. borne out of the best intentions. people that don't want to see . ybody persecuted and yet as a result of this bill, if it were to become law, there would be widespread persecution and prosecution of people who tried to hold to their christian beliefs. and i know our friends don't
or to harm battered women .o damage to women's shelters but i tried to encourage my friends, look at the literature about women who are victims of sexual assault. having been a felony judge for a decade, i heard testimony constantly about the victims and the victims' suffering and their ongoing suffering and their trauma that they continue to live through and the things that triggered their trauma. and it appears from the research literature that women, of course we're told that one out of four women will experience sexual assault.
we're also told that it's a raction of 1%, a fraction of a fraction perhaps of 1% of people who truly suffer from gender dysphoria. it used to be called a disorder. think it still was in the manual four. it sure was in three. but now in five it's called ender dysphoria. dysphoria being the opposite of euphoria. a confusion, a dissatisfaction, an unhappiness with a biological gender. so gender dysphoria. it's interesting. even in the equality act itself.
one place here it cites findings , here on page -- bottom of 6 about it points out that one in five transgender people experience homelessness. it doesn't go into the reasons or that, if that's true. and possibly there could be discrimination that leads to homelessness. but since this is a condition of unhappiness, a dysphoria, we don't know the reasons for one in five, if that's correct, people suffering from gender ysphoria being homeless. finding,ut giving that
you go through the bill, this ill's going to allow lenders who don't lend to people suffering from gender diser toia -- dysphoria at the same rate as those who do not suffer from gender dysphoria, not only can those seeking loans come against and sue the bank and win, the attorney general of the united states is authorized under this bill to bring the full power of the united states government at who ainst any individual about ns or is concerned lending money to someone suffering from this dysphoria.
but if someone even considered the fact that this gender unhappiness or dysphoria, if they even considered that, then they're going to lose the lawsuit under this bill to the individual and to the attorney eneral of the united states. previously ministers were thought to have some religious exemption. this is the first bill in american history we can find, and certainly the first one since the religious freedom estoration act, in 1993, but the first time a bill actually youls out specifically that cannot claim religious beliefs as a defense. so i'm not hearing people talk
about it. but i understand that orthodox jewish synagogues believe they should have men azahara buys. under this, if it becomes law, if a woman comes forward and says, i believe i'm a man and i want to be your rabbi, and they are not hired, well not only does that person have a claim against the synagogue, but also the attorney general can come in and destroy the synagogue financially. and that can happen with any church. the church says we love everybody. like my own church. christian church. green acres baptist. we love everybody, we welcome anybody in our church, we will not discriminate against anybody who wants to come worship the lord with us. but if you want to be married,
it needs to be what moses and jesus said marriage is. the past, you could utilize religious beliefs as a defense. but if this is the law of the land, then there will be no defense for religious beliefs. for the first time since the days of noah, we have come to believe that we are so much smarter and so much wiser han moses and jesus. so, amazing time. and know christian friends say, louie, you seem so down. you know, rejoice, rejoice in the lord always. i say rejoice and i understand that. jesus lso know that as
contemplated jerusalem, he had a broken heart. how many times have i wanted to bring you under my wing and love you and protect you and you wouldn't have it? so there's a rebellion going on in this country, rejection of things upon which this country was founded. and, you know, people try to paint someone like me as being a hater. i'm not a hater. there's nobody in this body i ate. an event, i had a person, looked like a woman, she said she weieved she was a woman, and had a talk for about 20 minutes. and i understood her thinking and i understood what she felt, though she was a biological man.
we disagreed about her lifestyle , but i had nothing but christian love. and we hugged, agreed to disagree, and hugged as we went our way. we were up here at the washington convention center. i don't hate her. i don't hate anybody. plenty of people hate me, i sure get that. but it is so unfair to say that anybody, just because they believe in the teachings of moses and jesus, is a hater, is simply not true. if anybody isthat not willing to forgive and love, they haven't really grasped what it means to be a christian. but it doesn't mean you have to accept and encourage and applaud
things that you know are not helpful. for heaven's sakes, the most thorough research ever done on transgender, and it was done -- i believe it was finland 30rks-year study, people seeking -- 30-year -- finland, 30-year study, people seeking sex change surgery. that 30-year study found that ose who were seeking sex change surgery were 20 times more likely to commit suicide. how could somebody who loves their fellow man and fellow women, how could somebody who truly loves them want them in a state of mind in life that they're 20 times more likely to
kill themselves, to take that precious gift of life they were given. how is that loving somebody, want them, encourage, oh, you stay in this lifestyle, you're 20 times more likely to kill yourself, but that's fine. we applaud you for being in that situation, 20 times more likely to kill yourself. and there's this great study here, the new atlantis journal of technology and society, the fall of 2016, special report, sexuality and gender. findings from the biological, psychological and social sciences, by lawrence mayer, m.b., m.s., ph.d., and paul r. mchugh, m.d. matthew mcconaughey hugh is an an ing -- dr. mchugh is amazing man at johns hopkins.
johns hopkins was the first hospital in the united states who did sex change operations. but as dr. mchugh points out, after about 20 years of monitoring the people on whom they did sex change surgery, ey found that the patients that went through this brutal, really brutal sex change surgery were no better off mentally than they were before. that was johns hopkins' findings. they said why should we cut off or take out perfectly healthy organs if the result is the person is no better? so they quit doing sex change operations. as i understand it, they were later threatened with losing a lot of money and support so they're back to doing them now
but i mean, we hear from the left all the time about the importance of science. and yet when it comes to science based on beat bill, science, we've been told that there's nothing but a mass of tissue inside a pregnant woman. and yet technology now has gotten so good that at some point, six, eight weeks into a pregnancy, you can hear a heart bale. and that heart beat is from a living person. and as has been said in this -- on this floor previously, if someone sees a body collapse, you run up and check, is it -- is there a heart beat? if there's a heart beat, you call for an ambulance. if there's no heart beat, you call for a morgue.
so we put a lot of stock in a heart beat. so why shouldn't it be part of a bill? yet states that have passed the legislation that says if there's a heart beat, then you can't do an abortion, it's a living being. and personally, i'm thankful are the ring women ones who carry a child in utero because if it were left to us men i don't believe there'd be near as much love and affection felt by the child in utero. but i think back about when our first child was born, eight to 10 weeks prematurely, and my wife had to stay in tyler, i didn't know whether to stay with her or go with our child that was take ton shreveport, trying to keep her alive. she said go, do anything you can
for our child. and so i went to shreveport. i got there. the neonaytologist, dr. sing, wonderful, wonderful doctor, he loved those babies. he said look, your by by's eye, they're not working properly. she can't see you. just a general blur. but she's been listening to your voice for many months now. even though she's in the womb, she could hear your voice, she know yours voice. stay here, talk to her. caress, talk, that will be a great comfort. and her -- most people know, premature child, usually the lungs are the last to develop and that's the -- that's katy's case. breaths were so short.
and just erratic. and the heart beat was really fast and erratic. it was in tyler, it was in shreveport. and after a couple of hours of my sitting there, just talking to her and caressing her little singh came e, dr. over and said, look at the monitors, i hadn't, i was looking at our child. and i looked up. the breathing was still fast. heart was still fast. but they'd stabilized. they were not erratic. r. singh said, she's drawing strength from you. she's drawing life, strength, from you. how was i going to leave after that? they said we could only stay two hours but i couldn't leave.
my child was drawing strength from me. so after i'd been there eight hours, came over and said, sir, you really have got to leave. you have to take a break. you can't sit here this long. i said but look at the monitor, she's doing well. i don't want to leave. but eventually they forced me to leave. and i had a wreck, my mind was thatwith katy, but anyway, child knew my voice. she could hear my voice. hose seven months in the womb. they know. makes a difference. and the people that have supported the heart beat bill, all of them that i'm aware of here in this body, it's based on
judeo christian beliefs and the value of one person. the right to life that precedes the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness. so this body has been in the business of taking away religious freedoms for quite some time. and it appears that it's going to continue. mr. speaker, i just want people positions of he people i know of that were against the equality act, it's not out of any hate. it's not out of any desire to be discriminatory. part of it is a desire not to have people 20 times more likely to kill themselves.
for heaven' sake -- for heaven's sake, we have enough veterans losing, taking their own live, tragic. americans taking their lives so tragic. there's not much you can say at a funeral of someone who has taken their lives that brings a lot of comfort. to the family. , people need to understand it specifically says in here, you know, the equal opportunity, equal credit opportunity act is amended -- as amended. it says right here in the bill. people that are transgender have -- one in five will experience homelessness without telling us why, it says so yao got to give them credit. we just brought our economy to he brink of ruin in 2008 and
some point to the beginnings of that tragedy where we almost lost everything back in the 1990's when banks were required to lend money for homes to people that couldn't afford it. i personally feel like some of the people that pushed people into homes fraudulently that they couldn't afford should have done some jail time. but it went on, it happened. lot ending institutions, a of lenders tell me over the years, we're being forced to lend money to people we know can't afford it but if we don't, the federal government is coming after us. if this bill becomes law that will be the case too. a banker that says, i'm a little concerned, there's a 20% chance that this person suffering from gender disforea is going to be
homeless -- disphoria is going to be homeless. don't make good decisions. maybe some of it is discrimination, some of it is poor personal decisions. now i've got the federal government under the quality act saying i've got to lend them money anyway. that if the fact that they're 20% more likely to be homeless, if i consider that at all and say we can't risk that money, we don't want to bring the country , the brink of failure again then the united states attorney general is authorized to sue me, the individual that's not granted the loan will be authorized to sue. this bill, though, unlike the hate crimes act, some of us were pushing in the hate crimes act,
let's at least define what sexual orientation is because as i said back then and -- in ebate, if you don't define sexual orientation, some judge, some time, the supreme court will say you didn't define it but you used the term sexual orientation so the meaning of that is very clear, anything you're oriented toward sexually some that would legalize sexual orientations that are currently crimes. whether it's necrophilia, pedphilia, some tried to say i equated homosexuality and bestiality, they were lying. i never did that. i said let's define out those things that we can agree should not be included. and we were refused any type of limiting definition.
so one thing in this, there is a limitation to sexual orientation, the term sexual orientation means homosexuality, heterosexuality or bisexuality. but then when it comes to gender identity, that definition is going to cause a great deal of problems. and it makes clear, even spells out that, you cannot deny access to a restroom, locker room, gender room, based on identity. it says that is in accordance with the individual's gender identity. my friend, very smart friend, mr. raskin, said he's been amazed over the years how courts ould move forward and progress in determining people's civil rights.
so he trouble here is, felt like we're not going to ever have a problem with men claiming to be women so they can national cholarships, notoriety, millions of dollars, television appearances. no man would ever do that. and if they tried the courts have been realy good about being able to discern who is faking, who is a man that says they're a woman and they really don't mean it. and who is legitimately a man thinking that they are a woman. the trouble with that is, the quality act makes clear, no individual has the right to tell a eone who says, i think i'm woman, you don't think they're a woman and you try to ask questions to determine if they're really thinking they're a woman before you treat the
person like one, you've just violated the equality act. you can't call into question somebody's own self-determinative identity of what they are gender wise. this bill makes that very clear. they and the attorney general of the united states can come after you. and that's why some people that have probably never voted for republican in their lives have been heard going, wait a minute. title ix back in the 1970's said you've got to have an equal number of female or women's scholarships as men's scholarships and we had a witness who is a professor, said she was one of the first couple of people to get a women's athletic scholarship under title ix there at villanova, where she went to school, and she pointed out, look, here's three fastest times of the women in the 2016 olympics in the 400 meter.
those are those three dots and the thousands of blue dots, thousands of which are faster than those women, those are men and many of those are second tyre athletes. they're not great male athletes. . and they still beat the women's times. last week we had a guy who believes he's a woman and he broke a number weightlifting records for women. i know there are a lot of democrat party voters who think they may have been here in the gallery clapping, violating the rules and clapping on the passage of the equality act here. but i have a feeling if they have a daughter who cannot get an athletic scholarship, even though she's the best female athlete in her high school, one
of the best female athletes in the state, and they're shut out from a female athletic scholarship because guys are now applying who think they're women, and you can't question them. if they tell you they've self-identified as a woman under this equality act, that becomes the law and you try to challenge them on whether they really do think they're a woman or not, then you're wide open to the attorney general coming into your school and costing megadollars. but i've talked to people who work in women's shelters and they've said, we have been totally dedicated for decades to helping women who were battered by sexual assault, maybe a husband. but we're a christian group. and if we are mandated to allow
a man to come in, even though he thinks he's a woman, if we're mandated to bring them in where these women are so vulnerable and so fragile, we'll have to close our doors. i've had small college leaders tell me that if this bill becomes law, we'll have to change so much in the way of accommodation, to accommodate people under the new law, that we'll have to shut our doors. we cannot, we're just barely making it by a shoe string right now. now, the massive colleges and universities, you know, they're getting so much money these days , they'll be ok. but the small colleges, they're going to have trouble coming up with the money. the women's shelters are going to have trouble coming up with the money. and they're not going to want to
. they care so deeply about the women that have been battered, i've seen it. i've talked to them. but i've experienced the love they have for these women that have just -- they're at the end of their rope and they come -- sometimes called a women's homeless shelter. they got nowhere else to go. and now after they've been brutalized by a husband or some other man, somebody that's stalking them, they're going to be told they can't keep a man out? if he think he's a woman? they'll close their doors? so i know this equality act was done out of the spirit of caring and not wanting to hurt anybody's feelings. but as we've heard over and over throughout the history of this place, right does have to be balanced. -- rights do have to be
balanced. so on the one hand you have people who are very confused and unhappy about their gender. even though there's also plenty a vidence to indicate that child who identifies with the gender that that child is not biologically, if that child is left alone, not pushed in one direction or another, over 80% of the time that child will ultimately resolve the situation mentally comfortable with their biological gender. heier.eone like walt i love the guy. he's been a woman physically. he's back being a man. tried to commit suicide. and now he spends his time
lovingly counseling, encouraging, trying to talk people down from killing themselves. he's just a sweetheart of a guy. saw him again recently. if this equality act becomes law, he won't be able to do that anymore. you can't try to talk somebody , their their difficulty suicidal thoughts, if you're to be o encourage them mentally what they are biologically. because this allows even the attorney general to come after people like that. people in this body would think such a person is mean-spirited. i don't find a mean-spirited bone in walter heier's body. he's just a sweetheart of a person.
but this, when you hear people ay this bill will bring an end , it will bring an .nd to discrimination that's true with regard to someone who is different mentally from what they are biologically that the moment. as i said, the studies indicate over 80% of the time someone that's left alone and not tried to be coached one way or another, they end up having their mental attitude on gender resolving and being biologically and mentally the same gender. but you try to counsel somebody on that, i mean, you're going to be sued individually, attorney general can come after you. and if your position is based on
the kind of love that jesus christ has filled you with, care and compassion, and you try to counsel someone out of that love and compassion, you've just violated the equality act and big brother government's coming after you. it's really tragic. we used to have more religious freedom. yes, there were a lot of battles between denominations in america. and that's why the continental congress couldn't trust -- everybody didn't trust one person in the continental congress to do a prayer that was fair to everybody, because there were so many different denominations. sounded like the quakers were . ually toughest to please but they were always able to come together and agree, ok, this minister may not be from my
christian denomination, but that minister will do a fair prayer for all of the christian denominations here. but that's why when benjamin franklin made his motion five weeks into the constitutional convention that they begin each day with prayer the way they had back during the continental congress, it ended up being voted down because basically they were saying, we don't have a treasury, we're not getting paid, and so we can't afford to hire a chaplain we can all agree on. so if we can just get a constitution together, then we can have a treasury, then we can hire christian ministers to come in here and pray for all the denominations represented here. and that's when randolph from virginia said, ok, all right. you're right. we don't have money to hire a chaplain right now, so i move that we recess, here we are the
end of june, just a few days from now it will be july 4. worry going to celebrate our nation's independence. -- we're going to celebrate our nation's independence. i move that we recess here in this constitutional convention and we reconvene together at a church. that has a minister that we can all trust to be fair to our christian denominations. and then we'll worship together and after we worship together, then we'll come back and try this constitution, try putting one together. now, that one passed. and they all gathered at the eformed cal vanistic church in n -- delphia -- calvi kalvinistic church in philadelphia. william rogers was the minister presiding and apparently did he an awesome job as a christian
minister of bringing all of these delegates attending the constitutional convention together. it was written by others that when they reconvened there was a new spirit. yes, they had disagreements, but there was a new spirit there. and know people are taught nowadays that benjamin franklin was a deist, someone that doesn't believe in god, just thinks some force, some thing, something, created the universe and if that thing or force, erson's still around, it never interferes with nature or man, everybody's on their own. but it was ben franklin that said, i've lived, sir, a long time and the longer i live, the more convincing proofs i see of this truth -- proofs i see of this truth. that god governs in the affairs of men. and if a sparrow cannot fall to
the ground without his notice, is it possible an empire could rise without his aid? we've been assured, sir, in the sacred writing that unless the lord build a house, they labor in vain that build it. he said, i firmy believe. this i also firmly believe without his, talking about god, without his concurring aid, we shall succeed in our political building no better than the builders of babel. we will be confined by our partial interests and we shall become a byword down through the ages. that's because he knew this was e best chance in the history of all of the world to have people self-governing. the romans had a form, the greeks are a form. but not like this. and we have been blessed, we've continued to work together over
the centuries to get the constitution to where all people will be treated as their create -- they're created. equal, not equal in talent or intellect, but equal in the sight of god. our creator. yet the equality act sends a message that if you are going to base your life on the teachings , then s or jesus or both we will not only persecute you, we will prosecute you and the attorney general of the united states is authorized under the equality act basically to destroy your life, if you happen to believe and practice what moses and jesus said.
it also -- we've done so much destruction of families in this country over the last 50, 60 years. and it's tough. i've seen it, people i love have been a single mom or single dad raising kids, it's tough. we have taken action, passed laws that really have been destructive of the home as a nuclear home. nd we've seen the falling away from judeo-christian beliefs. and as john adams said, this constitution is only meant for a religious and a moral people. it is holy inadequate for the government of any others. o this is one more nail in america's coffin.
as jefferson said, i fear for america, because i know god is just, but this says moses and jesus were just wrong and anybody that tries to follow those teachings publicly, we're going to destroy you. knoll we make everybody equal except orthodox jews and christians following the bible and also muslims that are following the koran, they will not be able to follow the teach offings the koran, but this becomes law. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. without objection, and pursuant to section 104-a of the house resolution 6, 116th congress, and thed orer of the house of january 3, 2019, the chair removes the gentlewoman from the
virgin islands, ms. plaskett from the house democracy and appoints the gentlewoman from california, mrs. davis, to fill the vacancy. does the gentleman from texas have a motion? mr. gohmert: i move we do now hereby 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 noon on. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. nadler: i yield myself three minutes. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 5, the equality act, which amends the civil rights
act of 1964 and other core civil rights statutes to explicit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. today is a historic day. e first time a comprehensive lgbtq civil rights bill has come to the floor of the house. this legislation will provide members of lgbtq americans protections from being denying medical care or being fired or thrown out of their homes. much of the history of the united states has been about expanding the definition who is understood to be included in the declaration of independence. when words were written, the phrase did not include black and latino men, native americans, did not include women and did not include lgbtq