[Pages H5363-H5396]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

PROTECTING OUR KIDS ACT

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1153, I call
up the bill (H.R. 7910) to amend title 18, United States Code, to
provide for an increased age limit on the purchase of certain firearms,
prevent gun trafficking, modernize the prohibition on untraceable
firearms, encourage the safe storage of firearms, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. DeGette). Pursuant to House Resolution
1153, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute
recommended by the Committee on the

[[Page H5364]]

Judiciary printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a
substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-48 is
adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 7910

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Protecting
Our Kids Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

TITLE I--RAISE THE AGE

Sec. 101. Prohibition on Federal firearms licensee selling or
delivering certain semiautomatic centerfire rifles or
semiautomatic centerfire shotguns to a person under 21
years of age, with exceptions.
Sec. 102. Operation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's public
access line.

TITLE II--PREVENT GUN TRAFFICKING

Sec. 201. Prohibition on straw purchases of firearms; prohibition on
gun trafficking.
Sec. 202. Prohibition on disposition of firearm to person intending
unlawful further disposition.
Sec. 203. Penalties.
Sec. 204. Firearms subject to forfeiture.

TITLE III--UNTRACEABLE FIREARMS

Sec. 301. Requirement that all firearms be traceable.
Sec. 302. Modernization of the prohibition on undetectable firearms.

TITLE IV--SAFE STORAGE

Sec. 401. Ethan's Law.
Sec. 402. Safe guns, safe kids.
Sec. 403. Kimberly Vaughan Firearm Safe Storage.

TITLE V--CLOSING THE BUMP STOCK LOOPHOLE

Sec. 501. Bump stocks.

TITLE VI--KEEP AMERICANS SAFE

Sec. 601. Definitions.
Sec. 602. Restrictions on large capacity ammunition feeding devices.
Sec. 603. Penalties.
Sec. 604. Use of Byrne grants for buy-back programs for large capacity
ammunition feeding devices.

TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 701. NICS Report.

TITLE I--RAISE THE AGE

SEC. 101. PROHIBITION ON FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEE SELLING OR
DELIVERING CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC CENTERFIRE
RIFLES OR SEMIAUTOMATIC CENTERFIRE SHOTGUNS TO
A PERSON UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE, WITH
EXCEPTIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 922(b)(1) of title 18, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(1)(A) any firearm or ammunition to any individual who
the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe has not
attained 18 years of age;
``(B) any semiautomatic centerfire rifle or semiautomatic
centerfire shotgun that has, or has the capacity to accept,
an ammunition feeding device with a capacity exceeding 5
rounds, to any individual who the licensee knows or has
reasonable cause to believe has not attained 21 years of age
and is not a qualified individual; or
``(C) if the firearm or ammunition is not a semiautomatic
centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun
described in subparagraph (B) and is other than a shotgun or
rifle, or ammunition for a shotgun or rifle, to any
individual who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to
believe has not attained 21 years of age;''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 922(c)(1) of such title
is amended by striking ``in the case of any firearm'' and all
that follows through ``eighteen years or more of age'' and
inserting ``(1) in the case of a semiautomatic centerfire
rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun that has, or has
the capacity to accept, an ammunition feeding device with a
capacity exceeding 5 rounds, I am at least 21 years of age or
a qualified individual (as defined in section 921(a)(30) of
title 18, United States Code), (2) in the case of a firearm
other than a shotgun, a rifle, or such a semiautomatic
centerfire rifle or semiautomatic centerfire shotgun, I am at
least 21 years of age, or (3) in the case of any other
shotgun or rifle, I am at least 18 years of age''.
(c) Qualified Individual Defined.--Section 921(a) of such
title is amended by inserting after paragraph (29) the
following:
``(30) The term `qualified individual' means--
``(A) a member of the Armed Forces on active duty; and
``(B) a full-time employee of the United States, a State,
or a political subdivision of a State who in the course of
his or her official duties is authorized to carry a firearm.
``(31) The term `ammunition feeding device' means a
magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device, but does
not include an attached tubular device which is only capable
of operating with .22 caliber rimfire ammunition.''.

SEC. 102. OPERATION OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION'S
PUBLIC ACCESS LINE.

(a) Report.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (in this section referred to as the ``FBI'')
shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate
and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives a report regarding operation of the FBI's
public access line.
(b) Matters Included.--The report required by subsection
(a) shall, at a minimum, include the following:
(1) A description of the protocols and procedures in effect
with respect to information-sharing between the public access
line and the field offices of the FBI.
(2) Recommendations for improving the protocols and
procedures to improve the information-sharing.

TITLE II--PREVENT GUN TRAFFICKING

SEC. 201. PROHIBITION ON STRAW PURCHASES OF FIREARMS;
PROHIBITION ON GUN TRAFFICKING.

(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in section 921(a), by adding at the end the following:
``(37) The term `family members' means spouses, domestic
partners, parents and their children, including step-parents
and their step-children, siblings, aunts or uncles and their
nieces or nephews, or grandparents and their
grandchildren.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 932. Gun trafficking

``(a) It shall be unlawful for any person (other than a
licensee under this chapter), in or otherwise affecting
interstate or foreign commerce, to knowingly purchase or
acquire, or attempt to purchase or acquire, a firearm for the
possession of a third party.
``(b) It shall be unlawful for any person (other than a
licensee under this chapter), in or otherwise affecting
interstate or foreign commerce, to hire, solicit, command,
induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade another person to
purchase, or attempt to purchase, any firearm for the purpose
of obtaining the firearm for the person or selling or
transferring the firearm to a third party.
``(c) The Attorney General shall ensure that the firearm
transaction record form required to be completed in
connection with a firearm transaction includes a statement
outlining the penalties that may be imposed for violating
subsection (a).
``(d) This section shall not apply to any firearm, if the
purchaser or person acquiring the firearm has no reason to
believe that the recipient of the firearm will use or intends
to use the firearm in a crime or is prohibited from
purchasing or possessing firearms under State or Federal law
and the firearm--
``(1) is purchased or acquired by any person, or that any
person attempts to purchase or acquire, as a bona fide gift
between family members; or
``(2) is purchased or acquired by an agent of a lawful
business, or that an agent of a lawful business attempts to
purchase or acquire, for the purpose of transferring to
another agent of the business, for lawful use in the
business.''.
(b) Forfeiture.--Section 982(a)(5) of such title is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``or'' at the end; and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) section 922(a)(1)(A) (related to unlicensed firearms
sales);
``(G) section 922(d) (relating to illegal gun transfers);
or
``(H) section 932 (relating to gun trafficking),''.
(c) Money Laundering Amendment.--Section 1956(c)(7)(D) of
such title is amended by striking ``section 924(n)'' and
inserting ``section 922(a)(1)(A), 922(d), 924(n), or 932''.
(d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such
chapter is amended by adding at the end the following:

``932. Gun trafficking.''.

SEC. 202. PROHIBITION ON DISPOSITION OF FIREARM TO PERSON
INTENDING UNLAWFUL FURTHER DISPOSITION.

Section 922(d) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
in the 1st sentence--
(1) in paragraph (8), by striking ``or'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by inserting after and below paragraph (9) the
following:
``(10) intends to sell or otherwise dispose of the firearm
or ammunition in violation of a Federal law, or to sell or
otherwise dispose of the firearm or ammunition to a person in
another State in violation of a law of that State.''.

SEC. 203. PENALTIES.

Section 924(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Whoever knowingly violates section 922(a)(1)(A) or
932 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than
10 years, or both.''.

SEC. 204. FIREARMS SUBJECT TO FORFEITURE.

Section 924(d) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``or 932'' after
``section 924''; and
(2) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (F), by striking the period at the end
and inserting ``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(G) any offense under section 932.''.

TITLE III--UNTRACEABLE FIREARMS

SEC. 301. REQUIREMENT THAT ALL FIREARMS BE TRACEABLE.

(a) Definitions.--Section 921(a) of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended--
(1) in paragraph (10), by adding at the end the following:
``The term `manufacturing firearms' shall include assembling
a functional firearm or molding, machining, or 3D printing a

[[Page H5365]]

frame or receiver, and shall not include making or fitting
special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to
firearms.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(38) The term `ghost gun'--
``(A) means a firearm, including a frame or receiver, that
lacks a unique serial number engraved or cast on the frame or
receiver by a licensed manufacturer or importer in accordance
with this chapter; and
``(B) does not include--
``(i) a firearm that has been rendered permanently
inoperable;
``(ii) a firearm that, not later than 30 months after the
date of enactment of this paragraph, has been identified by
means of a unique serial number, assigned by a State agency,
engraved or cast on the receiver or frame of the firearm in
accordance with State law;
``(iii) a firearm manufactured or imported before December
16, 1968; or
``(iv) a firearm identified as provided for under section
5842 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
``(39) The term `fire control component'--
``(A) means a component necessary for the firearm to
initiate or complete the firing sequence; and
``(B) includes a hammer, bolt or breechblock, cylinder,
trigger mechanism, firing pin, striker, and slide rails.
``(40)(A) The term `frame or receiver'--
``(i) means a part of a weapon that provides or is intended
to provide the housing or structure to hold or integrate 1 or
more fire control components, even if pins or other
attachments are required to connect those components to the
housing or structure;
``(ii) includes a frame or receiver, blank, casting, or
machined body, that requires modification, including
machining, drilling, filing or molding, to be used as part of
a functional firearm, and which is designed and intended to
be used in the assembly of a functional firearm, unless the
piece of material has had--
``(I) its size or external shape altered solely to
facilitate transportation or storage; or
``(II) solely its chemical composition altered.
``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A)(i), if a weapon with
more than 1 part that provides the housing or a structure
designed to hold or integrate 1 or more fire control or
essential components, each such part shall be considered a
frame or receiver, unless the Attorney General has provided
otherwise by regulation or other formal determination with
respect to the specific make and model of weapon on or before
January 1, 2023.''.
(b) Prohibition; Requirements.--Section 922 of title 18,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(aa)(1)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), it
shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, sell, offer
to sell, transfer, purchase, or receive a ghost gun in or
affecting interstate or foreign commerce.
``(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to--
``(i) the manufacture of a firearm by a licensed
manufacturer if the licensed manufacturer complies with
section 923(i) before selling or transferring the firearm to
another person;
``(ii) the offer to sell, sale, or transfer of a firearm
to, or purchase or receipt of a firearm by, a licensed
manufacturer or importer before the date that is 30 months
after the date of enactment of this subsection; or
``(iii) transactions between licensed manufacturers and
importers on any date.
``(2) It shall be unlawful for a person other than a
licensed manufacturer or importer to engrave or cast a serial
number on a firearm in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce unless specifically authorized by the Attorney
General.
``(3) Beginning on the date that is 30 months after the
date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful
for any person other than a licensed manufacturer or importer
to knowingly possess a ghost gun in or affecting interstate
or foreign commerce.
``(4) Beginning on the date that is 30 months after the
date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful
for any person other than a licensed manufacturer or importer
to possess a ghost gun in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce with the intent to sell or transfer the ghost gun
with or without further manufacturing or to manufacture a
firearm with the ghost gun.
``(5)(A) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell, offer
to sell, or transfer, in or affecting interstate or foreign
commerce, to any person other than a licensed manufacturer a
machine that has the sole or primary function of
manufacturing firearms.
``(B) Except as provided in subparagraph (A), beginning on
the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this
subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person other than a
licensed manufacturer to possess, purchase, or receive, in or
affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a machine that has
the sole or primary function of manufacturing firearms.
``(C) Subparagraph (B) shall not apply to a person who is
engaged in the business of selling manufacturing equipment to
a licensed manufacturer who possesses a machine with the
intent to sell or transfer the machine to a licensed
manufacturer.''.
(c) Requirements.--
(1) Removal of serial numbers.--Section 922(k) of title 18,
United States Code, is amended--
(A) by striking ``importer's or manufacturer's'' each place
it appears; and
(B) by inserting ``authorized by this chapter or under
State law'' before ``removed'' each place it appears.
(2) Licensed importers and manufacturers.--Section 923(i)
of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
(A) by inserting ``(1)(A)'' before ``Licensed''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: ``The serial number
shall be engraved or cast on the frame or receiver in a
manner sufficient to identify the firearm and the
manufacturer or importer that put the serial number on the
firearm.
``(2)(A) Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this paragraph, the Attorney General shall
prescribe regulations for engraving a unique serial number
onto a ghost gun.
``(B) The regulations prescribed under subparagraph (A)
shall--
``(i) allow an owner of a firearm described in subparagraph
(A) to have a unique serial number engraved on the firearm by
a licensed manufacturer or importer; and
``(ii) require that a serial number be engraved on the
frame or receiver in a manner sufficient to identify the
firearm and the licensed manufacturer or importer that put
the serial number on the firearm.
``(C) The regulations authorized under this paragraph shall
expire on the date that is 30 months after the date of
enactment of this paragraph.''.
(d) Penalties.--Section 924 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1)(B), by striking ``or (q)'' and
inserting ``(q), (aa)(1), (aa)(2), (aa)(4), or (aa)(5)'';
(2) in subsection (c)
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), in the matter preceding clause
(i), by inserting ``functional'' before ``firearm'' each
place it appears;
(ii) in subparagraph (B), in the matter preceding clause
(i), by inserting ``functional'' before ``firearm''; and
(iii) in subparagraph (D)(ii), by inserting ``functional''
before ``firearm''; and
(B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``all or part of the
firearm'' and all that follows through ``person.'' and
inserting the following: ``all or part of the functional
firearm, or otherwise make the presence of the functional
firearm known to another person, in order to intimidate that
person, regardless of whether the functional firearm is
directly visible to that person.'';
(3) in subsection (d)(1), by striking ``or (k)'' and
inserting ``(k), (aa)(1), (aa)(2), (aa)(4), or (aa)(5)'';
(4) in subsection (e)(1), by inserting ``through the
possession of a functional firearm'' before ``and has
three''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following:
``(q) A person who violates section 922(aa)(3) shall--
``(1) in the case of the first violation by the person, be
fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or
both; or
``(2) in the case of any subsequent violation by the
person, be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5
years, or both.''.

SEC. 302. MODERNIZATION OF THE PROHIBITION ON UNDETECTABLE
FIREARMS.

Section 922(p) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``any firearm'';
(B) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) an undetectable firearm; or''; and
(C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``any major component
of which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray
machines commonly used at airports, does not generate'' and
inserting the following: ``a major component of a firearm
which, if subjected to inspection by the types of detection
devices commonly used at airports for security screening,
would not generate'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) the term `undetectable firearm' means a firearm, as
defined in section 921(a)(3)(A), of which no major component
is wholly made of detectable material;'';
(B) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the
following:
``(B) the term `major component', with respect to a
firearm--
``(i) means the slide or cylinder or the frame or receiver
of the firearm; and
``(ii) in the case of a rifle or shotgun, includes the
barrel of the firearm; and''; and
(C) by striking subparagraph (C) and all that follows
through the end of the undesignated matter following
subparagraph (C) and inserting the following:
``(C) the term `detectable material' means any material
that creates a magnetic field equivalent to or more than 3.7
ounces of 17-4 pH stainless steel.'';
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in the first sentence, by inserting ``, including a
prototype,'' after ``of a firearm''; and
(B) by striking the second sentence; and
(4) in paragraph (5), by striking ``shall not apply to any
firearm which'' and all that follows and inserting the
following: ``shall not apply to--
``(A) any firearm received by, in the possession of, or
under the control of the United States; or
``(B) the manufacture, importation, possession, transfer,
receipt, shipment, or delivery of a firearm by a licensed
manufacturer or licensed importer pursuant to a contract with
the United States.''.

TITLE IV--SAFE STORAGE

SEC. 401. ETHAN'S LAW.

(a) Secure Gun Storage or Safety Device.--Section 922(z) of
title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(4) Secure gun storage by owners.--
``(A) Offense.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause (ii), it
shall be unlawful for a person to store or keep any firearm
that has moved in, or that has otherwise affected, interstate
or foreign

[[Page H5366]]

commerce on the premises of a residence under the control of
the person if the person knows, or reasonably should know,
that--

``(I) a minor is likely to gain access to the firearm
without the permission of the parent or guardian of the
minor; or
``(II) a resident of the residence is ineligible to possess
a firearm under Federal, State, or local law.

``(ii) Exception.--Clause (i) shall not apply to a person
if--

``(I) the person--

``(aa) keeps the firearm--
``(AA) secure using a secure gun storage or safety device;
or
``(BB) in a location which a reasonable person would
believe to be secure; or
``(bb) carries the firearm on his or her person or within
such close proximity thereto that the person can retrieve and
use the firearm as readily as if the person carried the
firearm on his or her person; or

``(II) another individual unlawfully enters the premises
under the control of the person and thereby gains access to
the firearm.

``(B) Penalty.--
``(i) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subparagraph, any person who violates subparagraph (A) shall
be fined $500 per violation.
``(ii) Forfeiture of improperly stored firearm.--Any
firearm stored in violation of subparagraph (A) shall be
subject to seizure and forfeiture in accordance with the
procedures described in section 924(d).
``(C) Minor defined.--In this paragraph, the term `minor'
means an individual who has not attained 18 years of age.''.
(b) Firearm Safe Storage Program.--Title I of the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10101
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``PART PP--FIREARM SAFE STORAGE PROGRAM

``SEC. 3061. FIREARM SAFE STORAGE PROGRAM.

``(a) In General.--The Assistant Attorney General shall
make grants to an eligible State or Indian Tribe to assist
the State or Indian Tribe in carrying out the provisions of
any State or Tribal law that is functionally identical to
section 922(z)(4) of title 18, United States Code.
``(b) Eligible State or Indian Tribe.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), a
State or Indian Tribe shall be eligible to receive grants
under this section on and after the date on which the State
or Indian Tribe enacts legislation functionally identical to
section 922(z)(4) of title 18, United States Code.
``(2) First year eligibility exception.--
``(A) In general.--A covered State or Indian Tribe shall be
eligible to receive a grant under this section during the 1-
year period beginning on the date of enactment of this part.
``(B) Covered state or indian tribe.--In this paragraph,
the term `covered State or Indian Tribe' means a State or
Indian Tribe that, before the date of enactment of this part,
enacted legislation that is functionally identical to section
922(z)(4) of title 18, United States Code.
``(c) Use of Funds.--Funds awarded under this section may
be used by a State or Indian Tribe to assist law enforcement
agencies or the courts of the State or Indian Tribe in
enforcing and otherwise facilitating compliance with any
State law functionally identical to section 922(z)(4), of
title 18, United States Code.
``(d) Application.--An eligible State or Indian Tribe
desiring a grant under this section shall submit to the
Assistant Attorney General an application at such time, in
such manner, and containing or accompanied by such
information, as the Assistant Attorney General may reasonably
require.
``(e) Incentives.--For each of fiscal years 2023 through
2027, the Attorney General shall give affirmative preference
to all Bureau of Justice Assistance discretionary grant
applications of a State or Indian Tribe that has enacted
legislation functionally identical to section 922(z)(4) of
title 18, United States Code.''.

SEC. 402. SAFE GUNS, SAFE KIDS.

Paragraph (4)(B) of section 922(z) of title 18, United
States Code, as added by this Act, is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(iii) Enhanced penalty.--If a person violates
subparagraph (A) and a minor or a resident who is ineligible
to possess a firearm under Federal, State, or local law
obtains the firearm and causes injury or death to such minor,
resident, or any other individual, the person shall be fined
under this title, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or
both.''.

SEC. 403. KIMBERLY VAUGHAN FIREARM SAFE STORAGE.

(a) Best Practices for Safe Firearm Storage.--
(1) Establishment.--
(A) In general.--
(i) Not later than 180 days after the enactment of this
Act, the Attorney General shall establish voluntary best
practices relating to safe firearm storage solely for the
purpose of public education.
(ii) The Attorney General shall give not less than ninety
days public notice, and shall afford interested parties
opportunity for hearing, before establishing such best
practices.
(B) Requirements.--In establishing the best practices
required under subparagraph (A), the Attorney General shall
outline such best practices for preventing firearm loss,
theft, and other unauthorized access for the following
locations:
(i) Businesses.
(ii) Vehicles.
(iii) Private homes.
(iv) Off-site storage facilities.
(v) Any other such place the Attorney General deems
appropriate to provide such guidance.
(C) Publication.--Not later than 1 year after the enactment
of this Act, the Attorney General shall publish, in print and
on a public website, the best practices created pursuant to
subparagraph (A) and shall review such best practices and
update them not less than annually.
(b) Promotion of Safe Firearm Storage.--
(1) In general.--Section 923 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(m) Beginning on January 1, 2025, licensed manufacturers
and licensed importers that serialize not less than 250
firearms annually pursuant to subsection (i) shall provide a
clear and conspicuous written notice with each manufactured
or imported handgun, rifle, or shotgun that--
``(1) is attached or adhered to, or appears on or within
any packaging of, each handgun, rifle, or shotgun; and
``(2) states `SAFE STORAGE SAVES LIVES' followed by the
address of the public website established by the Attorney
General pursuant to section 403(a) of the Protecting Our Kids
Act.''.
(c) Safe Storage Devices for All Firearm Sales.--
(1) In general.--Section 922(z) of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by striking ``handgun'' each place it
appears and inserting ``handgun, rifle, or shotgun''.
(2) Effective date.--This section and the amendments made
by this section shall take effect on the date that is 180
days after the enactment of this Act.
(d) Kimberly Vaughan Safe Firearm Storage Grant Program.--
Part PP of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.), as added by
this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 3062. KIMBERLY VAUGHAN FIREARM SAFE STORAGE GRANT
PROGRAM.

``(a) Authorization.--The Attorney General may award grants
to States and Indian Tribes for the development,
implementation, and evaluation of Safe Firearm Storage
Assistance Programs.
``(b) Application Requirements.--Each applicant for a grant
under this section shall--
``(1) submit to the Attorney General an application at such
time, in such a manner, and containing such information as
the Attorney General may require; and
``(2) to the extent practicable, identify State, local,
Tribal, and private funds available to supplement the funds
received under this section.
``(c) Reporting Requirement.--
``(1) Grantee report.--A recipient of a grant under this
section shall submit to the Attorney General an annual
report, which includes the following information:
``(A) The amount distributed to each Safe Firearm Storage
Assistance Program in the jurisdiction.
``(B) The number of safe firearm storage devices
distributed by each such Safe Firearm Storage Assistance
Program.
A recipient of a grant under this section may not include any
personally identifying information of recipients of safe
firearms storage devices pursuant to a Safe Firearm Storage
Assistance Program that received funding pursuant to this
section.
``(2) Attorney general report.--Beginning 13 months after
the first grants are awarded under this section, and annually
thereafter, the Attorney General shall submit to Congress a
report, which shall include following information:
``(A) A list of grant recipients during the previous year,
including the funds awarded, cumulatively and disaggregated
by grantee.
``(B) The information collected pursuant to subsection
(d)(1).
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to the Attorney General to carry out this
section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2023 through
2033, to remain available until expended.
``(e) Use of Funds.--Funds awarded under this section shall
be allocated as follows:
``(1) Not less than 75 percent of the funds received by a
grantee shall be used to create or to provide resources for
Safe Firearm Storage Assistance Programs in the jurisdiction.
``(2) Not more than 25 percent of the funds received by a
grantee may be made available to nonprofit organizations to
partner with units of local government to purchase and
distribute safe firearm storage devices.
``(f) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) The term `safe firearm storage device' means a device
that is--
``(A) designed and marketed for the principal purpose of
denying unauthorized access to, or rendering inoperable, a
firearm or ammunition; and
``(B) secured by a combination lock, key lock, or lock
based on biometric information which, once locked, is
incapable of being opened without the combination, key, or
biometric information, respectively.
``(2) The term `Safe Firearm Storage Assistance Program'
means a program--
``(A) carried out by a unit of local government or an
Indian tribe; and
``(B) solely for the purpose of acquiring and distributing
safe firearm storage devices to the public.''.

TITLE V--CLOSING THE BUMP STOCK LOOPHOLE

SEC. 501. BUMP STOCKS.

(a) In General.--Section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``and (8) a destructive
device.'' and inserting ``(8) a destructive device; and (9) a
bump stock.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
``(n) Bump Stock.--The term `bump stock' means any of the
following:
``(1) Any manual, power-driven, or electronic device that
is designed such that when the device is attached to a
semiautomatic weapon, the

[[Page H5367]]

device eliminates the need for the operator of a
semiautomatic weapon to make a separate movement for each
individual function of the trigger and--
``(A) materially increases the rate of fire of the
semiautomatic weapon, or
``(B) approximates the action or rate of fire of a
machinegun.
``(2) Any part or combination of parts that is designed and
functions to eliminate the need for the operator of a
semiautomatic weapon to make a separate movement for each
individual function of the trigger and--
``(A) materially increases the rate of fire of a
semiautomatic weapon, or
``(B) approximates the action or rate of fire of a
machinegun.
``(3) Any semiautomatic weapon that has been modified in
any way that eliminates the need for the operator of the
semiautomatic weapon to make a separate movement for each
individual function of the trigger and--
``(A) materially increases the rate of fire of the
semiautomatic weapon, or
``(B) approximates the action or rate of fire of a
machinegun.
``(o) Semiautomatic Weapon.--The term `semiautomatic
weapon' means any repeating weapon that--
``(1) utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing
cartridge or shell to extract the fired cartridge case or
shell casing and chamber the next round, and
``(2) requires a separate function of the trigger to fire
each cartridge or shell.''.
(b) Amendments to Title 18, United States Code.--
(1) Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by this Act, is further amended--
(A) in paragraph (3), by striking ``muffler or firearm
silencer'' and inserting ``muffler, firearm silencer, or bump
stock''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(41) The term `bump stock' has the meaning given such
term in section 5845(n) of the National Firearms Act (26
U.S.C. 5845(n)).''.
(2) Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(A) in each of subsections (a)(4) and (b)(4), by inserting
``bump stock,'' before ``machinegun''; and
(B) in subsection (o)(1) , by inserting ``or bump stock''
before the period.

TITLE VI--KEEP AMERICANS SAFE

SEC. 601. DEFINITIONS.

Section 921(a) of title 18, United States Code, as amended
by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(42) The term `large capacity ammunition feeding
device'--
``(A) means a magazine, belt, drum, feed strip, helical
feeding device, or similar device, including any such device
joined or coupled with another in any manner, that has an
overall capacity of, or that can be readily restored,
changed, or converted to accept, more than 15 rounds of
ammunition; and
``(B) does not include an attached tubular device designed
to accept, and capable of operating only with, .22 caliber
rimfire ammunition.
``(43) The term `qualified law enforcement officer' has the
meaning given the term in section 926B.''.

SEC. 602. RESTRICTIONS ON LARGE CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING
DEVICES.

(a) In General.--Section 922 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (u) the
following:
``(v)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell,
manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate
or foreign commerce, a large capacity ammunition feeding
device.
``(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the possession of
any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise
lawfully possessed on or before the date of enactment of this
subsection.
``(3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
``(A) the importation for, manufacture for, sale to,
transfer to, or possession by the United States or a
department or agency of the United States or a State or a
department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, or a
sale or transfer to or possession by a qualified law
enforcement officer employed by the United States or a
department or agency of the United States or a State or a
department, agency, or political subdivision of a State for
purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off-duty), or a
sale or transfer to or possession by a campus law enforcement
officer for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off-
duty);
``(B) the importation for, or sale or transfer to a
licensee under title I of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42
U.S.C. 2011 et seq.) for purposes of establishing and
maintaining an on-site physical protection system and
security organization required by Federal law, or possession
by an employee or contractor of such licensee on-site for
such purposes or off-site for purposes of licensee-authorized
training or transportation of nuclear materials;
``(C) the possession, by an individual who is retired in
good standing from service with a law enforcement agency and
is not otherwise prohibited from receiving ammunition, of a
large capacity ammunition feeding device--
``(i) sold or transferred to the individual by the agency
upon such retirement; or
``(ii) that the individual purchased, or otherwise
obtained, for official use before such retirement; or
``(D) the importation, sale, manufacture, transfer, or
possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device by
a licensed manufacturer or licensed importer for the purposes
of testing or experimentation authorized by the Attorney
General.
``(4) For purposes of paragraph (3)(A), the term `campus
law enforcement officer' means an individual who is--
``(A) employed by a private institution of higher education
that is eligible for funding under title IV of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.);
``(B) responsible for the prevention or investigation of
crime involving injury to persons or property, including
apprehension or detention of persons for such crimes;
``(C) authorized by Federal, State, or local law to carry a
firearm, execute search warrants, and make arrests; and
``(D) recognized, commissioned, or certified by a
government entity as a law enforcement officer.''.
(b) Identification Markings for Large Capacity Ammunition
Feeding Devices.--Section 923(i) of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended by inserting
after subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) the following:
``(B) A large capacity ammunition feeding device
manufactured after the date of enactment of this subparagraph
shall be identified by a serial number and the date on which
the device was manufactured or made, legibly and
conspicuously engraved or cast on the device, and such other
identification as the Attorney General shall by regulations
prescribe.''.
(c) Seizure and Forfeiture of Large Capacity Ammunition
Feeding Devices.--Section 924(d) of title 18, United States
Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the first sentence--
(i) by striking ``Any firearm or ammunition involved in''
and inserting ``Any firearm or ammunition or large capacity
ammunition feeding device involved in'';
(ii) by inserting ``(v),'' after ``(k),''; and
(iii) by striking ``any firearm or ammunition intended''
and inserting ``any firearm or ammunition or large capacity
ammunition feeding device intended''; and
(B) by inserting ``or large capacity ammunition feeding
device'' after ``firearms or ammunition'' each place the term
appears;
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``or large capacity
ammunition feeding device'' after ``firearms or ammunition'';
and
(B) in subparagraph (C), by inserting ``or large capacity
ammunition feeding devices'' after ``firearms or quantities
of ammunition''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)(E), by inserting ``922(v),'' after
``922(n),''.

SEC. 603. PENALTIES.

Section 924(a)(1)(B) of title 18, United States Code, as
amended by this Act, is further amended by inserting ``(v),''
after ``(q),''.

SEC. 604. USE OF BYRNE GRANTS FOR BUY-BACK PROGRAMS FOR LARGE
CAPACITY AMMUNITION FEEDING DEVICES.

Section 501(a)(1) of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10152(a)(1)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(I) Compensation for surrendered large capacity
ammunition feeding devices, as that term is defined in
section 921 of title 18, United States Code, under buy-back
programs for large capacity ammunition feeding devices.''.

TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 701. NICS REPORT.

Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
Act, and annually thereafter, the Attorney General shall
submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and
the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives a report that includes, with respect to the
preceding year, the demographic data of persons who were
determined to be ineligible to purchase a firearm based on a
background check performed by the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System, including race, ethnicity, national
origin, sex, gender, age, disability, average annual income,
and English language proficiency, if available.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
2 hours, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Jordan), will each control 1 hour.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.

General Leave

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and insert extraneous material on H.R. 7910.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.
Ms. PELOSI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I
commend him for his leadership in bringing this important legislation
to the floor. Protecting our kids; what could be more important than
that? I thank the gentleman for channeling the ideas and enthusiasms of
so many Members on both sides of the aisle as he brings this bipartisan
legislation to the floor.
I thank Mr. Nadler for his leadership, and I thank the task force led
by Mr. Mike Thompson of California for

[[Page H5368]]

his important work advancing the background check partisan legislation,
as well as Mr. Clyburn for his legislation that is already over on the
Senate side.
Madam Speaker, but today, we are doing more. Today, we were called to
action by our colleague, Lucy McBath, who told us that today we must
make history to protect the children, and we are going to make history
by making progress.
So I thank all of our Members, so many Members who have been so
important to this legislation. I thank them on behalf of the courageous
survivors of gun violence who have spoken out, out of respect for those
who lost their lives and with appreciation for the gravity of this
issue that we come to be on this floor.
Madam Speaker, as the families from Buffalo to Uvalde bury their
loved ones, even more communities have been hit by gun violence. Just
last weekend, Americans watched in horror as at least 13 mass shootings
unfolded across the country: from Philadelphia to Chattanooga to
Phoenix to Grand Rapids.
As the data shows, the challenge of gun violence goes much further
than these mass killings. Every night on our streets, Americans are
being killed in gun crimes. And every day, our Nation loses Americans
to suicides and accidents. This is a tragic daily massacre, which
rarely makes the headlines or the evening news, but it is there.
So here we are, for the children. When those who were advocating gun
violence or perpetrating it went into the classrooms, they crossed a
line. It is terrible the gun violence that we have had in our country.
But that they would go into Newtown and shoot little children who are
barely out of diapers; and again now in Texas, these beautiful children
in elementary school, and everything that happened in between, it was
an assault on the culture of our country that our children would not be
able to go to school without fear or concern about their safety.
Our children are, as President Kennedy said, our greatest resource
and our best hope for the future. They are our precious treasure.
Everything we do is for the children. And for the children, we must
stop this gun violence in our country and restore their confidence in
their safety, wherever they may be. So we are on a crusade for the
children, and sadly now, by the children.
Children testifying in committee. Children coming to events. Last
week, I had a 5th grader come to a Wear Orange rally that we had in
California, where she said she lost both her mother and her father in
separate gun violence incidents. In 5th grade, speaking at the podium
so courageously. Children turning their grief, their experience now,
not just--it would be enough to end the violence of losing a loved one,
but to witness it and be a victim of it in the classroom. A crusade for
the children by the children and of the children in terms of our
motivation to stop this for our precious children.
Indeed, America had lost more children from gun violence than any
other cause.
Does that embarrass you to think that in our country more children
have died from gun violence than any other cause?
These stories are tragically all too common in America today.
Countless more than those who died are forever changed by the horrors
of gun violence that they saw firsthand or that they experienced in
their families.
It is sickening that our children are forced to live in this constant
fear. And make no mistake, these gunmen who choose to shoot at innocent
children are desecrating, again, our culture--a culture where all of
us, all of our kids must and should feel safe, whether it is in school,
in church, the movies, or any other place.
Madam Speaker, protecting our children can and must be a unifying
mission for our Nation because they are our, as I said, our national
treasure. That is why, under the unyielding leadership of our chairman,
Mr. Nadler, the House will pass the Protecting Our Kids Act today. This
bold package includes commonsense measures that will make an enormous
difference to save lives.
Who wouldn't vote to raise the age from 18 to 21 for a person to have
a weapon of war?
Who wouldn't vote to raise the age to take weapons of war out of the
hands of teenagers?
Who wouldn't vote to get illegal guns off of our streets by cracking
down on gun trafficking which is a danger to people but also to law
enforcement?
Who wouldn't vote for background checks on ghost gun purchases which
our law enforcement tells us is a major concern out there?
Who wouldn't vote to protect children from stolen weapons or
accidental shootings with safe storage requirements?

Who wouldn't vote to ban bump stocks--that was President Trump's
executive order--bump stocks from civilian use or outlawing high-
capacity magazines designed for massacres not for killing varmints.
These measures will not only help stem the tide of mass murder but
address the equally urgent and wide range of daily gun deaths. Let us
salute the many Members who have worked persistently to craft this
strong legislation, written to earn bipartisan support that the
American people expect and deserve.
Today's package is just one step in the House's relentless fight to
stop the bloodshed. Our Democratic majority, as I mentioned earlier,
has twice passed the Bipartisan Background Checks Act and the Enhanced
Background Checks Act, which together would put our Nation on a path
toward universal background checks.
Tomorrow, thanks again to Congresswoman McBath and Congressman
Carbajal, we will pass the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Act,
otherwise known as the Red Flag Act. This will help keep guns out of
the hands of those who pose a threat to themselves or others.
Soon, we will vote for Mr. Cicilline's Active Shooter Alert Act to
create an AMBER alert-style notification during a mass shooting, a
measure widely supported by law enforcement.
And the House will continue to consider additional actions we can
take that have a proven record of saving lives. When I talk about these
different things, people say, well, what difference is that going to
make?
Well, the cumulative effect is a big one. We know there are
negotiations going on in the Senate and we are prayerful, we are
prayerful about those. Hopefully, we can make some advancement.
Because for all of us who have met again and again and again with the
survivors of gun violence, some coming time and again to check up on
what is happening, others new to that horrible club that none of us
wants to be a member of, they just want something to happen.

{time} 1445

Years ago, when I met with the survivors of Pulse, I said: What can
we do to be of comfort to you? They said: Just make sure it doesn't
happen to someone else.
That is what they said. They didn't say: I need this; I need that.
They said: Just make sure it doesn't happen to someone else.
Right now, in the eyes of survivors and indeed all Americans, their
eyes are on us in the Congress to see whether we have the courage, the
commitment, and the conviction to protect the children.
For some in Congress, a moment of silence is good enough for them, a
moment of silence. As Mr. Higgins said when he talked about Buffalo, a
moment of silence now, but action after. Now, we are taking that
action.
So many of our colleagues have talked about incidents in their
district, personal experiences shared by people who have been victims
of gun violence. Mr. Espaillat talked about what happened in his
district.
Again, so many of you have come speaking of the horror of it all, and
every time it happens, it is as if it has happened for the first time
because the horror is so fresh. But it is not the first time for the
victims who have to relive so much of the experience.
To those who a moment of silence is good enough because you don't
have the courage to take a vote to protect the children, I would say
your political survival is totally insignificant compared to the
survival of our children.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together with
a strong ``aye'' vote on all the provisions

[[Page H5369]]

in the bill for the final package and to do so as part of a crusade of,
by, and for the children. I urge an ``aye'' vote on the Protecting Our
Kids legislation.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
What happened in Uvalde, Buffalo, and Tulsa is as wrong as wrong
could be, and our hearts go out to those communities and those families
who have been impacted in such a terrible way. The answer is not to
destroy the Second Amendment, but that is exactly where the Democrats
want to go.
Don't take my word for it. Just look at what they said. The President
of the United States said last week that he wants to get rid of the
most popular handgun in the country. Michael Moore, a Democrat--not a
Member of Congress but a Democrat--said it is time to repeal the Second
Amendment.
During our 10-hour markup last Thursday in the committee hearing,
Representative Jackson Lee said if this bill passes, we are not
finished. Representative Jones said if this bill doesn't pass, we will
end the filibuster; we will expand the Supreme Court; we will do
whatever it takes to get law-abiding citizens' guns.
Today, we have this hodgepodge of six bills thrown together. Many of
the elements in these bills are unconstitutional. Even the Ninth
Circuit has said it is unconstitutional what they want to do on the age
limit. These bills would say when you can buy a firearm, what kind of
firearm you can get, and where and how you have to store that firearm
in your own darn home.
Of course, tomorrow, they are bringing the so-called red flag law to
the floor. Someone who doesn't like you can file a complaint. Within 24
hours, there is a hearing that you are not allowed to be at--you can't
confront your accuser--and they can take away your Second Amendment
liberty. That is the bill they are going to pass tomorrow.
Frankly, this shouldn't surprise us. For 18 months, Democrats have
assaulted the First Amendment. It shouldn't surprise us now that they
are coming after the Second. Every right we enjoy as Americans under
the First Amendment--your right to practice your faith, your right to
assemble, your right to petition your government, freedom of the
press--heck, some of them call for outlawing certain networks.
And freedom of speech, just a few weeks ago, the Biden administration
tried to put together the Disinformation Governance Board. Oh, my
goodness.
The attacks on the First Amendment have been sustained. They have
been going on for 18 months, and now here they come, going after law-
abiding citizens' Second Amendment liberties.
The Speaker started by saying this bill is about protecting our kids.
That is important. Sure is. That is what she said, protecting our kids
is important. Yes, it is. But this bill doesn't do it.
What this bill does is takes away Second Amendment rights, God-given
rights protected by our Constitution, from law-abiding American
citizens. That is what this legislation does, and that is why we should
oppose it.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, our Nation has been through trying times these last
few weeks as we have tried to process the mass shootings in Buffalo,
Uvalde, Tulsa, and all too many other cities. Just this past weekend,
we learned of yet another horrific incident in Philadelphia and yet
more carnage in Tennessee, Arizona, Virginia, and South Carolina. And
those are just the stories we saw in the news.
Day after day, we see more lives lost to gun violence in our schools,
on our streets, in our houses of worship, and in our homes, touching
every region of the country. And we hear the urgent calls from our
constituents crying out for us to take action. Today, we heed that
call.
H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids Act, is comprehensive legislation
to address the scourge of gun violence, a blight that killed nearly
45,000 Americans in 2020 alone.
It builds on the work of several of our colleagues, including:
Anthony Brown's Raise the Age Act, which would raise the lawful age
to purchase an AR-15 styled semiautomatic assault rifle from 18 to 21
years old;
Robin Kelly's Prevent Gun Trafficking Act, which would establish new
Federal offenses for gun trafficking and straw purchasing;

David Cicilline's Untraceable Firearms Act, which would ensure that
ghost guns are subject to existing Federal firearms regulations;
A trio of gun storage proposals--Rosa DeLauro's Ethan's Law, Elissa
Slotkin's Safe Guns, Safe Kids Act, and Sheila Jackson Lee's Kimberly
Vaughan Firearms Safe Storage Act--which would establish storage
regulations that keep guns out of the hands of children and award
grants for firearm storage assistance programs;
Dina Titus' Closing the Bump Stock Loophole Act, which would build on
existing regulations banning the manufacture, sale, or possession of
bump stocks for civilian use;
And Ted Deutch's Keep Americans Safe Act, which would ban the sale,
manufacture, and illegal possession of gun magazines that hold more
than 15 rounds of ammunition.
I thank each of them for their contributions to this bill and for
making this country safer for all Americans.
Madam Speaker, all of us in this Chamber were shaken by the images of
parents in Uvalde standing in line to match their DNA to the remains of
their 9- and 10-year-old children, parents who should be picking up
their children from school right now but who, instead, are picking up
the pieces of their lives shattered by this unimaginable loss.
But the question today is: Who among us will have the courage to do
something about it? Who will be able to tell mothers and fathers that
their children need not go to school in a fortress just to keep them
safe? Who will be able to tell children that they did all they could
today to ensure that their parents will return safely from the
supermarket or their office or an evening out? Who will be able to tell
their constituents that they stood with them and not with the gun
lobby?
Americans are watching. They are begging us to protect them and their
loved ones from gun violence. Who among us will answer their call?
I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this Protecting
Our Kids Act, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio (Mr. Chabot).
Mr. CHABOT. Madam Speaker, this legislation represents an unfortunate
missed opportunity. After witnessing the horrible tragedy that occurred
at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, we should be coming
together and working in a bipartisan manner to take every
constitutionally permissive step to make our schools safer and more
secure and to protect our most valuable resources, our children.
That is what we did after the tragic shooting in Parkland, Florida.
Back in 2018, Congressman John Rutherford, a former sheriff, led a
bipartisan group of Members, myself included, in reauthorizing the COPS
Secure Our Schools grant program. The legislation we passed increased
Federal funding for school security and expanded the safety measures
for which the money could be used.
As a result, the Department of Justice announced over $125 million in
grants last year to help improve security at local schools. Overall, it
is a good program that will benefit millions of students and teachers,
but there is always room for improvement.
That is why we should be looking for ways to get more money to
schools to increase security, but the legislation before us today
contains nothing that will really help make our schools safer. In fact,
efforts to add school security provisions to the bill were rejected by
the majority.
For example, during the Judiciary Committee markup, I offered an
amendment to encourage the hiring of retired police officers and
honorably discharged military personnel as school resource officers.
After all, no one is better trained and better prepared to protect our
schools. Unfortunately, the majority rejected this commonsense proposal
to help improve safety and security at schools across the country.

[[Page H5370]]

Then, at Rules Committee, I offered an amendment to allow unspent
American Rescue Plan funds to be used on school security programs.
Billions set aside for schools under that legislation hasn't been spent
and could be lost forever if schools don't meet certain deadlines.
While we do, or did, need to protect students and teachers from
COVID, more children under 11 died at Robb Elementary in 1 hour than
have died from COVID in the entire State of Texas this year. Yet, we
have $100 billion--billion with a b--in unspent education funds to
fight COVID while only $125 million--million with an m--available for
school security.
It seems logical that we should allow these unspent funds to be spent
to protect our children and our teachers. The money could be used for
metal detectors, to adopt security plans, to train school officials, to
hire school resource officers, including, as I mentioned, retired
police officers, and to help identify students with mental health
issues and get those students the treatment that they need.

Yet, this commonsense amendment, too, was rejected by the majority.
Instead of school security measures, we, unfortunately, have a bill
full of likely unconstitutional provisions that won't pass the Senate
anyway.
The crux of my argument against this legislation is the majority is
acting quickly when they ought to be doing the right thing.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee), the cosponsor of the bill and
a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, no 9-year-old should be sentenced to
a death sentence. No grandmother shopping at a grocery store should get
a death sentence. No mother who testified today should lose her son.
Vicious gun violence that has no rhyme and no reason. Yes, I am
excited about this historic moment. H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids
Act, is, in fact, a solution to horrible and vicious problems.
It is clear, as I stand next to the children, they should not have
died. As I stand next to those from Buffalo, they should not have died.
As we know about those who were seeking medical care in Tulsa, they
should not have died.
I have no problem with saying that we build on this, and as Ronald
Reagan said to us, he at the time saw no reason for an AK-47 to be used
for hunting or defending one's home.
Dr. Guerrero, a pediatrician, said that he raced to the hospital, and
as he raced to the hospital, he found parents outside yelling
children's names in desperation, sobbing as they begged for news of
their related children. Or the mother who ran barefoot all the way to
Robb Elementary School, begging and crying for a child. Or Miah, who
had the wherewithal to watch as her teacher was shot dead, she marked
herself with blood because she was attempting to save her life.
These children, these Americans, our loved ones, this should not
happen again. So, this bill that has a package of storage bills, that
has a package of munitions, that deals with the age, deals with a
number of items, trafficking, ghost guns, bump stocks, this is a way to
go.

{time} 1500

I hope, as we go in the future, we are not afraid of a 7-day waiting
period or an assault weapon ban. This is the way to go.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15
seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, this is the way to go.
I thank Chairman Thompson and Chairman Nadler.
This is the way to go. Should they be given a death sentence? Where
is the responsible gun owner that can stand with me and declare that
they should live? You are out there.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has again
expired.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, we need humanity and courage.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7910, the ``Protecting Our
Kids Act.''
Our country is experiencing a crisis of gun violence. It is critical
that Congress act now to protect our children and our communities by
supporting H.R. 7910. This multifaceted legislation is a combination of
humanity, courage, decency, and action.
I traveled to Uvalde and listened to the grieving parents and
families of children and teachers slaughtered at Robb Elementary. We
can no longer standby idly as our children suffer such life-changing
trauma.
As I stand here today, I am reminded of the immortal words of the
conscience of Congress, Representative John Lewis, following the 2016
Pulse Nightclub massacre. He said:
``This is the fight. It is not an opinion. We must remove the
blinders, the time for silence and patience is long gone.''
He asked--``Where is the heart of this body? Where is our soul? Where
is our moral leadership? Where is our courage?''
Far too many have died by gunfire since Representative Lewis asked,
``Are we blind?'' I ask this body today: Where is our courage? Are we
still blind to this horror? What will it take for us to act?
As a Texan, I understand how deeply guns are embedded in our culture.
Though, I equally understand how our children are impacted by the
presence of guns in our communities.
My heart was touched by Kimberly Vaughan, a 14-year-old student, was
the youngest victim to die along with eight schoolmates and two
teachers, at Santa Fe High School in Texas in 2018. The shooter gained
access to his father's shotgun and pistol, kept in a closet, to carry
out the murders.
To commemorate Kimberly Vaughan, I introduced a provision of H.R.
7910 that expands the requires safe firearm storage devices to be made
available at the point of sale--for both rifles and shotguns--which
will train new gun owners on the value of safe storage and remind
seasoned gun owners that safe storage goes hand-in-hand with
responsible gun ownership.
There are now more guns held legally and illegally in the U.S. than
there are people. While gun violence touches every corner of America,
Texas has suffered some of the deadliest mass shootings in history.
Despite the escalating gun violence statistics, which have left
innumerable families and communities broken and afraid, Congress has
still failed to act.
Instead, lawmakers in several states, including in my state of Texas,
have reconvened after mass shootings to soften gun laws, most notably,
passing permit-less carry legislation.
I have been dismayed by those who repeatedly offer thoughts and
prayers, then fail to act. Our top priority as lawmakers should be
protecting our communities. Yet, we have relinquished that duty through
inaction.
Now is the time for action. We cannot wait any longer. I call upon
each of my colleagues, on both the right and left, to muster your
courage and join me in support of H.R. 7910--life-saving legislation,
which represents the hard work of so many dedicated members of
Congress.
I thank House Judiciary Committee Chairman Nadler and Representative
Mike Thompson, Chair of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, for
working with me on this bill and recognizing the urgency and necessity
of bringing it to the floor.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Gaetz).
Mr. GAETZ. Madam Speaker, Speaker Pelosi tells us she is on a crusade
for the children. Someone should maybe remind the Speaker the Crusades
did not always end well when they were reflexively driven by emotion
and riddled with poor planning.
No, this is no crusade for the children. If it were, you wouldn't
leave our children as sitting ducks in gun-free zones when they go to
school every day.
The Speaker says we need action. We are for action. How about the
action of my bill to create a national stand-your-ground law to
strengthen self-defense, or Richard Hudson's bill for national
concealed carry, or any number of proposals Republicans have offered to
unlock the safe and secure environment when we have our military
veterans and our former members of law enforcement able to carry a
firearm responsibly in schools to be able to respond to these acts of
violence?
No, their version of action is more gun control and raising the age
to be able to buy certain firearms. Well, on November 25, 2021, a
crazed lunatic with a knife broke into a home in El Paso and began
assaulting a woman inside. The 20-year-old homeowner grabbed his rifle
and killed the assailant. That is action.
In 2017, in Sutherland Springs, Texas, a gunman open fired inside the
First Baptist Church. A Good Samaritan grabbed his AR-15 and engaged
the

[[Page H5371]]

shooter, stopping him from further carnage--a good use for an AR-15.
In 2019, in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, a 19-year-old killed three would-
be burglars who broke into his home.
These situations happen every day. There would be more death and more
bloodshed if we were to accept these proposals from the Democrats.
The Second Amendment isn't about hunting or about self-defense; it is
about power. It is about the power that is reserved in the citizenry to
curate a balance so that Americans are not overrun by tyranny. Thank
God we haven't had to use the Second Amendment for the purpose that
some might have envisioned necessary when our Founders were creating
the Constitution.
That power belongs to the people, not to the Democrats trying to take
their rights away.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Thompson), a cosponsor of the bill and the chairman of
the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support
of this bill, the Protecting Our Kids Act. I point out that every
argument we have heard against it so far is nonsense.
Every student deserves to feel safe in school, and every parent
should know that their child is safe when they walk out of their house
in the morning.
After each mass shooting, too many people are content to offer their
thoughts and prayers. The Protecting Our Kids Act is more than thoughts
and prayers.
I was proud to work on this bill with Chairman Nadler, Chairwoman
Jackson Lee, and all of our colleagues who have contributed bills and
input that have made this bill the important bill that it is.
As a lifelong hunter, gun owner, and as a combat veteran, I believe
in law-abiding citizens' ability and right to own firearms. As a gun
owner, I believe that all responsible gun owners have that
responsibility to support efforts to help keep our schools, streets,
and communities safe from mass shootings and from the everyday gun
violence that often goes unreported by the media.
Each provision in this bill helps reduce gun violence, and it saves
lives. Raising the age to buy an assault weapon saves lives. Limiting
magazine capacity will limit the carnage of mass shootings, and it
saves lives. Going after traffickers keeps guns out of the hands of
people who shouldn't have them, and it saves lives. Safe storage helps
reduce suicides and keeps kids safe at home and school, and it saves
lives. The unregulated sales of bump stocks and ghost guns is tearing
up our communities; regulating ghost guns and regulating bump stocks
saves lives.
This bill respects the Second Amendment while taking steps to protect
our communities from the epidemic of gun violence. None of our careers
are worth more than the lives of the children in this country. We need
to pass this bill, and I hope we do it with strong bipartisan support.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, the previous speaker said ``nonsense.'' It
is not nonsense to defend the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment
protects our God-given right to protect ourselves, our family, our
property, and our freedom. That is not nonsense. That is essential is
what it is, and it is a critical part of the Constitution.
Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Hudson).
Mr. HUDSON. Madam Speaker, as the father of an elementary school
child, I am devastated every time we have a school shooting. That is
why identifying solutions to stop these tragedies is so important to
me.
There are only two significant gun safety bills to pass Congress
recently. Both were Republican bills passed by a Republican majority
and signed by a Republican President.
The Democrats' mantra has been ``do something.'' My Republican
colleagues and I know that the American people expect us to do
something that matters.
That is why I introduced H.R. 7966, the STOP II, Secure Every School
and Protect our Nation's Children Act. It builds on the STOP School
Violence Act signed into law in 2018 and redirects unused COVID-19
funding to provide $1 billion to hire school resource officers, and it
provides $1 billion to hire mental health guidance counselors.
Our guidance counselors are wonderful, caring people who are
stretched too thin. They may not always have the time they need to
reach all the children who need help. There is $5 billion included to
fund STOP School Violence programs that harden schools, expand active
shooter training, and provide resources for law enforcement, school
officials, and students to intervene before someone reaches a breaking
point.

Under my legislation, schools can also apply for threat assessments
to identify weaknesses in security and in mental health services. A
clearinghouse is also codified under Homeland Security to share best
practices for school safety.
My STOP II Act is one of 12 bills that House Republicans are bringing
forward that actually solve problems and actually save lives, all
without threatening the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding
citizens. If gun control worked, Chicago would be one of the safest
cities in America.
My colleagues across the aisle have so far refused to work with us
where there is common ground on this issue. They and the media know the
bills we are considering today have no chance of becoming law.
I ask my colleagues across the aisle to set aside this partisan
agenda. Instead, help me to harden schools. Help me to intervene with
students in a mental health crisis before they reach a breaking point.
Imagine the impact if we had intervened and gotten the help that this
young man in Uvalde needed before he dropped out of high school. Help
me protect our children and teachers to make sure tragedies like this
never happen again.
Madam Speaker, if we adopt the motion to recommit, we will instruct
the Committee on the Judiciary to consider my amendment to H.R. 7910 to
provide needed resources to schools for safety and security and mental
health intervention and counseling.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the
amendment in the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Tennessee (Mr. Cohen), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill and
would like to see a bill that is even stronger.
There is no question that children--and that is what they are--should
not be buying AR-15s before they are 21. In fact, I don't think they
should be buying them at all. But until they are 21, they shouldn't be
buying them.
It has been proven scientifically that the male brain is not
developed to a certain point to be trusted at that time with that type
of weapon. Those are weapons of war. Those weapons tore apart those
children, decapitated them, and made them unidentifiable. That was the
purpose of those weapons, and that is what happened. There is no reason
for that to occur.
The opinion in 2008 that gave the right to carry a gun was not
unlimited. It said you can have reasonable restrictions. That is what
Justice Scalia said. These are reasonable restrictions.
As far as my friend, Mr. Hudson, I have great respect for him. One of
the teachers at Uvalde who was hit and lost all 11 children said: We
trained. There is no training that can prepare you for this. There is
nothing you can be prepared for.
If you get more school counselors, does that help people in the movie
theaters and in Columbine? No. Movie theaters, churches, grocery stores
all need to be protected. This country is wild with guns, and we need
to restrict them.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, it has been difficult in debate last week
and even today to be told that we have no courage. We were told in
debate last week: We don't want to hear anymore about social media,
violent video games, Hollywood, mental illness. And

[[Page H5372]]

they sure don't want to hear any more about prayers. They are disgusted
hearing about prayers. They don't want to hear any more about
fatherlessness and drug use.
Maybe if we heard more prayers from leaders of this country instead
of taking God's name in vain, we wouldn't have the mass killings like
we didn't have before prayer was eliminated from school.
It is not like we are not willing to consider the best way to stop
mass shootings, but if you look at the plans being proposed in these
bills, you can find these things in cities controlled by Democrats.
If you look at the 16 cities that were hit with record homicide
rates, they all had Democrats at the top controlling things:
Philadelphia, 524 murders last year; Austin, Texas, had a record 88;
Indianapolis, 258; Albuquerque, 107; Columbus, Ohio, 179; Jackson,
Mississippi, 129; and Atlanta, Georgia, 150.
If you look at the Speaker's own State--as this article by AWR
Hawkins said this week, an FBI report on active shooter incidents in
2021 shows California was the number one State for such incidents, with
6 incidents out of the 12 that met the definition of mass killing.

In California, universal background checks, assault weapons ban,
high-capacity magazine ban, 10-day waiting period on gun purchases, red
flag laws, gun registration requirements, good cause requirement for
concealed carry--and what is the response we got in debate last week
about? You ought to have due process. We are told: Oh, they get due
process. Look at the bill.
What the Democrats call due process is just like the January 6th
Committee. It is not due process. It is not bipartisan. They have only
one side that is heard at the hearing. The people, when they want to
take away your gun, they don't get to be there. The husband can rush in
and claim the battered wife is a threat. That is enough to get her
eliminated from being able to use a weapon or have a weapon.
These are not the ways to fix things. For people who are okay with
late-term abortions and ripping the arms and legs off of children that
feel the pain and then crushing the skulls, it is desensitizing.
Madam Speaker, it is not well received.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Johnson), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Madam Speaker, how free are we as Americans
if we are holed up in our homes, shell-shocked by gun violence? We
should not have to live like that. We shouldn't have to live tormented
by the need to buy yet another gun more powerful than the one our
neighbor purchased last week. That is not freedom. Our kids deserve
better.
The old and tired NRA Republican Party philosophy, which is the only
way to stop a bad guy is a good guy with a gun, has not and will not
work. In Uvalde, 19 good guys with guns didn't stop the killer of 19
school kids and two teachers.
We have done it the Republican way for far too long now, and for the
sake of the kids, it is time to do something different.
Today, the good guys in the House will stand up to the NRA and pass
the commonsense Protecting Our Kids Act.

{time} 1515

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article dated
May 31, 2022, from The New York Times titled ``California has America's
Toughest Gun Laws, and They Work.''

[From the New York Times, May 31, 2022]

California Has America's Toughest Gun Laws, and They Work

(By Shawn Hubler)

The grotesque toll of gun violence is again being debated
in Congress. As Luis Ferre-Sadurni and I reported over the
long weekend, states are not holding their breath.
Particularly this state: In ways that have tended to be
underreported, California has significantly lowered gun
deaths, Dr. Garen J. Wintemute, an emergency room doctor and
longtime firearm violence researcher, told me this week.
``For the last 20, maybe even 25 years--except for the two
years of the pandemic, which have increased homicides and
suicides across the country--our rates of firearm violence
have trended downward,'' said Dr. Wintemute, who directs the
Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of
California, Davis, Medical Center in Sacramento. ``And this
has been at a time when most of the rates in the rest of the
country have gone up.''
California's rate of firearm mortality is among the
nation's lowest, with 8.5 gun deaths per 100,000 people in
2020, compared with 13.7 per 100,000 nationally and 14.2 per
100,000 in Texas, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention has reported. And Californians are about 25
percent less likely to die in mass shootings, compared with
residents of other states, according to a recent Public
Policy Institute of California analysis.
I asked Dr. Wintemute how California is different. Here's a
lightly edited excerpt from our conversation, which took
place on Memorial Day after his emergency room shift:
Just a couple of weeks ago, California had a mass shooting.
By what measures are our policies a success?
You have to look at it on a population basis. We do have
more mass shootings in California, but we're also by far the
largest state. I looked a while ago at the rates of firearm
violence across the 21st century--homicide and suicide
together--and the rest of the country was up, but
California's rates were so far down that the average was
flat.
We always hear that nothing works, that even California's
strict gun laws are ineffective.
That's because we evaluate policies one at a time, in
isolation. The results for one policy might be mixed or even
negative. But what California has done over a number of
decades has been to enact a whole bundle of policies that I
think work in synergy, to measurable effect.
It sounds like the ``Swiss cheese model'' public health
experts have used to address Covid.
Yes. The idea is to prevent the holes in the policies from
lining up. But if we rank the states, California's rate of
firearm violence ranks 29th out of 50 states for homicides
and 44th for suicides.
Can you share some examples?
California has done a lot to prevent high-risk people from
purchasing firearms. We've broadened the criteria for keeping
guns out of the hands of people who pose a danger to
themselves or others due to mental illness. If you're
convicted of a violent misdemeanor in California, you can't
have a gun for the next 10 years; that offense has to be a
felony in most states.
We require background checks, and not just from licensed
retailers; in most states, purchases from private parties
require no background checks or record keeping of any kind.
We have a system, that we're evaluating now, for getting guns
back from ``prohibited persons''--people who have been
convicted of violent crimes or who are facing domestic
violence restraining orders. And we enforce these policies,
unlike a lot of other states.
What else?
In the early 1990s, cheap handguns--``Saturday Night
Specials''--were almost entirely manufactured around Los
Angeles. It was a few companies making upward of 800,000
cheap handguns a year. So the state imposed standards for
design and safety. One of the companies has since gone to
Nevada. The rest went belly-up and no one else has come in to
fill the gap.
What about gaps?
Every time California sets a new standard, the gun industry
tries to outwit it. Unregulated ghost guns have become
immensely popular here, precisely because we're such a
tightly regulated market. And the state program to recover
guns from prohibited people has never had the level of
funding it needs to do the whole job--there are only about 40
trained agents for the whole state and a backlog of at least
10,000 people whose guns need to be taken.
Overall, what could the rest of the country learn from
California?
The lower the prevalence of ownership, the lower the rate
of firearm violence--that's been one of the most robust
research findings for decades. Rates of gun ownership are
lower here, in part because of this bundle of state measures.
In the United States overall, something like 25 percent to 30
percent of individuals own guns. In California, it's about 15
percent to 18 percent.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, the evidence doesn't lie. California's
rate of firearm mortality is among the Nation's lowest, with 8.5 gun
deaths per 100,000 people in 2020, compared with 13.7 per 100,000
nationally and 14.2 per 100,000 in Texas. Gun safety laws work. It is
that simple.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
This is an emotional debate. It is an emotional debate because we
lose, on a daily basis, family members, neighbors, friends, and fellow
citizens to a bullet or multiple bullets--killed by gun.
I do not subscribe to the theory that some promote that the more guns
we have, the safer we will be. I believe that is somewhat like the O.K.
Corral theory that if you have a faster gun, then you will be safe.
Eventually,

[[Page H5373]]

somebody will have a faster, bigger, and more surprising gun than we.
Madam Speaker, like all Americans, I found the mass shooting at
Uvalde, Texas, heart-wrenching, tragic, and unacceptable. Although the
news was excruciating to watch, it was anything but surprising given
our history with deadly firearms. Sadly, we didn't even have time to
mourn the 19 children and two teachers who were killed in Uvalde before
news broke of another mass shooting--over and over and over and over
and over and over again.
At some point these statistics have to move us to respond in an
effective way. My friend from North Carolina suggested hardening the
schools. We have hardened this Chamber over the objections of some when
we know that no gun should be in this Capitol other than those
possessed by law enforcement, Capitol Police.
According to the nonpartisan Gun Violence Archive, there have been as
many as 33 mass gun violence incidents in the 14 days since the attack
on Robb Elementary. We have more guns in this country than any other
nation on Earth. The Second Amendment guarantees that we have a right
to a gun, but the Supreme Court in Heller said: But there are
limitations to that right.
I strongly support an individual American's right to have a gun in
his or her home--their home--to protect themselves and their business.
But the Court said: Be reasonable.
In the past week alone, 7 days, we have seen mass shootings in
Chattanooga, Tennessee, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Tulsa,
Oklahoma. Not even 10 days before the shooting in Robb Elementary, a
domestic terrorist killed 13 people in a grocery store in Buffalo, New
York.
In every corner of this country, Americans are begging--begging--
Congress to protect our kids and our people. Many of us like to say,
This is the people's House.
The people are speaking to us and crying out for action.
A gentleman who spoke before me said something about saying prayers.
I believe in prayer. But I also believe the admonition that John
Kennedy said when he said: ``Let us go forth to lead the land we love,
asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on Earth, God's
work must truly be our own.''
Today, in this House--the people's House--we need to act to protect
the people.
Madam Speaker, I want to direct your attention to this chart again.
Look at the numbers--hundreds of deaths. In addition to the
unconscionable trauma these attacks inflicted on the parents, children,
wives, husbands, brothers, sisters, and other loved ones of the
victims, they have one thing in common: the perpetrator got the gun
legally.
In Tulsa, Oklahoma, the perpetrator got the gun approximately 3 hours
before he shot Dr. Phillips. He was filled, obviously, with passion,
hate, and anger at the pain that he apparently was suffering physically
and perhaps emotionally.
So what did he do?
He went down and quickly got a gun--an AR-15 to be exact--and went
and shot not only Dr. Phillips but three other people in the process.
Those are 285 deaths we could have prevented if we had commonsense gun
laws in place.
Of the 45,000 people who died from gun violence last year alone--we
are talking about making people safe--45,000 deaths--they are not
safe--how many would have also been spared had our laws been stronger?
Frankly, I, myself, would favor reinstituting the 1994 assault
weapons ban for which I voted. And I lamented the fact that when my
Republican colleagues were in charge of the House, Senate, and the
Presidency, they allowed that law to go out of existence. None of us
can speculate what the cost of that was, but there is no doubt in my
mind there was a cost. In fact, that bill reduced mass shootings then,
and it would do so again now.
There is much I believe we ought to do as the Representatives of the
American people in this House. The House, though, has already taken
action on two very critical gun safety measures supported by 9 out of
10 Americans. We don't have 9 out of 10 Americans who are Democrats in
this country. Neither side does. But if you have any credence in
polling data that says what Americans think, 9 out of 10 think that
comprehensive background checks should be the law of the land. I don't
know a commonsense argument against that.
We passed the Charleston loophole. This gentleman who bought that gun
3 hours or thereabouts before he killed Dr. Phillips would have had
time to cool off and to perhaps have second thoughts, to perhaps have
saved the life of a doctor whose job it was to save lives. We sent
those bills over, and Senate Republicans, however, have refused to
allow even debate on either of these bills--even debate on either of
these bills that are overwhelmingly supported by the American people.
I know that my Republican colleagues are as disturbed by the murder
of children as Democrats are. I believe that. I hope that is the case,
but I believe it. But I am confounded by the unwillingness to respond
in an effective way even on asking that everybody get checked out, so
we know they are not criminally insane or a felon or an abuser or on
the terrorist watch list; but it is no to comprehensive background
checks just to see if somebody is a danger to themselves or others.

I know that our colleagues across the aisle shed tears when their
constituents die from gun violence, as we do. This should not be a
Democratic or Republican issue but an issue of our common humanity and
our common sense. If we work together, we can achieve a safer America.
We have seen promising signs from the Senate that a bipartisan
agreement may be possible. I surely hope it is. But this House will not
and should not wait to act. That is why we are voting on this
Protecting Our Kids Act today.
This legislation is, in my view, long overdue. I participated in a
sit-in on this floor to try to galvanize the Congress. It didn't work.
Sadly, it didn't work. To the disappointment of the American people, it
didn't work.
This comprehensive bill is the product of tireless efforts by many of
our colleagues to address issues that contribute to our gun violence
epidemic.
Thanks to Robin Kelly, the Protecting Our Kids Act will crack down on
gun traffickers who take guns, where? Into the big cities and spread
them around. Now, they sell them; they don't give them away for free.
But it is the traffickers who break the laws--not of Chicago, but
perhaps don't break the laws of where they bought multiple guns for
those who can't buy guns.
Similarly, Representatives Cicilline and Espaillat pushed to include
provisions that would regulate elusive ghost guns. Now, I chaired the
Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government that
oversaw the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division, and we couldn't
even make sure that ordnance--bullets--could be traced because the NRA
was opposed.
Representative Titus ensured that we would ban bump stocks, a weapon
component that allowed a gunman to kill 60 people in Las Vegas in 2017
and wound hundreds more.
Was he a hunter? Was he a sportsman?
Additionally, this bill will restrict high-capacity magazines which
enable shooters to inflict maximum destruction in the minimum amount of
time, thanks to language included by Representative Deutch. Because of
Chairwoman DeLauro, Chairwoman Jackson Lee, and Representative Slotkin,
this bill also protects our kids from gun violence at home by
implementing gun storage safety standards.
Common sense and common purpose protects our kids.
This act also includes Representative Anthony Brown's measure to
raise the legal age for purchasing assault weapons and shotguns from 18
to 21. You can buy an AR-15, apparently, or some other multiple-shot,
quick-shot weapon, but you can't buy a drink in many jurisdictions.
Is that common sense?
This legislation never would have come together without the
leadership of Chairman Nadler. I thank the chairman for his leadership,
and I thank the committee for their work on this bill. I thank
Chairwoman Jackson Lee of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and
Homeland Security, and I thank Chairman Thompson of the Gun Violence
Task Force.
This bill, as well as additional legislation from Representatives
McBath and Carbajal that will be considered subsequently on Thursday,
takes major

[[Page H5374]]

steps forward to make our communities and our children safer.
Is it perfect?
Will it stop all the killing?
No, it won't. We know that.
Is there a perfect answer?
No.
Is making schools safer bad?
No. We support that.
I don't know that we support making them into armed camps, as some
would suggest, because I think that would make them less safe in many
respects.

{time} 1530

So I urge all of my colleagues to put our country, our constituents,
and our kids first. Let us rise above party and partisanship and
special interests as we seek to do what is right, what is necessary,
and what an overwhelming majority of the American people are looking to
Congress to achieve.
Isn't that what we are supposed to do, represent the people?
I am hopeful we can find a bipartisan path forward to enact long-
overdue reforms to make our communities safer from gun violence because
a bullet doesn't care about your race, your faith, your age, your
orientation, or any other factor.
And yes, people do care about those things and manifest it in the
worst way possible. But they do it with an instrument that will allow
them to kill a lot of people very quickly.
The American people care what we do here today. The American people
care that their Congress is doing everything possible to keep them
safe, to keep our children safe. The American people care.
Each of us today has a chance to show that we care. God's work on
Earth must truly be our own. Vote for this bill. Make our kids and
communities and people safer.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Jeffries), a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Madam Speaker, America is in the midst of a shocking
gun violence epidemic that should shock the conscience of everyone, and
has devastated children, families, and communities. We must address it
with the fierce urgency of now.
But there are some in this Chamber who would rather bury their heads
in the sand and act like everything is okay.
It is not okay that Black folks were gunned down in Buffalo, New
York, simply because of the color of their skin.
It is not okay that members of the Jewish community were gunned down
in the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh simply because of their
religious beliefs.
It is not okay that children were gunned down and shredded in Uvalde,
Texas, by an 18-year old who should never have had access to a weapon
of war.
It is not okay that mass murder has become a way of life in the
United States of America. That is why we must pass comprehensive gun
violence prevention legislation, address this epidemic decisively, and
allow America to be the best version of itself.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, today we are debating six gun control
provisions in one. Why are there six bills in here? Because none of
them work.
But you can't take six bills that don't work and put them together
and make one that does. It doesn't work that way.
These are unserious, unconstitutional and, most troubling, dangerous
provisions; six titles in this bill, and they all suffer the same
inherent problem that gun control suffers when we pass it here in these
legislatures, and that problem is, criminals do not obey the law. They
are going to love some of these laws, though.
Let's take, for instance, the so-called safe storage provisions in
here. Home invaders are going to love the fact that Congress has now
told you you need to lock up your gun in your house. How are you going
to defend yourself when your guns are locked up? This is dangerous. It
is also unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court already ruled in Heller that it is unconstitutional
to require Dick Heller to keep his gun disassembled and unloaded in his
house. That violates the Second Amendment.
Think about the provision to raise the age to 21 to buy a long gun.
That includes rifles and shotguns, not just a handgun, which is already
impermissible. This is unconstitutional, and it is immoral.
Why is it immoral? Because we are telling 18-, 19-, and 20-year olds
to register for the draft. You can go die for your country. We expect
you to defend us, but we are not going to give you the tools to defend
yourself and your family.
I offered an amendment in committee that would let the spouse of
somebody in the armed services serving overseas acquire the means of
self-defense while her husband is serving overseas; let her defend her
and her children. Just because she is 18, 19, or 20, and her husband is
serving, she shouldn't be defenseless. The Democrats voted it down in
committee.
I offered an amendment to say that we won't treat domestic violence
victims as gun traffickers if they happen to get a gun from a neighbor
instead of getting it from the gun store. Every Democrat but one voted
against protecting domestic violence victims.
Let me give you one that is not a hypothetical. My dear friend Nikki
Goeser, who worked in my congressional office, watched her husband
murdered in front of her in a gun-free zone because she followed the
law. She had a licensed registered firearm and, in a moment she regrets
to this day, she left it in her car because she knew the law said not
to bring it in there; but her stalker knew she wasn't going to have a
gun. Her stalker murdered her husband in front of her.
Criminals don't follow the law. So let's do the one serious thing we
could do.
Why must children keep dying? Let's quit advertising our schools as
soft targets. Let's quit saying that these are gun-free zones, and that
these kids are sitting ducks.
In 1990, Congress did another knee-jerk reaction that has cost more
lives than it saved. It is called the 1990 Gun-Free School Zones Act.
Fortunately, some States and school districts have had the wisdom to
override this provision. And guess what? We don't have to guess.
Does hardening our schools work? Does letting trained teachers and
professional staff carry, does it protect children? We know it does.
Because in every single school district, every school that has allowed
them to carry, there hasn't just been no mass shootings, there hasn't
been a single shooting. Why?

Because these insane individuals, they seek one thing. They seek some
twisted version of glory, which involves a body count. And they know
they will not achieve that if they walk into that school and the first
thing they see when they whip out their gun is a staff member who is
armed and trained, and they die unceremoniously. That is what they
deserve.
Put three of those on the news, and you could stop this.
So we should quit advertising our schools. Quit making that the
Federal default that they are sitting ducks.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. CICILLINE. Madam Speaker, almost 6 years ago I sat down right
here on this floor with the late, great John Lewis and so many
colleagues to protest the Republicans' unwillingness to take up gun
safety legislation after the Orlando shooting at the Pulse nightclub.
We promised to the American people that if we were given the
majority, we would deliver on gun safety legislation.
Last year, we passed bills for expanded criminal background checks
and to close the Charleston loophole to ensure criminals can't buy
firearms. And today, we will pass groundbreaking legislation to address
gun violence and the epidemic of gun violence in our country.
Gun violence is the crisis of this generation. There isn't a person
or a community in this country that isn't affected by gun violence. It
doesn't matter if you are rich or poor, in a city or suburb, young or
old. We are all a text message away from this happening to any one of
us.
In the last 159 days alone, we have had more than 240 mass shootings
in

[[Page H5375]]

this country; almost 19,000 dead from guns, and 27 school shootings.
Children killed in Uvalde, Parkland, Sandy Hook, and many more places
across the country.
Enough is enough. It is time to do something. Every minute we wait,
every minute we fail to act, we sentence more Americans and more
children to death by guns in this country.
The Protecting Our Kids Act is a smart, commonsense package that will
save lives. I urge my colleagues to take this first step with us. Help
reduce gun violence in this country. Protect your constituents from the
gun violence that is ravaging communities all across America.
And we can't stop here. This is a great bill. There is a lot more
work to be done to make certain that kids and all the members of our
communities are safe.
But have the courage to stand up. Actually, it doesn't take a lot of
courage. Do your job. Protect your constituents from these horrific
acts of gun violence.
Vote ``yes'' on this legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are directed to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I oppose H.R. 7910, the Democrats' latest gun control effort.
Supporters of this bill do not want to protect America's Second
Amendment rights because they don't care about Second Amendment rights.
Instead of addressing the societal issues that have been caused by
decades of progressive leftwing policies that have assaulted the
American family and American society, they want to ban guns.
They ignore the fact that many of the cities with the most
restrictive gun control laws also have the highest levels of crime.
They simply do not acknowledge that they don't believe in the Second
Amendment.
But let's talk about what Republicans have proposed because
Republicans have proposed many efforts. You just heard from Mr. Massie
one of his.
Well, here is what you don't hear. I listened very carefully to the
majority leader. He was enumerating through polls. But guess what? The
majority of Americans believe schools would be safer if teachers were
given options to carry a firearm. That comes from The Economist, the
latest Economist poll last week.
A similar poll: 26 percent are safer with an armed guard. Utah allows
teachers to carry a concealed weapon. They not only have not had a mass
shooting, they have never had a shooting since that law has been in
place.
Justice Scalia said in his Heller opinion that the very text of the
Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right,
the Second Amendment right, and declares only that it shall not be
infringed. This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is
it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.
The Second Amendment simply declares that it shall not be infringed,
but that is exactly what your bills do.
The Republicans have also said, let's harden the schools. Look, you
have got $122 billion that you gave in relief, COVID relief to K-12.
More than 90 percent of it remains unused.
And you say, well, we don't want to talk about doors. What do we do?
We hide behind doors because they work.
You can harden schools and make them work. You can arm guards and
make them work and make children safer.
We all condemn the acts of violence that have occurred throughout our
country, but the answer cannot be restricting America's right to
protect themselves. Every day, Americans use guns to protect themselves
and their families. This bill will make it harder for Americans to do
this. That is an inconvenient fact that my colleagues across the aisle
simply can't and choose not to address.
Last week, at markup, Democrats repeatedly claimed that good guys
with guns do not stop bad guys with guns. But Congressman Massie read a
long list of incidents of good guys using guns to stop bad guys. But
that list was ignored.

I will give you one. In Charleston, West Virginia, a woman with a 9-
millimeter handgun stopped a shooter shooting into a crowd with an AR-
15.
Here is one. Stephen Willeford stopped a shooting at a church in
Sutherland Springs.
I urge you to vote ``no.''
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Lieu), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. LIEU. Madam Speaker, when I served in the U.S. military, I was
trained on firearms.
Let me tell you what a bullet from an AR-15 does to you. The bullet
leaves the muzzle of the AR-15 at a speed three times higher than that
of a handgun. The energy is so strong that the bullet will disintegrate
3 inches of your bone.
A person shot with an AR-15 looks like a grenade exploded in their
body. The bullet also causes your human flesh to ripple violently, so
that even if the bullet misses your artery, the human flesh, the
ripples can burst arteries anyway.
In Uvalde, Texas, little kids were decapitated and had their faces
blown off.
A person under 21 cannot buy a Budweiser. We should not let a person
under 21 buy an AR-15 weapon of war.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1545

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Jayapal), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Madam Speaker, the Protecting Our Kids Act is about
saying no more to mass shootings, no more to children murdered in
schools, no more to Black people murdered at the grocery store, no more
to doctors being murdered in hospitals, no more to losing our children,
our fathers, mothers, siblings, and friends in this uniquely American
epidemic of gun violence.
The families who have lost loved ones know that these deaths are not
inevitable. We need to act now.
This bill has simple but effective solutions: Raise the minimum age
to 21 to buy a semiautomatic rifle, prohibit gun trafficking and high-
capacity magazines, require safe storage, and crack down on ghost guns
and bump stocks.
Had these protections been enacted in 1999, they would have stopped
at least 35 recent mass shootings and saved over 400 lives.
Today, we can choose to mean it when we say ``never again.'' Vote
``yes.'' Save lives. Save children. Save our communities.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Demings), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mrs. DEMINGS. Madam Speaker, as a police chief, I was expected to get
things done, to do everything within my power to keep people safe.
Offering thoughts and prayers is fine. My grandchildren do that. But
if that was all I did as a police chief after mass shootings, no one
would have let me get away with that. Well, there is an expectation for
Congress, too, to do more.
Madam Speaker, what is painfully wrong with this tragic moment in our
history are the people who want the power of the position but not
really the responsibility.
Congress failed that little girl who could only be identified by her
green tennis shoes. Congress failed the loved ones in Buffalo, at the
Pulse nightclub, and in Newtown.
After the Parkland shooting in Florida, Republican legislators helped
pass red flag laws and other meaningful legislation to keep guns out of
the hands of dangerous people.
Will we do something? Haven't we had enough, or is it just too scary
to do the right thing?
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Correa), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. CORREA. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Protecting
Our Kids Act.
Over the last 20 years, we have lost thousands of lives--thousands of
lives--

[[Page H5376]]

to mass shootings. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death of
children in America. Let me repeat: Gun violence is now the top cause
of death of children in America.
This legislation is not perfect, but if we can save one, two, three
lives by passing this legislation, then it is worth our effort.
It is our obligation to pass this legislation. Our thoughts and
prayers are not enough. We have to act and act now, and I call on my
colleagues to join us in voting in favor of protecting our kids.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Garcia), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. GARCIA of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of
H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids Act, and H.R. 2377, the Federal
Extreme Risk Protection Order Act.
In Texas, our souls are crushed, and our hearts are still broken. We
stand in solidarity with our friends and neighbors in Uvalde and
communities across the Nation, mourning the lives of those who have
lost their lives to gun violence.
Empathy, love, and morality are calling upon us to pass these bills
that are commonsense legislation to reduce gun violence and save
children's lives.
Let's not be deceived by the absurd proposition to arm our teachers
in schools. Let's let schools be schools. A teacher should be armed
with books, not guns. Children need to focus on learning the ABCs, not
how to dodge bullets.
I urge my colleagues across the aisle to consult their conscience,
not the NRA, and vote ``yes'' on these measures.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, how much time remains on each side.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 40\1/2\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 38\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I rise today not to offer my words but the
words of a brave Coloradan, Tom Mauser. Tom's son, Daniel, was murdered
at Columbine High School 23 years ago in 1999. He was 15 years old, the
same age as me.
Tom shared with me that in the weeks before his death, Daniel asked
him, ``Dad, did you know there are loopholes in the Brady Bill?''
At 15 years old, Daniel was able to see the gaping holes in our
Nation's gun laws. Tragically, so were the two 18-year-old killers,
teenagers that, in Tom's words, ``saw loopholes big enough to drive a
truck through.''
As Tom said to me today, what has Congress really done to protect our
precious children from gun violence in those 23 years? Shamefully,
nothing.
It is time for Congress to do its job. It is time to act and to
demonstrate that you give a damn about our children. Tom is right. I
beg my colleagues, support this commonsense bill.

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Fitzgerald).
Mr. FITZGERALD. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R.
7910.
I thought I would take this opportunity to do my own fact check on
some of the inaccurate claims my colleagues on the other side of the
aisle presented at last week's markup.
My Democrat colleagues will often claim there are loopholes in the
current background check system, sometimes specifically citing the
Charleston loophole. This is simply not true. Federal firearms
licensees cannot transfer a firearm without performing a background
check on the purchaser.
The FBI is notified immediately if a prohibited person attempts to
purchase a weapon, and the FBI has 3 days to follow up. The 3 days for
follow-up prevent the FBI from sitting on their hands and not following
through with background checks as a way to deny a person a firearm by
bureaucracy and, therefore, take away their Second Amendment rights.
Another claim frequently made by my colleagues is that banning so-
called assault weapons, a term they rarely define, would reduce mass
shootings. Despite automatic weapons already being illegal to the
general public, the left uses the term ``assault weapons'' to describe
scary-looking guns, regardless of the actual characteristics of the
firearm. Even weapons mischaracterized as assault weapons are used in
less than 1 percent of all homicides.
Many of my colleagues claim mandating so-called safe storage of
firearms is a commonsense approach to reducing gun violence. Not only
does a requirement to keep a firearm within the home unloaded or locked
up not comply with Supreme Court precedent, but it also puts them at a
disadvantage.
Listen, if you want to accomplish something today, pass what many
States have done, and that is to make resources available to secure
schools. Madam Speaker, $100 million, and over 1,300 Wisconsin schools
have removed themselves from the list of the most vulnerable with State
dollars. Let's do that today and really accomplish something.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Dean), the vice chair of the
Judiciary Committee.
Ms. DEAN. Madam Speaker, it is said that a civilized society that can
no longer feel outrage can no longer be civilized.
Ten people slaughtered in their grocery store. Nineteen children and
two teachers massacred in their school, only to have parents who had
dropped their children off in the morning wait in some horror line to
offer DNA samples. At least 15 people murdered in mass shootings just
this weekend, including in my home city, Philadelphia.
Outrage. We must feel the outrage. Do these tragedies from guns in
the hands of bad actors sound like the well-regulated militia
explicitly mentioned in the Second Amendment? Of course not. It is
outrageous.
We want to save our children. We want to save our babies. We want to
save our families, the elderly who live in constant fear.
Yet, did you hear, Madam Speaker, the argument on the other side of
the aisle? A God-given right for an 18-year-old to slaughter children
in a school? Enough is enough.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Georgia (Mrs. McBath), a member of the Judiciary Committee who knows
the tragedy of gun violence personally.
Mrs. McBATH. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Protecting
Our Kids Act, a chance for us to keep our families healthy and whole
and safe.
Day after day, hour after hour, the American people have felt the
pain and the horror and the despair of yet another mass shooting,
another family torn apart, another community broken.
I know that feeling. You know my story. My son, Jordan, was just 17
years old when he was shot by a man who simply didn't like the loud
music that he was playing in his car.
How long do we let American families in this country keep suffering
this pain?
That is why we must pass this commonsense legislation, why we must
take this step toward ensuring that we are creating true progress for
the next generation.
Americans deserve better, and shame on us if we do not take action.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Escobar), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Ms. ESCOBAR. Madam Speaker, on August 3, 2019, in El Paso, a white
supremacist massacred 23 innocent people at Walmart. Our red flag bill
might have saved them.
On August 31, 2019, eight people were killed in Midland-Odessa by a
man who failed his background check and purchased a gun through a
private sale. Our bill on private firearm sales might have saved them.
On May 18, 2018, at Santa Fe High School, a 17-year-old used his
father's gun to kill 10 people. Our safe storage bill might have saved
them.

[[Page H5377]]

In Uvalde, parents are burying their babies today after an 18-year-
old purchased an AR-15-style rifle and slaughtered 21 individuals. Our
bill raising the age to 21 might have saved them.
These are just the recent Texas mass shootings.
It is not the teachers, the schools, or the doors. It is the guns.
We can't save every life, but my God, shouldn't we try?
We hear Americans, and today in the House, we are taking the action
you are demanding. Take note of who is with you and who is not. I am
proud to remain El Paso Strong.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. Jones), a member of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. JONES. Madam Speaker, I rise because we find ourselves on a path
that we have traveled before, a path that the American people were
promised they would never have to meet again after Columbine, after
Sandy Hook, after Parkland, and now after Uvalde.
For two decades--two decades--Republicans bought by the NRA have
blocked every attempt to pass legislation that would stop children from
being massacred in their classrooms. Why? Because nothing is easier
than buying an AR-15 in this country except buying a Republican Member
of Congress.
Today, Democrats in the House will pass the Protecting Our Kids Act,
and we need the Senate to abolish the filibuster to do the same.

{time} 1600

Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly).
Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Madam Speaker, for years I have heard that
tired argument that gun violence prevention legislation won't work.
``Just look at Chicago,'' they say, ``where residents have some of the
strictest gun laws but the highest rates of gun violence.''
The reason for that is simple--gun trafficking. More than 60 percent
of guns used in crimes in Chicago come from out of State, and we are
not the only city where this happens.
According to the ATF, from just 2016 to 2020, one-third of the more
than 1.3 million crime guns recovered and traced by law enforcement
were brought in across State lines. These guns are purchased in States
with lax laws, trafficked across State lines, and then sold to people
in our State who we know should not have a gun.
In Illinois, we are doing everything we can to protect our residents.
Our neighbors are failing us. That is why I introduced the Prevent Gun
Trafficking Act, and why I am so glad this solution is included in the
Protecting Our Kids Act. This is a simple, commonsense solution. Making
straw purchasing a Federal crime will help stop the flow of guns into
our communities from out of State. Most importantly, it will save
lives.
Stopping gun trafficking and straw purchasing is just one step we can
take to eliminate gun violence. The Protecting Our Kids Act is a smart,
broad approach to a complex issue. Passing this bill is the next step
forward in saving children, and we cannot wait.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the distinguished chairwoman of the
Appropriations Committee.
Ms. DeLAURO. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the Protecting Our
Kids Act, a comprehensive package to address gun violence in the United
States. I am pleased that it includes my legislation, Ethan's Law,
which will keep kids across the country safe by ensuring that firearms
are safely stored and secured.
I introduced Ethan's Law in the House over 3 years ago in memory of
Ethan Song, a Guilford, Connecticut, teenager, 15 years old, who
accidentally shot himself with an unsecured gun in 2018. The firearm
was improperly stored in a Tupperware box with the gun lock keys and
the ammunition nearby.
Before I had the honor of introducing Ethan's Law in Congress, it
passed the Connecticut General Assembly and the State senate with broad
bipartisan support, signed into law in 2019. Today, we take a critical
step to make Ethan's Law the national standard in safe storage.
Ethan's Law will set a Federal standard for safe gun storage and
incentivize States to create and implement safe gun storage laws. This
legislation is a child safety bill, first and foremost, because losing
just one child to accidental gun violence is too many.
What happened to Ethan was tragic. No parent should have to lose
their child because of an unsecured gun. It is time for Congress to
act.
In the words of Ethan Song's parents, Mike and Kristin Song, whose
relentless advocacy led us to this moment: ``Not a single person on
Earth can change the past, but every one of us can change the future.''
Let's change the future while saving countless lives by passing the
Protecting Our Kids Act.
When Kristin Song found out that Ethan's Law was included in the
Protecting Our Kids Act, she said that the first person she wanted to
tell was Ethan, her beautiful boy, that she has fearlessly fought for
since the day she was forced to watch him be lowered into the ground.
Upon hearing the news, she immediately drove to the cemetery, and she
ran across it yelling, ``Ethan, we did it. Your lifesaving legislation
will be heard, it will get a vote.''
Madam Speaker, I am voting in favor of this legislation. I urge my
colleagues to do the same.
We love you, Ethan.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. McClintock).
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Madam Speaker, this is called the Protecting Our Kids
Act, but sadly it does no such thing. The one thing that we could do
immediately to protect our kids is the one thing that the Democrats
refuse even to consider.
We think nothing of it when we see an armed guard at a bank. Well,
they are there for one purpose--to stop anyone who is trying to steal
our money. And, yet, when we suggest that we should use the same force
and resolve to stop someone from killing our children, the left goes
berserk. I simply do not understand such a screwed-up value system as
that.
President Biden's press secretary says that hardening our schools is
not something he supports. Think about that. The most heavily guarded
person in the world in the most hardened fortress in the country is
telling us that we cannot protect our children and our schools as
seriously as we protect our money in our banks. Of course, hardening
the schools works.
Listen to the sick mind that produced the massacre in Buffalo. He
wrote, ``Attacking in a weapon-restricted area may decrease the chance
of civilian backlash. Schools, courts, or areas where CCW are outlawed
or prohibited may be good areas of attack. Areas where CCW permits are
low may also fit in this category. Areas with strict gun laws are also
great places of attack.'' That is the Buffalo shooter. Criminals
understand that even if the Democrats in this House do not.
In committee, I offered an amendment to require schools receiving
Federal security funds to have at least one armed guard on every campus
and to allow school officials who have met the requirements of their
State to carry a concealed weapon to have it on campus to protect their
students if they want to. This is something that can be implemented
immediately and that could well have stopped the massacre at Uvalde.

It doesn't depend on criminals obeying the law, as this bill does. It
doesn't depend on someday, maybe, reducing possibly the 400 million
firearms in this country. It doesn't make self-defense harder for
honest and decent people. In fact, it makes self-defense easier for
honest and decent people. It would make future attacks on our schools
much less likely to succeed and infinitely more dangerous to those
contemplating such an act. Yet, the Democrats refuse to even consider
it.
We know how to reduce gun violence. Harden our schools and protect
our

[[Page H5378]]

children with the same seriousness as we protect our money. Prosecute
gun criminals. Send them to prison for the rest of their lives. Execute
murderers. Confine the dangerously mentally ill so that we can treat
them. Stop letting terrorists into the country across our southern
border.
Yet, woke district attorneys often refuse to prosecute gun criminals
or they quickly drop gun charges to reduce their sentences. The
Democrats have all but abolished the death penalty. They have released
dangerous criminals from our prisons, released dangerous criminal,
illegal aliens into our communities, flooded our streets with the
dangerously mentally ill, and turned a blind eye as terrorists come
across the border that they have left wide open. And then they wonder
why we are plagued with violent criminals.
Maybe it is time to get serious about removing criminals from our
streets and fortifying our schools. That is something we could do today
that will have an immediate effect today.
Protecting Our Kids Act. It does no such thing. It is a tale told by
an idiot full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Brown).
Mr. BROWN of Maryland. Madam Speaker, again and again we hear a
common refrain when a mass shooting happens, a young man, typically
under the age of 21, legally purchases a semiautomatic rifle and
murders innocent people. We saw this in Uvalde; we saw this in Buffalo;
we saw this in Indianapolis in 2021; and we saw this in Parkland in
2019. In fact, six of the nine deadliest mass shootings since 2018 were
by young men who should never have been allowed to purchase these
weapons in the first place.
Right now, you must be 21 in this country to buy a handgun but only
need to be 18 years old to buy a semiautomatic rifle capable of
committing unspeakable tragedies. I served in the military. I trained
with these weapons. I know what they can do.
These weapons of war have no place in our neighborhoods, let alone in
the hands of an untrained 18-year-old boy. The answer is simple--raise
the age needed to purchase these weapons to 21, in line with the age to
purchase handguns. We have bipartisan support for this: Democrats,
Republicans, gun safety advocates, law-abiding citizens and responsible
gun owners, teachers, and veterans, because it is common sense.
Shooting after shooting, we ask ourselves what more could we have
done. We debate whether one action could have saved the lives of those
children, those mothers, fathers, grandmothers, and neighbors. I am
done with that. It is time for action.
Raising the age to buy these weapons won't solve our Nation's gun
violence epidemic overnight, but if we can make it just a little harder
for someone to get their hands on these deadly weapons, if we can save
just one life or one community from this carnage and grief, it will be
worth it.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Raise the age to buy these deadly weapons. Enough is enough.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, the despicable violence that took place
in Uvalde and other places was horrific, and we mourn the loss of
innocent life. The thought of losing my fourth-grade grandson in this
way shakes me to the core.
There are steps we can take to prevent tragedies from occurring
without endangering and infringing upon the rights of law-abiding
citizens. I will not support legislation taking away the Second
Amendment rights of my constituents. We must focus on root causes of
violent crimes and the many cultural issues plaguing our society.
As a Nation, we face a severe mental health crisis, fatherless homes,
breakdown of families, glorification of violence that permeates our
culture at every level, even to the devaluation of 63 million innocent
babies' lives taken in the last 50 years. It must be all-hands-on-
deck--in our homes, our schools, and our churches--to address the
foundational issues that keep our kids and communities safe.
Madam Speaker, let's not just do something. Harden our schools.
Tackle them with real solutions. Oppose this legislation and do the
right thing to save innocent lives.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to plead with my colleagues
to support H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids Act.
We gather just days after an 18-year-old mowed down 19 schoolchildren
and two of their teachers with an AR-15. Just days earlier, a racist
conspiracy theorist used that same type of weapon of war to murder 10
Americans, turning a grocery store into a bloody battlefield. Nineteen
families in Uvalde and 10 families in Buffalo are permanently
shattered, never to be the same again. On average, more than 110
Americans suffer the same fate, death by gun, every single day.
Madam Speaker, no one can tell me that I don't know what I am talking
about when it comes to damage that guns can do. Forty-two years ago, I
was a sixteen-year-old police cadet when a gun misfired, severing my
spinal cord, and changing my life forever.
Of course, we will never be able to stop every single gun injury or
death, but we have the power to act, to pass commonsense gun safety
laws that reduce the preventable heartbreak experienced by far too many
families in this country. We must get illegal guns off our streets. We
must pass red flag laws to keep guns out of the wrong hands. We must
raise the minimum age to buy a semiautomatic assault weapon to 21, and
we can.

These are commonsense policies, backed by broad, bipartisan
majorities of Americans. But instead, some of my colleagues have the
audacity to suggest that we turn our schools into armed fortresses.
What is next? Armed churches? Armed movie theaters? Is this the
country you want to leave to your children and grandchildren? I
certainly don't.
Madam Speaker, guns are now the leading cause of death for children
in this country. No other developed country on Earth would ever
tolerate this level of gun violence, and we shouldn't, either.
Those children in Uvalde deserved to grow up.
The victims in Buffalo deserved to return home safe.
And the 40,000 Americans who die from guns every year deserved to
live.
The American people are counting on us to deliver change. I pray that
we won't let them down.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Owens).

{time} 1615

Mr. OWENS. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 7910. The
violence that occurred in Uvalde, Texas, was horrific. As we consider
the pain these families are experiencing, we can do more now. Let us
focus today like a laser beam on protecting our precious children.
My friends on the other side of the aisle want us to vote on a hasty,
partisan, and overreaching package of bills they developed in the
middle of the night without any Republican input.
The legislation we are considering today is clearly designed to strip
law-abiding Americans of their constitutional rights. In a town hall
meeting last summer, President Biden himself said he would like to ban
the sale of handguns and rifles, full stop. It is no wonder law-abiding
Americans see this legislation as central Federal overreach.
History has taught us some great lessons. One is that, ``Liberty,
once lost, is lost forever.''
I grew up in the Deep South where, for a time, Black Americans were
unable to defend themselves. After the Civil War, Democrat Black Codes
and Jim Crow laws prohibited people of color from owning firearms.
Most people have heard the phrase, ``40 acres and a mule,'' the order
issued in 1865 that allowed 40,000 former slaves to live on hundreds of
thousands of acres.
After the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, the Democrat President,
Andrew Johnson, a Confederate sympathizer, confiscated this land,
displacing thousands of Black Americans

[[Page H5379]]

and families. This is an example of why the right to bear arms is
necessary to safeguard and protect our life, liberty, and property.
The Democrats' proposals are unhelpful in protecting our kids and go
against all common sense. They ignore real solutions that will keep our
children safe and help prevent future acts of senseless violence.
Most importantly, they are not proposing anything that protects our
children now. We don't need to spend another 2 years fighting over
solutions. We have solutions available immediately. The Securing Our
Students Act, my legislation, would empower local school districts to
immediately receive unspent funds from the American Rescue Plan and
implement security measures in their schools now.
Of the $122 billion appropriated to the America's K-12 schools in
last year's $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, roughly 93 percent
remains unspent. I invite my colleagues to join me in demanding these
hundreds of billions of dollars be immediately used to help local
schools determine and implement the safety measures that best fit their
communities. We can harden our schools and protect our children at
school now.
We can never bring back those precious children we lost, but we can,
and we must, work together to prevent future tragedies.
This is a solution that will harness the full weight of American
innovation and technology and keep our schools safe now to ensure that
no child, educator, or family has to say goodbye to a loved one because
of any kind of violence.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Michigan, (Mr. Levin).
Mr. LEVIN of Michigan. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairman Nadler for
pulling this vital package together.
I speak as a father of four who is heartbroken and still processing
Uvalde, Buffalo, and the unending string of mass shootings; a longtime
gun reform advocate and a member of the Gun Violence Prevention Task
Force who demands real, commonsense gun reform to save lives now.
That is why I support the Protecting Our Kids Act in this moment of
profound grief and collective loss. When it comes to the epidemic of
gun deaths, there is no panacea. We must pass meaningful reforms,
evaluate our work, and then keep on passing more legislation.
Though I am extremely supportive of this long-overdue package, I am
concerned about criminal penalties for safe storage violations. Over-
criminalization too often harms Black and Brown communities.
As a warrior for racial justice, I urge all of us to investigate how
disparate communities would be impacted before this bill heads to the
President's desk.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
support this bill.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Roy).
Mr. ROY. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for yielding.
Why do we have guns?
Why do we have the Second Amendment?
Is it to hunt? Sure.
Self defense? That is even more important.
The fact is, if you read the founders--Federalist No. 46, James
Madison contrasts us with the tyrannical governments of Europe who are,
``afraid to trust the people with arms.''
Joseph Story in his Commentaries on the Constitution in 1833: ``The
right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered
as the palladium of the liberties of a republic. Since it offers a
strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of
rulers; and will generally, even if these were successful in the first
instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.''
We have a Second Amendment because we understand in this country that
there are some things, inalienable rights, that you cannot justly take
away from a free and equal human being. Tyrants disarm the people they
intend to oppress. Those are the facts.
Jewish people in Germany were prohibited from owning firearms; 13
million Jews were exterminated by the Nazis.
The Soviets instituted gun control and millions were killed; 20
million dissidents were rounded up and exterminated.
Mao disarmed the Chinese people; 20 million dissidents were
exterminated.
In Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge was able to take advantage of the fact
that limited gun ownership to just hunters and killed 1.5 million to 3
million Cambodians.
Turkey disarmed Armenians, and 1.5 million Armenians were killed in
the Armenian Genocide.
The South disarmed slaves and actively fought against their arming.
And then in the 20th century, armed Black Army veterans, for example,
in Louisiana, were able to defend against the KKK.
Even fact-checking organization Snopes said: ``We find it reasonable
to conclude that gun confiscations, facilitated by laws requiring the
registration and/or licensing of firearms, played a crucial role in
carrying out of 20th-century genocides.''
This is not fiction. This is in our lifetime. This is in our
grandparents' lifetime. This is in our recent history. This is why the
Second Amendment matters. It is not trivial. It is not something you
just brush aside. This is a foundation of liberty. It is who we are.
But in order to sell a lie to the American people that the government
will protect them from all manners of evil, while defunding the police,
leaving our borders wide open--I am glad my colleagues can suddenly
find Uvalde on a map--while allowing dangerous cartels operating
hundreds of miles into Texas, allowing fentanyl to pour into our
communities and kill tens of thousands of children--the very children
my colleagues say they wish to protect.
In order to do this, Democrats in this body are willing to take away
citizens' God-given right--yes, the God-given right that was mocked
earlier--to protect himself or herself, or her family or his family,
from harm--the very harm they foster by appeasing lawlessness, and
importantly, from the very tyranny being applied to them to deny that
right.
That is what is at stake, this bill; and it gets brushed aside, raise
the age limit. Well, there are constitutional questions to that, in the
4th Circuit, 9th Circuit, and other circuits.
The second title in straw purchases, the very straw purchases the
Democrat DAs don't even want to really prosecute, would prohibit a law-
abiding citizen from giving a gun to a friend as a gift.
Safe storage would make it unlawful for me to have the 22- and the
20-gauge, propped up by my door right now in Texas, to kill coyotes and
snakes. It would make it unlawful.
This will not do any good. It will harm Americans, and it undermines
our foundational liberties that are crucial for a free state.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Manning).
Ms. MANNING. Madam Speaker, so far this year, our country has
experienced more than 250 mass shootings. And it is only June. Gun
violence is now the number one cause of death of children in this
country. We cannot let this continue.
The Protecting Our Kids Act is an important step toward curbing gun
violence by limiting high-capacity magazines, raising the minimum age
to buy assault weapons to 21, and encouraging safe storage practices.
If these measures had been in place, the 18-year-old gunman in
Uvalde, Texas, would not have been able to buy the two assault weapons
he used to murder 19 children and two teachers.
The Dayton, Ohio, shooter would not have been able to buy the high-
capacity magazine that allowed him to shoot 26 people in 30 seconds.
Madam Speaker, we can't solve this complex problem at once, but
neither can we desist from taking commonsense measures to help make
this country safer for our children. Let's honor our oath. Let's do our
job to keep the American people safe. Vote ``yes'' on this bill. It is
the least we can do for our constituents.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).

[[Page H5380]]

Ms. SPEIER. Madam Speaker, I believe I am the only Member of this
House that is a victim of gun violence. My body is riddled with
bullets. I have a divot in my leg that is the size of a football. I
have skin grafts on all parts of my body. I live with that every single
day.
A victim of gun violence is traumatized over and over again. I
implore my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if we had a 737
that crashed every month for 12 months in this country, we would do
something about it. And that is what is happening to children in this
country.
Madam Speaker, 1,500 kids die of gun violence every single year. We
have to do something about it. All we are saying is don't let them
purchase an assault weapon until they are 21. We already say you can't
purchase a handgun until you are 21. Dr. Guerrero this morning talked
about decapitated heads.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues--I am leaving this institution--
to please do something.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I will share a conversation that I had with Anna Kate,
who is a constituent of mine in my district. She called my office
absolutely distraught; this was late in the day of the shooting. She
said that parents have really reached their breaking point right now
and that she is afraid, and she is afraid for her 7-year-old son.
She said, I want to tell my child, you will be safe in school.
What a simple sentence that most parents--any parent--would want to
say. ``You will be safe in school.''
But I can't, she said.
Children continue to die, and this is on all of us, all of our
conscience. There is no issue more important than this.
We can do something starting today, something real. We can finally
pass this legislation. Let's do it.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo).
Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, where is the soul of America in this Chamber? I have
listened to every speaker since the debate began.
I think that Shakespeare would say: Thou dost protest too much.
We have simple, profound facts. Our children are being blown away.
Last week, the first funeral, that casket could not be opened.
I think every single Member here is a parent. Walk behind that
casket. Think of yourselves and your own children. They deserve
solutions to this. There has to be more from you than damning the
Democratic Party.
Come on. We are Members of Congress.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 10 seconds to the
gentlewoman.
Ms. ESHOO. Many of us say a prayer, the Lord's prayer. And at the end
we say: And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. Amen.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Speaker, not one word from our colleagues when it
comes to the crime waves in cities like Chicago, Los Angeles,
Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New York, San Francisco, and Philadelphia.
To do so would be to criticize their own soft-on-crime policies. It
has been going on for a decade now. They hope Americans ignore the
inconvenient truth. Criminals don't get background checks, and they
don't fear laws because rogue prosecutors financed by progressive dark
money groups don't enforce our laws.

{time} 1630

These criminal strongholds and Washington, D.C., have one thing in
common: They are run by Democrats who refuse to enforce our laws.
This administration, responsible for a 40-year inflation high,
erasing our border, and a shrinking economy, will say anything to
distract from their own failures. Jimmy Carter says thank you for
making the seventies look good.
Week after week, we hear about violent criminals revictimizing
communities without being held accountable. The people furthering these
policies and making our communities less safe are the same people who
are fervently arguing to disarm Americans and defund the police. They
are the same people weaponizing the FBI against their political
opponents and the same people who want to repeal the Second Amendment.
I wish they would just tell the American people the truth instead of
deploying Trojan horses.
Whether it is rifle bans, 9-mm bans, Federal red flag laws, one thing
is certain: They will not change the outcomes for the people in those
cities.
As some Members of this body have said in the last few weeks: This is
just the beginning. We will not stop.
They will continue to erode our rights because they believe in a
nanny-state government, not a government of the people.
What Americans need is the enforcement of our laws holding criminals
accountable and protecting our constitutional rights.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a May 27, 2022,
piece from CNN titled ``States with weaker gun laws have higher rates
of firearm related homicides and suicides, study finds.''

[From CNN, May 27, 2022]

States With Weaker Gun Laws Have Higher Rates of Firearm Related
Homicides and Suicides, Study Finds

(By Emma Tucker and Priya Krishnakumar)

A new study published Thursday by a leading non-profit
organization that focuses on gun violence prevention found
that there is a direct correlation in states with weaker gun
laws and higher rates of gun deaths, including homicides,
suicides and accidental killings.
The study by Everytown for Gun Safety determined that
California had the strongest gun laws in the country. Hawaii
topped the list with the lowest rate of gun deaths in the
country while Mississippi led the country with both the
weakest gun laws and highest rate of gun deaths.
``What this project does, is show what we've been saying
for years: Gun laws save lives,'' said Nick Suplina, senior
vice president of law and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety
Support Fund. ``We think this is going to be a really
important tool for lawmakers, reporters and advocates that
have been looking for the kind of visual tool that can make
that case clearly.''
To compile its list, the group used data from the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, looked at each state's
rate of gun deaths in 2020 and compared those rates with 50
policies that they say are scientifically proven to be
effective in preventing gun violence, Suplina said.
The research team then weighed the list of gun safety
policies based on their efficacy, ranked each state on its
implementation of those policies and compared that score with
the rates of gun deaths in each state, he said.
The CDC's data includes homicides, accidental killings and
suicides committed by guns. According to the CDC, over 45,000
people in the United States were killed with a firearm in
2020--more than half died by suicide.
The analysis, first reported by CNN, put California at the
top of the list for gun law strength--a composite score of
84.5 out of 100, with one of the lowest rates of gun deaths
per 100,000 residents, at 8.5 out of 30 and below the
national average of 13.6. Hawaii has the lowest rate of gun
deaths in the country with the second strongest gun law
score. It also has the lowest rate of gun ownership, with
firearms in 9 percent of households, the data shows.
As state legislatures begin to convene for their 2022
legislative sessions, lawmakers will consider a breadth of
bills that either loosen or expand gun protections across
various states.
``I have seen firsthand in California that the work we have
done to strengthen gun laws has been both life-saving and
effective,'' said Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA). chair of the
House Gun Violence Prevention Task Force. ``Gun laws work,
and we need them across the board to ensure that felons,
domestic abusers, and those with mental health issues can't
simply go to the next state over to circumvent the very laws
meant to keep guns out of their hands.''
CNN has reached out to the National Rifle Association (NRA)
to comment on the research, but it declined to do so before
seeing the data.
Mississippi has the weakest gun laws with a score of 3 out
of 100 and has the highest rate of gun deaths per 100,000
residents--28.6 out of 30, the research shows.
Massachusetts has adopted 37 of the 50 policies and has the
second-lowest rate of

[[Page H5381]]

gun deaths, while Missouri has only eight of the gun safety
policies and the fourth highest rate of gun deaths in the US.
Louisiana and Wyoming are among the top five states with the
highest gun deaths and the weakest gun safety laws.
``Lawmakers in the states at the bottom can't pretend to be
ignorant about the importance of gun laws after looking at
this report,'' said Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand
Action, which has been fighting for gun safety measures since
the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Connecticut
that killed 20 children and six educators.
Mother and activist DeAndra Dycus said the gun violence
problem in Indianapolis is ``tearing our community apart.''
Nearly eight years ago, her 13-year-old son, DeAndre
``Dre'' Knox, was shot in the back left side of his head at a
birthday party in Indianapolis when shots were fired during a
confrontation between two boys. DeAndre, now 21, survived
after being on life support for several days, Dycus said, and
he currently lives in a facility with non-verbal quadriplegic
paralysis.
``As a mother, when I look at him, I see everything that
was taken away,'' Dycus said. ``My son was a dreamer. He was
a scholar. He was on this road to being something great.''
``But on the flip side, I see this little boy who has made
such an impact, not just on our city but our country, as it
pertains to what it looks like to survive,'' she said. ``Dre
has embodied that.''
Everytown designated a list of five foundational laws that
have proven to be the most effective in lowering gun violence
rates. These include requirements for a background check and/
or permits to purchase handguns; a permit to carry concealed
guns in public; the secure storage of firearms; the rejection
of `Stand Your Ground' laws; and the enactment of `extreme
risk' laws that temporarily remove a person's access to
firearms when there is evidence that they pose a serious risk
to themselves or others, according to Everytown.
Last year, several conservative states--such as Texas,
Iowa, Tennessee, Montana, Utah and Wyoming--passed
legislation allowing some form of permitless carry as
President Joe Biden pushed forward executive actions to
address gun violence following several high-profile mass
shootings.
In Texas, the controversial ``constitutional carry''
legislation went into effect in September that allows most
Texans who legally own a firearm to carry it openly in public
without obtaining a permit or training.
Supporters of the bill have argued that by removing the
licensing requirement they are removing an ``artificial
barrier'' to residents' right to bear arms under the
Constitution and ensuring more Texans have access to ``the
protection of themselves or their families'' in public. But
law enforcement officials and experts have expressed concerns
that the open carrying of firearms makes it more difficult
for police to quell violence.
``As we've seen gun extremism continue to rise in this
country, we've also seen people who open carry start out at
marches and rallies and then show up in elected officials'
homes, in polling places, statehouses and then on January 6th
at the US Capitol,'' Watts said.
According to Watts, the shooting in a Michigan high school
in December that killed four students is a ``textbook
example'' of why laws that require the secure storage of
firearms are essential to gun safety.
The alleged gunman in that shooting, 15-year-old Ethan
Crumbley, is accused of fatally shooting four classmates and
wounding several others on November 30. His parents were
charged with four counts of involuntary manslaughter in the
same incident. All three have pleaded not guilty.
Prosecutors allege that James Crumbley, the father of the
suspected shooter, bought the gun used in the shooting four
days earlier. The incident prompted outrage over Ethan's
alleged accessibility to the gun, arguing that the shooting
could have been prevented.
Only 23 states currently have some semblance of a secure
storage requirement, Watts said.
Last year, Everytown successfully worked to pass secure
storage laws in Maine, Colorado, and Oregon, among others,
according to Watts.
During this year's legislative session, Watts said the
organization will work with lawmakers in hopes of passing
such laws in at least 14 states. States such as California,
Michigan and New Jersey are working on first-of-its kind
legislation that requires parents to be notified about secure
storage.
Everytown's research shows that 21 of the country's states
have rejected Stand Your Ground laws, which allow individuals
to use deadly force in public as self-defense even if they
can safely walk away from the situation.
Despite strong gun laws, some states still feel the effects
of being close to a state with more lax regulations. For
example, Illinois has the sixth-strongest gun safety laws in
the country, but its neighboring state of Indiana has much
weaker gun laws, Suplina says.
According to Suplina, this could explain why such a high
number of guns purchased in Indiana have ended up in Chicago.
Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice charged six
Indianapolis residents related to the straw purchasing of
firearms. Prosecutors said more than 20 of the guns were
recovered in Chicago after being used in violent crimes,
including murder.
Gun violence overall has risen during the pandemic. More
than two-thirds of the country's 40 most populous cities saw
more homicides last year than in 2020, and most of them were
a result of gun violence, according to a CNN analysis of
police department data. For many cities, the elevated rates
of homicide continued into 2021.
While experts say the reasons for the rise in homicides are
varied, murders are increasingly carried out with guns. The
increase in gun violence was underscored in the FBI's 2020
Uniform Crime Report, which stated that about 77 percent of
reported murders in 2020 were committed with a gun, up from
74 percent in 2019. The agency reported that the number of
homicides increased by nearly 30 percent from 2019, the
largest single-year jump the agency has recorded. There is no
federal database of gun sales, but other independent surveys
have found that gun sales have soared during the Covid-19
pandemic.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the package of
gun violence prevention bills we are considering today.
Gun violence is at unseen epidemic levels in this country. We need to
combat the source of the epidemic: easy access to guns.
I will address, however, the impact of the lack of statehood for the
residents of the District of Columbia on their ability to pass and
maintain their own commonsense gun violence prevention laws.
If Republicans take the majority in the next Congress, they could
eliminate D.C.'s gun violence prevention laws, which they have
repeatedly tried to do, including its ban on assault weapons and high-
capacity magazines and its universal background checks.
At least seven current Republican Members of Congress have introduced
such bills. I have defeated each effort in Congress to overturn D.C.
gun violence prevention laws, and I vow to do so again, but the
ultimate remedy for congressional interference in local D.C. matters,
of course, is D.C. statehood.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Castro).
Mr. CASTRO of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise to vote to do something.
It is too easy for dangerous people to get dangerous weapons in this
country, and we are either going to do something about it or we are
not.
I want you to imagine for a second that a shooter with an AR-15 goes
into your child's or grandchild's school tomorrow or next fall and
leaves a hole the size of a basketball in their chest or leaves their
head decapitated off their body. Ask yourself what you would ask of the
people who represent you. Would their thoughts and prayers be good
enough for you if that happened to your child? Would they being worried
about their primary election be okay with you?
The people of Uvalde, when I spoke to them, asked me how it is that
somebody who is 18 can't buy beer or cigarettes, but they can go into a
gun store and buy two AR-15s and go kill 20 people.
The teachers who died, the cops who died, the children who died
cannot vote to change the law. Only we can do that. This is our legacy.
Vote ``yes.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks
to the Chair.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I rise to confront the Nation's
leading child killer: gun violence.
Passing the Protecting Our Kids Act does that by raising the legal
age to buy certain semiautomatic rifles and closing the ghost gun
loophole. It strengthens safe storage rules at home and clamps down on
bump stocks and high-capacity magazines.
Once more, House Democrats will do something meaningful to address
this carnage while House Republicans do nothing. Yes, a few Senate
Republicans may do the absolute minimum, but when an 11-year-old tells
Congress that she smeared her murdered friend's blood on her own body
to play dead and stay alive in Uvalde, I will take baby steps over no
steps.

[[Page H5382]]

From Uvalde and Buffalo to Parkland, Orlando, and Las Vegas, America
is bleeding. While this legislation will not end gun violence, it is a
tourniquet.
The deaths, suicides, and astronomical health costs are too high, and
we cannot continue to forsake our national freedoms to learn, work, and
worship without fear.
Let's pass this legislation and reclaim America's values and confront
this Nation's leading killer of children: gun violence.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Cline).
Mr. CLINE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for
yielding.
I rise in opposition to the so-called Protecting Our Kids Act. What
we saw 2 weeks ago in Uvalde, Texas, was tragic and horrific, and we
should take action to prevent future tragedies such as this one, but
this bill is not the solution for several reasons.
First, the bill restricts the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding
adults. With very limited exceptions, the bill would prohibit 18- to
20-year-olds from buying nearly all semiautomatic rifles and shotguns.
During the markup of this bill, the Judiciary Committee chairman
argued that this is applicable because these young adults don't have
fully formed brains. Yet, we entrust these same young adults to serve
our country in the military and die for our country. We trust these
young adults to vote in our elections.
What is even more interesting is while Democrats believe that these
young adults don't have fully formed brains, they certainly are more
than willing to try to reduce the age at which a person can vote to 16.
Second, the bill makes it more difficult for a domestic violence
victim to keep a firearm for protection. As drafted, the bill would
criminalize a domestic violence victim's attempt to seek help from a
friend or neighbor in obtaining a firearm.
The safe storage requirements of the bill make it harder for people
to access a firearm in an emergency by mandating a one-size-fits-all
approach for firearm storage.
Finally, the bill's limits on magazine capacity will essentially ban
many common firearms, some of which may accommodate between 15 and 30
rounds of ammunition.
Overall, this bill is an attempt to restrict the constitutional
rights of law-abiding citizens while ignoring the broader problems of
why these tragedies are happening.
Let's talk about school resource officers in our schools. Let's talk
about fortifying school buildings. Let's talk about ending the
dangerous mirage of gun-free zones. And yes, let's talk about mental
health.

We have to look for commonsense solutions that make it easier for
Americans to protect themselves and their loved ones. I oppose this
bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).
Ms. CHU. Madam Speaker, we cannot let America be like this.
Children shouldn't be texting their family good-bye as they lay
barricaded behind desks. Parents shouldn't dread having to drop a child
off at school, wondering if this is a death sentence. And a grandmother
shouldn't have to fear being murdered as she goes into a grocery store
to get dinner.
The U.S. is the only country in the world with more civilian-owned
firearms than people, and it is costing us our loved ones' lives.
Thoughts and prayers are not enough. They never were. We have to take
action. This is what we were sent to Congress to do, to act.
The bill before us today, H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids Act,
will save lives. We can no longer act like we are powerless to stop
mass murders in our communities when it is clear there is so much we
can do.
Pass this bill. Enough is enough.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Georgia (Mrs. Greene).
Mrs. GREENE of Georgia. In 1990, our schools became gun-free school
zones, and on September 6, 1990, when I was 16 years old, my high
school went on lockdown because one of the students at my school
brought three guns to school in a duffel bag on the school bus, brought
the guns into our school, and proceeded to take control of our high
school. And he was the only person in the school who had guns. That is
why that happened.
There was no one to protect us who had a gun that day. The only
person with guns was the very mentally ill, upset teenager who had
brought guns to school that day to kill other students. I know that
fear. As a matter of fact, I think I am the only Member of Congress
that that has actually happened to.
I am also a mom. I have dropped off my kids at school for years,
wondering would this happen at my children's school. Would they face a
terrible fate like the poor children in Uvalde? This should never
happen to our children, and I can't help but point out to all of us
here, while we are debating how to protect our kids in school and we
are debating our Second Amendment gun rights, I want to point out that
we are all so privileged to be in this building being protected by
armed guards with guns who are protecting our lives.
It is shocking to me that this body of Congress won't do the same
thing for children in schools all over America because we know one
thing works. We know that a gun is a tool, and it is a weapon that can
be used to defend yourself or defend others. We are all lucky enough to
have that privilege, but our schoolchildren aren't.
If we really want to be serious about protecting our kids here in
America, we will repeal the Gun-Free School Zones Act, and we will put
into action real legislation that protects children in schools
everywhere, all over America, with good guys with guns, the same way we
are being protected.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch), a member of the
Judiciary Committee.
Mr. DEUTCH. Madam Speaker, I am disappointed in the way that our
colleagues are so cavalierly avoiding the facts.
These commonsense measures, had we passed them before, could have
saved over 400 people killed in mass shootings since Columbine.
I am disappointed in the cavalier mischaracterization of
jurisprudence. Justice Scalia said that the rights secured by the
Second Amendment are not unlimited. My colleagues know that the changes
in this law that we are proposing today will not undermine the Second
Amendment in any way.
Madam Speaker, I have two documents that inform everything I do here.
One is the Constitution of the United States, and the other is this
list that I wrote on February 14, 2018, of every one of the 17 members
of my community slaughtered by a killer with an AR-15 in his high
school.
We have heard a lot about foundational rights, foundational
liberties, as if the Second Amendment is the sum total of the
Constitution. Madam Speaker, the First Amendment matters as well, and
for these 17, they have no right to practice religion and to pray for
themselves or all of those who are killed every time we offer thoughts
and prayers. And for these 17 and everyone killed by gun violence, they
cannot peaceably assemble as the First Amendment gives the right to all
Americans. And, Madam Speaker, most of all, they cannot petition the
government for redress of their grievances, not these 17, not the 19
from Uvalde, no one killed by gun violence.
Today, we can help redress the grievances of all those lost to gun
violence by passing this important legislation. We must, and we will.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Rutherford).
Mr. RUTHERFORD. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R.
7910 because this bill does nothing to stop human violence, which is
the real problem at hand here.
Straw purchases are already illegal. You can't buy a gun for someone
else to get around the background check. Bump stocks are already
regulated like automatic weapons, thanks to the Trump administration.
Infringing on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans is
not the answer. In fact, the bill before us will even make criminals
out of legal gun owners.
This bill would put the Federal Government in charge of law-abiding
citizens and how they store their firearms

[[Page H5383]]

inside their own homes. This bill puts firearms storage over and above
self-defense.
Instead, let's work together to address human violence problems by
bolstering our mental health system, identifying individuals before
they become active shooters and mass murderers, and improving our
school safety through crime prevention through environmental design,
CPTED. It can be done.

{time} 1645

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Garamendi).
Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Speaker, I have heard over and over again we
ought to harden our schools. We ought to let every teacher have a gun.
One question that needs to be asked as that argument goes forward:
Why? Why do we need to do that?
We need to do that because an 18-year-old was able to buy two AR-15s,
go to the school in Uvalde, and shoot up all of the students and
teachers--19. That is presumably why we have to harden our schools.
Maybe it is time for us to come to the reality that it is time for us
to pass commonsense gun safety legislation. This particular piece of
legislation does just that. It doesn't take away the Second Amendment
rights.
What it does is to provide every American with the right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and not having to worry about
whether their school has been hardened sufficiently to prevent an 18-
year-old with two military-style weapons to enter that school. It is
time for us to act. Pass this legislation.

Mr. GARAMENDI. Madam Speaker, it is time to act.
On January 19, 1989, my wife Patti and I entered the ICU at San
Joaquin General Hospital. We were there to see a five-year-old boy and
his parents, who recently fled from war-torn Laos. The boy was fighting
for his life. A day earlier, a gunman, armed with an AK 47c, walked
onto the playground at Cleveland Park Elementary School in Stockton
California and started shooting, killing five children and injuring
thirty-two. ``We came here to escape war,'' the boy's parents pleaded.
``How could this happen in America?''
I represented Stockton in the California Senate in 1989 during the
Cleveland Park Elementary shooting. After hearing from first responders
and victims, I introduced legislation that would become California's
assault weapons ban--the first of its kind in the nation. Senator
Dianne Feinstein bravely took up the case in Washington, and in 1994
Congress passed and President Clinton signed the federal assault
weapons ban into law. Unfortunately, the federal ban expired in 2004
when the Republican-led Congress refused to extend the ban.
Tragically, mass shootings have been on the rise ever since Congress
let the assault weapons ban expire. Last month in Texas, days after his
18th birthday, a man purchased two AR-15-style assault rifles and 375
rounds of 5.56-caliber ammunition. Days later, on May 24, 2022, he
entered Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, and murdered 19
fourth-grade children and two teachers. America was left heartbroken
and appalled by the horrific mass shooting and is asking how a youth
who could not buy a beer was able to buy and possess more weapons of
war than a trained Marine would carry into a deadly conflict.
Unfortunately, the horror witnessed in Uvalde is not an isolated
incident in today's America. There have been over 20 mass shootings in
America since the tragedy at Robb Elementary in Uvalde, Texas. Mothers,
fathers, children, and grandparents have all had their lives cut short
and left behind friends and family to mourn their loss. America is
experiencing a gun violence epidemic, and we are foolish to think
anything will change without immediate action locally and nationally.
It is estimated that over 20 million AR-15-style assault rifles are in
the homes and streets of America. There have already been 233 mass
shootings in America since January 2022. We have to act to change this.
During the 10 years America had a federal assault weapons ban, gun
homicide rates declined 49% nationally. Sadly, mass shootings and gun
homicides have become more frequent and deadly since the ban expired.
There have been more mass shootings in the last two years than in the
10 years under the federal assault weapons ban.
It's time for Congress to reinstate the federal assault weapons ban.
H.R. 1808, the Assault Weapons Ban Act, would do just that and
institute a buy-back program to remove many of these deadly weapons
from our communities. Congress also must also institute a universal
background check system with a waiting period, establish a national Red
Flag law, ban ghost guns, limit magazine sizes, allow civil lawsuits
against gun manufacturers, and institute a stiff tax on all gun sales
and assault weapons ammunition. This tax should be used to compensate
gun violence victims and increase investments in gun violence research.
The Democratic House of Representatives, with no support from
Republicans, has already voted twice this session to pass gun safety
legislation. This month, House Democrats will take further action by
voting for legislation to protect our communities from gun-wielding men
and women bent on murder and violence. The tragic fact is that the
Senate Republicans, like their House colleagues, have refused to vote
for even the most minimal gun safety legislation and are using the
filibuster to block commonsense reforms that will save lives.
The gun violence epidemic cannot be tolerated. It cannot be
normalized. We must not re-elect lawmakers and candidates who would
rather protect the NRA and their gun-obsessed donors than innocent
children and teachers. These shooters are cowards going after the most
vulnerable.
As I write this, the memory of that family gathered around that
hospital bed at San Joaquin General Hospital haunts me as I envision
hundreds of families gathered around hospital beds and coffins weeping
and asking, ``How could this happen in America?'' It happens because
our courts and too many politicians have chosen to protect gun
manufacturers, gun sellers, and gun owners rather than children,
teachers, worshipers, and shoppers. In the fall mid-term elections,
America must elect candidates who will vote for gun control.
We must be as brave as those children and teachers in that classroom
last month. We must stand up to the NRA and its supporters.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise in support
of the Protecting Our Kids Act.
Today, the victims' families and community members from the mass
shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde appeared before the Oversight Committee
demanding action. These communities have faced unspeakable tragedy.
It is our duty as lawmakers to listen to them and work to build a
world where they will never have to see these horrific events repeated.
This legislation will save countless lives from the violence these
families have had to endure.
We must support every title in this bill, especially title II,
cracking down on interstate gun trafficking. I have spent over a decade
fighting for gun trafficking and straw purchases to be made a Federal
offense. The illegal interstate movement of firearms into New York,
known as the ``Iron Pipeline'' has caused countless firearms to enter
our State unlawfully. Preventing gun trafficking across State lines
should be a bipartisan goal.
As a mother and teacher, I am horrified by these attacks on our
schools, grocery stores, and our communities. I urge my colleagues to
support this bill.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Mrs. Cammack).
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Speaker, I came here today to speak on behalf of
women and the parents of my district--heck, honestly, I came to speak
on behalf of all Americans who want their kids to be safe and secure in
their schools, and for people to be safe in their communities.
I came here today to say that we all want these things because our
hearts collectively break when any life is lost. We mourn for those
lives lost needlessly.
We need to do better, and we can do better, which is why every single
Member of this Chamber must, without hesitation, denounce, decline,
decide, and oppose against H.R. 7910, the politics over our kids act.
This is common sense. Taking legal firearms out of the hands of law-
abiding citizens does nothing but empower criminals.
It is already illegal to commit murder. Has that stopped murder? Has
that stopped violence? No.
Madam Speaker, you said in your opening remarks: ``Protecting our
kids--what could be more important than that?'' You said: ``We are here
for the children.'' You went on to say: ``Everything we do is for the
children,'' and that today's effort to strip our constitutional rights
is a ``crusade for the children.''

[[Page H5384]]

You must have forgotten the nearly 60 million children that have been
murdered through some of the most horrific means during an abortion.
All on your watch.
You invoke JFK, and say: ``Our children are our best resource and our
best hope for the future.''
Is that so?
Why do you deny them their future by killing them in the womb? It
sounds a bit hypocritical, if you ask me.
You also made the statement that the leading cause of death for
children is firearms. Then why does the data refute that? ``NBC News''
reported that motor vehicle deaths of kids from age 1 to 17 continues
to be the number one cause of death.
Spare me, Madam Speaker, that you are here fighting for the children
because your three decades in Congress reflect a record of anything but
a fight for children.
Certainly not the kids being trafficked at the border. Not the kids
being abused. Not the kids fighting for their life in the womb, or the
kids whose future is being stolen by abusive Big Government policies.
If this were about protecting kids, then why does this bill do
nothing to secure or harden our schools? Why were there no bipartisan
efforts as part of this package? Why do these bills do nothing to
address the mental health crisis that we are facing that is driving the
violence? It is not the guns; it is the people.
People who are intent on committing acts of evil and violence will do
so by any means necessary. That is a fact.
While you have conveniently forgotten so much, I certainly do not
want to forget how many victims of domestic violence will be left
without options to protect themselves if this garbage bill becomes law.
The same party screaming to defund our police is the same party
screaming about how you--a law-abiding citizen--should not be able to
defend yourself.
Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't mention that you have clearly
all forgotten your oath. An oath that we took here on this Chamber
floor to uphold and defend the United States Constitution, and the
Second Amendment is part of that.
Madam Speaker, and to all my colleagues, the Constitution is not a la
carte, you can either accept it all or none of it, but you cannot
cherry-pick. If you cannot uphold your oath, then you should resign.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All Members are reminded, once again, to
address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
New Jersey (Ms. Sherrill).
Ms. SHERRILL. Madam Speaker, like so many parents across the Nation,
when I sent my four kids off to school this past week, I worried that
they wouldn't be coming home, like so many children across the country.
I got a bit hopeful when I heard that my colleagues are speaking for
women across the country, and I expected to hear then that they were
going to talk about passing universal background checks because we know
that 88 percent of the country wants to see universal background checks
passed. I am sorry, I must have missed that in their conversation.
When I heard how devastated my colleagues are for the little children
that have been dying, like I am, I thought, well, great, maybe we will
hear something about passing a law that restricts people 21 and under
from purchasing guns, like Mitch McConnell said he is willing to
consider. I must have missed that, too.

I have to tell you, we know these gun safety legislation pieces work
because in New Jersey, we have passed most of them, and we have made
major progress. In fact, while the rest of the country has seen gun
rate deaths increase by 33 percent, in New Jersey they fell by 10
percent.
Again, I am hoping, as we speak for mothers and women and children
and families across New Jersey, we start to hear about how we are going
to pass this great legislation.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Bishop).
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, it is repeated over and
over again that the Second Amendment is not unlimited, it has limits.
No one contends otherwise.
What are the limits? Wouldn't it be nice to hear that in the debate?
The limits as set forth in Heller and McDonald is that it is
improper, and you cannot ban weapons that are ``in common use at the
time.'' You cannot require that firearms in the home be ``rendered and
kept inoperable.''
The Ninth and Fourth Circuits have said that, like other
constitutional rights, all of them, the Second Amendment protections
apply to 18- to 20-year-olds. The dissenting judge in that opinion in
the Fourth Circuit acknowledged that there is ``persuasive evidence of
that.''
This bill bans for 18- to 20-year-old adults guns that are in common
use. It bans for everyone ammo magazines that are in pervasive use. It
requires that weapons be disabled in the home. This one doesn't violate
the Constitution, I admit, but it even criminalizes a neighbor who buys
a gun for self-protection for a victim of domestic violence.
The Democrats say more is coming. They use the terminology ``weapon
of war.'' They intend to ban this class of weapons entirely. You have
made it clear in the House Judiciary Committee.
Ms. JACKSON LEE: Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I will not yield. She
has had a lot of time.
Madam Speaker, you made it clear that you will proceed regardless of
what the Second Amendment says. Mr. Jones made it clearer than anyone.
If the filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it. If the Supreme
Court objects, we will expand it.
Do something, is the mantra. It is probably worth remembering that
that is short for the commonly heard phrase, ``do something, even if it
is wrong.'' The last thing we need is something that is wrong. What is
needed is an answer. You are not pursuing an answer because, frankly,
you are not grappling with the problem.
Could we begin with candor? Are these disasters enough to prompt
candor? Could we have some truth? You have been doing gun control since
1968. Has it worked to your satisfaction? The gentlewoman from
Pennsylvania said earlier: The country is sick. She has misdiagnosed
the problem.
They say it is the guns. Madam Speaker, guns have been prevalent in
the United States of America since before our founding. We did not
suffer the mass shootings. We did not suffer the chaos in the cities
like she described. Why do we have this now?
Chesterton, a British gentleman, came closest, he said: ``The
disintegration of rational society started in the drift from the hearth
and the family; the solution must be a drift back.'' Everybody knows it
is true.
If there is a sickness in the country, it is the product of 60 years
of disintegration of American culture by the liberal project: Assaults
on the family; hostility to God; cheapening life; pervasive expansion
of the welfare state; ridicule for individual and parental
responsibility; Soros DAs ending punishment for crime; delegitimizing,
defunding, and abolishing police.
Behold your handiwork. Stripping Americans of constitutional rights
won't cure what ails us. Not the Second Amendment, not the First
Amendment to which you are hostile, not the Fourth Amendment, not the
Fifth Amendment. Join us to solve the problems you have caused. We can
find answers together.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will, once again, admonish Members
to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat).
Mr. ESPAILLAT. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of the
Protecting Our Kids Act. This overdue legislation will tighten gun
regulations.
Unfortunately, in the world's wealthiest country, we have the 32nd
highest rate of death from gun violence across the planet. This is a
horrific statistic that is impacting all of our districts--blue
districts and red districts.
In my district, gun violence has taken far too many lives, including
the young life and brutal murder of Krystal Bayron-Nieves, working the
midnight shift in an East Harlem Burger King. The brutal murder of two
police officers in Harlem's 32nd Precinct.

[[Page H5385]]

An 11-month-old gunshot victim in the Bronx. Yes, Madam Speaker, only
11 months old.
Madam Speaker, I am here to tell my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle that this epidemic is serious. In fact, it is a public health
crisis. For this reason, Congresswoman Escobar and I urge our
colleagues to join us in a resolution declaring gun violence a national
public health crisis.
This is just the beginning, Madam Speaker. We will continue to pass
more gun regulations.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1700

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time each side has
remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 13\1/4\
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 10 minutes remaining.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark).
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, today in our country 321
people will be shot, and 111 of them will die from those gunshots.
Twenty-two of the people who are shot every day in this country are
kids, just like the 19 fourth graders sitting in their classroom while
they were massacred in Uvalde.
So I ask my colleagues: How many more?
How many more innocent people need to die?
How many more elders will be murdered at a grocery store or in their
houses of worship?
How many more children, slaughtered in their classroom, will be
enough to do something to save lives?
We are considering the most basic measures to keep people safe from
gun violence and to keep families from having to I.D. their children by
DNA after their bodies were destroyed by a weapon of war.
Raising the age to 21 to buy assault rifles, safe gun storage, and
cracking down on gun trafficking are obvious solutions. Vote ``yes'' to
protect families. Vote ``yes'' to save our children.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Speaker, it has been heart-wrenching hearing
the stories on the floor today.
America is not unique with gun violence. What is unique is that
America has accepted the slaughter. Unlike Britain, Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, and Norway, after horrific events they acted decisively to
reduce gun violence, and it worked.
We have stood by while the carnage continues to our shame. America
should not be the only rich country that cannot protect our children.
After events in Oregon, I met with victims of gun violence, and they
developed a package that looks a lot like what we are voting on today.
It is no longer acceptable for gun violence enablers to hide behind
thoughts and prayers. If other countries can protect their families,
then so can we.
Madam Speaker, pass this package.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Horsford).
Mr. HORSFORD. Madam Speaker, later this month, 30 years to the day,
my father was shot and killed by senseless gun violence.
And so I rise today with a heavy heart for those who have been
murdered by gun violence and the survivors who now must live with that
trauma every single day.
I have a heavy heart for the 58 victims and survivors in my hometown
of Las Vegas who experienced the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.
I have a heavy heart for the parents and families in Uvalde, Texas,
whose children were murdered while at school.
I have a heavy heart for the Black Americans who were murdered at a
grocery store in Buffalo, New York.
I have a heavy heart for the doctors and nurses who were killed at a
hospital in Tulsa.
I have a heavy heart. But I also have the courage to protect our
children, and I will continue to work to break the cycle of violence.
The question is: Do my colleagues have the courage to protect our
kids?
Vote ``yes'' on this legislation.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Steube).
Mr. STEUBE. Madam Speaker, guns are not the cause of evil, just like
the vehicle used by the domestic terrorist in Waukesha, Wisconsin, to
mow down innocent people in a parade killing six was not the cause of
that evil. The person driving it was.
Why aren't the pictures of the victims of that heinous act being
shown by the Democrats on the floor today, like those victims in
Uvalde?
Where was the left's cry to ban vehicles that killed those innocent
lives in Waukesha?
There are no cries to ban cars because that is not on the left's
agenda. Banning guns is. And Democrats use these heinous crimes to
further the long sought-after political objective of disarming America,
and many Democrats in this Chamber have called for outright bans on
certain firearms.
There is a moral decay in our country that has been created by the
left. They have torn down traditional institutions, taken God out of
our classrooms, and systematically destroyed the notion of
traditional families and values.

Just look at these numbers in a recent article from The Christian
Post: Seventy-five percent of most cited school shooters in America are
fatherless; 60 percent of America's rapists grew up without fathers; 63
percent of teenagers who commit suicide don't have a father in their
life; 72 percent of adolescent murderers are fatherless. The same was
true for the murderer at Robb Elementary. And I could go on.
Why isn't the majority talking about that?
Why isn't the majority talking about solutions to have role models in
children's lives?
Because that doesn't accomplish a policy objective for them.
This bill, nor any bill before us this week, will stop mass
shootings. This bill won't even decrease gun violence, and the facts
and evidence from the jurisdictions with similar policies make that
clear. Just look at any holiday weekend in Chicago and see how many
people have been shot with many of these policies already in place.
This bill is simply a step further to restrict the ability of law-
abiding citizens to own firearms and defend themselves while doing
nothing to address the cultural rot that leads to these acts.
This bill seeks to take the Second Amendment rights away from 18- to
20-year-olds by taking away their ability to purchase a firearm.
Comparing Census data on the total 18- to 20-year-old population with
Department of Justice data on violent crimes committed by that age
group--and this includes violent crimes not involving guns--only 0.3
percent of 18- to 20-year-olds commit violent crimes in a year.
Madam Speaker, when you look at murder, including murder without
guns, only 0.013 percent of 18- to 20-year-olds commit murder in a
year. So today Democrats are going to take away the lawful right for
99.7 percent of adult Americans between the ages of 18 and 20 for the
acts of a few wicked people.
Now, think about that, Madam Speaker. So the daughter off to college
and living by herself can't buy a shotgun to keep in her home to
protect herself against a rapist all because of 0.3 percent of that age
group has committed a violent crime.
The magazine limits in the bill are even more egregious because it
affects all Americans and all firearms, not just rifles, and will
effectively serve as a ban on most commonly used handguns. As I
demonstrated in the Judiciary Committee last week, numerous firearms
that millions of Americans use every single day to protect themselves
and their families could be rendered useless by a 15-round magazine
limit. And those 15-round magazine limits have absolutely no effect on
solving mass shootings.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand for freedom, to stand
for the Constitution, and to stand for the right of law-abiding
citizens to defend themselves.

[[Page H5386]]

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
Ms. LEE of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of
H.R. 7910, the Protecting Our Kids Act. I thank Chairman Nadler for
bringing these bills to the floor.
Gun violence is responsible for more than 32,000 deaths each year.
This is a heartbreaking moment for so many of us. This is a public
health crisis in our country. It is an epidemic.
The victims of Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and other mass shootings
deserve more than our thoughts and prayers.
Last week, I met with young, gun violence survivors in my district.
They spoke powerfully about the cycle of violence and the easy access
to guns, especially ghost guns. They talked about the trauma they
endured by themselves, their families, and their communities. This is
nothing new. This has been going on for so many years, and they are
asking us to take action to save lives.
This bill responds to their call by raising the age for purchase of
certain firearms.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15
seconds.
Ms. LEE of California. All I am saying is, all of our children who
have died through gun violence had a right to live, and they had a
right to life.
So I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and to take action so
that we can save countless lives. Let's protect our kids. I thank the
chairman again for yielding.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Allred).
Mr. ALLRED. Madam Speaker, after the mass shooting in El Paso in
2019, I received a letter from then 6-year-old Cal from Rowlett, Texas.
He wrote:

When kids get shot, that is less friends to play with. When
I grow up I don't want to hear any more on the news about
people being killed with guns.

He was 6, and he had to write that to his Congressman. Today, just 3
years later, he is the same age as some of the kids murdered in Uvalde.
I refuse to accept that there is nothing that we can do, and I refuse
to say there is nothing we can do to protect kids like Cal or my sons
in their schools.
We have to act by passing commonsense measures, like raising the age
to 21 to buy an assault-style weapon, banning high-capacity magazines,
and increasing safe storage. That will save lives. This legislation,
the Protecting Our Kids Act, will save lives.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' to help us save
lives and for the Senate to finally act and to join us in trying to end
this crisis.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez).

Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Madam Speaker, we are here today because for the
victims of Uvalde, it is too late; for the victims of Parkland, it is
too late; for the victims of Sandy Hook, it is too late; and for the
victims of Columbine, it is too late.
Constituents from my district are still reeling from recent gun
violence incidents. We all saw the images of people running desperately
away from the shooter at the subway station in Sunset Park. I am tired
of watching again and again my constituents suffer from horrific acts
of gun violence.
This legislation is a necessary step to prevent gun violence from
happening in our schools, places of worship, grocery stores, malls, and
public transportation. Moreover, it imposes stronger regulations on
those who can buy these weapons of war.
Congress cannot be too late anymore. Enough is enough.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. DelBene).
Ms. DelBENE. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the Protecting
Our Kids Act. I am a parent of two great kids. When they were young, my
husband or I would drop them off at school, and we were confident that
they were in a safe space. But for so many parents, that is no longer
the case.
I recently hosted a roundtable with some of the over 1,000
constituents who have written or called into my office following the
tragedies in Uvalde and Buffalo and the over 240 mass shootings in
2022.
It is heartbreaking to hear how parents have to explain to their kids
what to do if there is an active shooter, as if it is inevitable.
We know what we can do to help prevent future tragedies like Uvalde.
We can pass commonsense gun safety policies like this legislation.
Enough is enough. We have to end the senseless deaths of our children
and our neighbors. Vote ``yes.''
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Kentucky (Mr. Massie).
Mr. MASSIE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for
yielding.
The Democrats today say they don't want to take your guns away. Well,
then why does the legislation do just that?
What they should say today is: We don't want to take all of the guns
away from all of the people just yet because we know we can't get away
with that.
The reality is the anti-Second Amendment lobby has vastly outspent
all of the pro-Second Amendment groups put together in the last several
elections.
Who is in the pocket of whom?
So the red flag laws take all of the guns from some of the people,
and the bill that will pass tonight, if the Democrats are fortunate
enough to do so, will take some of the guns from all of the people.
Now, why are the gun owners who don't own so-called high-capacity
magazines, for instance, concerned?
Why are the gun owners who don't own, for instance, AR-15-style
weapons concerned about this legislation?
Because they know the legislation won't work, and the response to
this unserious and unconstitutional legislation that will allow the
school shootings to continue will be more gun control from the
Democrats.
Let me give you an example, Madam Speaker. They have a high-capacity
magazine ban in here that bans any magazine that can accept over 15
rounds.
Well, guess what?
At Virginia Tech, the shooter carried 17 magazines none of which held
more than 15 rounds and most of which held 10 rounds. The shooter at
Columbine carried 13 magazines, each of which held 10 rounds. This
legislation would have done absolutely nothing.
It is not about how many rounds a magazine holds. It is about the
evil intent of the shooter and is there somebody there with the
capacity to stop that shooter before they can get going.

{time} 1715

Why is this legislation dead on arrival in the Senate?
Why is it dead on arrival in the Supreme Court?
One of my colleagues has already acknowledged they know this is
unconstitutional, and they will pack the Court if they have to. They
said it in the Judiciary Committee, to keep this legislation alive
after it should long since die.
But why is it dead? Because Americans don't support it.
You have quoted statistics. Those statistics are fake. If they were
true, this would breeze through the Senate. But they are not.
And so I urge my colleagues to respect the Constitution; respect the
will of the American people; to respect the safety of American citizens
and, most of all, the safety of children. Let's do something to protect
them instead of these fake virtue signals that will do nothing but to
curtail the Second Amendment rights of Americans.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong
support of H.R. 7910, Protecting Our Kids Act.

[[Page H5387]]

You know, I am so tired of hearing about Chicago and other big
cities. Local governments do what they can, do what they will. But this
is not a local issue. This is a national issue. It is a national
problem and it requires a national solution.
And so I urge all of my colleagues, no matter where you are from,
make sure that you vote to protect our kids. And the only way to do
that is get rid of these assault weapons and seriously reduce the
number of guns in our society.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).
Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, as a child, I lived with a man, my
father, who should not have had access to a gun. When his temper
flared, we would hide in the closet, my brothers and sisters, praying
we would see the morning. My baby sister never recovered from those
fears and ultimately died by suicide, haunted by the memories.
Too many children are living with those fears today, in classrooms,
and in their homes. We cannot afford to look away, once again, and do
nothing.
Twenty-eight years ago, when the assault weapons ban was debated, my
husband, then an NRA board member, and who, by the way, slept with a
gun under his pillow until the day he died, made one of the toughest
votes of his career. He supported the bill, though he didn't agree with
everything in it.
We all have a job to do for our country. I don't want to take the
guns away from any responsible gun owner. But the clock is ticking.
Who will be the next mass shooting? Who is the next target?
What do we want our American story to be?
We need to act now.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).
Ms. TITUS. Madam Speaker, I had intended to stand up here and speak
about my provision preventing bump stocks being added to guns but,
after sitting here and listening for several hours, my colleagues
across the aisle, they have been misrepresenting the Second Amendment.
They have been pretending to care about children, and they have been
blubbering about their need for big guns to protect themselves.
I have just got to say one thing. America is listening, and it will
remember who allowed this plague to continue to kill our loved ones and
spread disaster around our country. They are listening, and they will
remember who it was.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. I am
prepared to close.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Gaetz).
Mr. GAETZ. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Well, we have heard the plan from Democrats. This is not a modest,
trimming around the edges of gun laws. It has been a full-throated
assault on the Second Amendment; a desire to deprive people of the
weapons that they choose at the age that they achieve majority.
And we have heard countless examples of where the good guy with the
gun has been the difference between more or less bloodshed.
But this is particularly an aggrieved time to bring this legislation
forward because we heard the Speaker of the House recently say that
members of the Republican Party were members of a cult. So you now have
House Democrats demeaning, defaming, calling extremists, tens of
millions of Americans, while they try to disarm you and then
subsequently defund the police.
And so no good guys are coming when the woke mob ends up at your
door. That is their plan for America.
And gun control, unrestrained gun control is a key part of it. And
just like they said, they will pack the Court; they will blow up the
filibuster; they will abuse every mores of this place for the
opportunity to take down the Second Amendment. That is what is at
issue. That is what we are fighting for.
And Republicans in the United States Senate should not sign up for
this charade. They should stand with our fellow Americans for the
Constitution and with American gun owners.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I could not sit idly by to hear the
abuse of the Second Amendment that Judge Scalia would not recognize;
and that is, that there are no restrictions.

I believe Judge Scalia would look at these dead babies and realize
that the Constitution and the Second Amendment that is protected,
untouched, would ask you the question, is there no sense of
responsibility to be able to provide restrictions to save lives?
How dare you suggest that we cannot provide the kind of laws in
Protecting Our Kids Act that provides the incentives and guidelines to
save lives?
Ask the mothers and fathers of these babies. The Second Amendment is
not absolute. It does allow restrictions; just as President Reagan
said: He sees no reason for an AK-47, at that time, to be used for
sport or to be used for anything else.
Support our babies and vote for this act. Where is your
responsibility and courage?
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Representative Massie was right on target when he said red flag laws
take all guns from some people and they do so without due process. This
bill takes some guns from all people. But Democrats say, don't worry.
We are not out to get the Second Amendment. Really?
Here is what Representative Cicilline said in committee last week:
Spare me the B.S. about constitutional rights.
Here is what Representative Jones said last week in committee: If the
filibuster obstructs us, we will abolish it. If the Supreme Court
objects, we will expand. We will not rest until we have taken weapons
out of circulation in our communities. Each and every day, we will do
whatever it takes; whatever it takes.
They are out to get the Second Amendment.
The right of the American people, the right of we, the people, to
keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. That is what bothers them.
They don't trust we, the people. They are smarter than us. They are
better than us. They don't trust law-abiding American citizens. They do
not trust them.
And that is what is so wrong with the direction we are going with
this legislation and the legislation they are going to bring to the
floor tomorrow.
We have seen they don't trust Americans to exercise their First
Amendment liberties. Now they are going after their Second Amendment
liberties. And that red flag law they are going to bring up tomorrow
goes after the Fifth Amendment due process rights that we enjoy as
American citizens. That is why we should oppose this legislation and
the legislation tomorrow.
And I hope, as my friend from Florida said, I hope the United States
Senate doesn't go down this red flag trail that they are now on and
further take away liberties from law-abiding American people.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Too many cities in this country have become a shorthand for mass
shooting: Newtown, San Bernardino, Charleston, Las Vegas, Parkland,
Santa Fe, El Paso, Buffalo, Uvalde. The list goes on.
How many more communities must be visited by tragedy before we take
action?
How many more parents need to bury their own children because an 18-
year old with an AR-15 assault rifle stormed into their school?
How many more children must grow up without a parent because a high-
capacity magazine allowed a shooter to spray dozens of bullets through
a supermarket?
Let today be the day that we begin to end this cycle of gun violence
and we take meaningful action to protect our communities and, most of
all, to protect our kids.
You know, the Republicans tell us that we want to defund the police.
We

[[Page H5388]]

don't want to defund the police. President Biden just said the other
day we want to fund the police.
They want to defund the police. They want to disarm the police. What
chance does a policeman, with a regular service revolver, have against
someone with an AR-15 assault rifle? None at all.
They want to make sure that our police have no chance at all to
resist the dishonest people who use weapons of war because weapons of
war overwhelm whatever any policeman may have. That is the problem
here.
The problem here is that they want to defund--or I shouldn't say
defund. They want to disarm our police, compared to the crooks and the
murderers who have the weapons of war which can outweigh the service
revolvers that any police officer will have.
So we want to protect the police officers. We want them to not be
outgunned by the murderers. That is where we are. That is what this
bill does. That is perhaps why they are afraid of this bill.
But we must pass this bill to save our police officers, to save our
communities, to save our children.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Madam Speaker, we have a gun epidemic which is
unique to America.
As a mother and grandmother, like the rest of the nation, I am
heartbroken by the horrifying killings of innocent Americans,
especially our children.
In 2021, homicides hit a 15 year high in Los Angeles. And this year,
according to the Los Angeles Police Department, people are being killed
at a faster pace than last year.
According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), in 2020, 45,222
people died from gun-related injuries. Of these, 19,384, died
violently.
These are not just numbers. They represent individuals whose lives
were cut short as a result of gun violence. They were moms, dads, sons,
and daughters. They belonged to a family, they were loved, and will
forever be missed.
They should be here today.
Mass shootings must not be an acceptable norm.
Changing our culture of gun violence will not happen overnight. We
must start the process now. There is no excuse for failing to try.
I urge my Republican colleagues to put partisan politics and special
interests aside and join us in support of this commonsense legislation
to help keep our children and fellow Americans safe.
Our thoughts and prayers are not enough if we fail to act and
continue to ignore the gun violence which forever shatters the hearts
of families across our nation.
Martin Luther King Jr., reminded us that ``the arc of the moral
universe is long, but it bends toward justice.''
To my Republican colleagues, you do not need more time. Americans
need you to bend towards justice now and help us to prevent another
Uvalde, another Buffalo, Tulsa, El Paso, Parkland, Sandy Hook, and
Columbine.
Enough is enough.
We must pass this legislation and the Senate must get it to the
President's desk, without delay.
I urge my colleagues to make our children's lives a priority and
support this commonsense legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under House Resolution 1153, the previous
question is ordered.
Pursuant to section 3(a) of House Resolution 1153, the Chair will put
the question on retaining each title of the bill, as amended.
The Chair will put the question on retaining title I of the bill. The
question is: Shall title I be retained?
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 15-minute vote on retaining
title I of H.R. 7910 will be followed by 5-minute votes on:
Retaining title II;
Retaining title III;
Retaining title IV;
Retaining title V;
Retaining title VI;
Retaining title VII;
The motion to recommit, if offered;
Passage of the bill, if ordered; and
Motions to suspend the rules and pass:
H.R. 7352;
H.R. 7334;
H.R. 5879;
H.R. 7622;
H.R. 7664;
H.R. 7670;
H.R. 7694;
H.R. 7776; and
H.R. 7667.
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered. Members will record their votes by electronic device, and
this will be a 15-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 228,
nays 199, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 237]

YEAS--228

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Salazar
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--199

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schrader

[[Page H5389]]

Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

{time} 1805

Mr. GRAVES of Missouri and Mrs. McClain changed their vote from
``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mses. LEE of California and ROYBAL-ALLARD changed their vote from
``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title I of the
bill was retained.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

members recorded pursuant to house resolution 8, 117th congress

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Buchson (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Cawthorn (Gaetz)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. DeGette). The Chair will now put the
question on retaining title II of the bill.
The question is, Shall title II be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 226,
nays 197, not voting 5, as follows:

[Roll No. 238]

YEAS--226

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Salazar
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--197

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack

NOT VOTING--5

Donalds
Hollingsworth
Mace
Rodgers (WA)
Zeldin

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1819

So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title II of the
bill was retained.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)

=========================== NOTE ===========================

June 8, 2022, on page H5389, in the third column, the following
appeared: Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) Lamb
(Blunt Rochester) Leger Fernandez (Neguse)

The online version has been corrected to read: Johnson (TX)
(Jeffries) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL)) Lamb
(Blunt Rochester) Leger Fernandez (Neguse)

========================= END NOTE =========================

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now put the question on
retaining title III of the bill.
The question is, Shall title III be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 226,
nays 194, not voting 8, as follows:

[Roll No. 239]

YEAS--226

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera

[[Page H5390]]

Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-
McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis,
Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez,
Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Upton
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--194

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Carey
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C.
Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-
Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--8

Cammack
Carl
Donalds
Graves (LA)
Hollingsworth
Keating
Mace
Walberg

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1826

So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title III of the
bill was retained.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mrs. CAMMACK. Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 239.
Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, I was in a meeting during
this vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall
No. 239.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now put the question on
retaining title IV of the bill.
The question is, Shall title IV be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220,
nays 205, not voting 3, as follows:

[Roll No. 240]

YEAS--220

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

[[Page H5391]]

NAYS--205

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kind
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--3

Ferguson
Hollingsworth
Schrader

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1834

So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title IV of the
bill was retained.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now put the question on
retaining title V of the bill.
The question is, Shall title V be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 233,
nays 194, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 241]

YEAS--233

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Joyce (OH)
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Salazar
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Valadao
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--194

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1843

So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title V of the
bill was retained.

[[Page H5392]]

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now put the question on
retaining title VI of the bill.
The question is, Shall title VI be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 220,
nays 207, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 242]

YEAS--220

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Upton
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--207

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kind
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1851

So the question was decided in the affirmative.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will now put the question on
retaining title VII of the bill.
The question is, Shall title VII be retained?
Pursuant to section 3(b) of House Resolution 1153, the yeas and nays
are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 380,
nays 47, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 243]

YEAS--380

Adams
Aguilar
Allen
Allred
Amodei
Armstrong
Auchincloss
Axne
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Barr
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bentz
Bera
Bergman
Beyer
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NC)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Boebert
Bonamici
Bost
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brooks
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Calvert
Cammack
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carey
Carl
Carson
Carter (GA)
Carter (LA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Cloud
Clyburn
Clyde
Cohen
Cole
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Curtis
Davids (KS)
Davidson
Davis, Danny K.
Davis, Rodney
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Donalds
Doyle, Michael F.

[[Page H5393]]

Dunn
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fallon
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fletcher
Foster
Foxx
Frankel, Lois
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Golden
Gomez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gosar
Gottheimer
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Green, Al (TX)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grijalva
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harder (CA)
Harris
Harshbarger
Hayes
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Higgins (NY)
Hill
Himes
Hinson
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hudson
Huffman
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jacobs (NY)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (CA)
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kinzinger
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamb
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
LaTurner
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Lesko
Letlow
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Long
Loudermilk
Lowenthal
Luetkemeyer
Luria
Lynch
Mace
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Massie
Mast
Matsui
McBath
McCarthy
McClain
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meeks
Meijer
Meng
Meuser
Mfume
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (NC)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newhouse
Newman
Norcross
Norman
O'Halleran
Obernolte
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Owens
Palazzo
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Perry
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Posey
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reschenthaler
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rosendale
Ross
Rouzer
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Rutherford
Ryan
Salazar
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scalise
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sessions
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Simpson
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Smucker
Soto
Spanberger
Spartz
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stauber
Steel
Steil
Steube
Stevens
Stewart
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiffany
Timmons
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Turner
Underwood
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Walberg
Waltz
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Wenstrup
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Yarmuth
Zeldin

NAYS--47

Aderholt
Arrington
Babin
Banks
Brady
Burgess
Cline
Comer
DesJarlais
Duncan
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Feenstra
Fitzgerald
Gohmert
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Hartzler
Jackson
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kustoff
Lucas
Mann
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
Moolenaar
Mullin
Nehls
Palmer
Pence
Pfluger
Rose
Roy
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Stefanik
Thompson (PA)
Wagner
Walorski
Weber (TX)
Westerman
Williams (TX)

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1901

Ms. STEFANIK, Messrs. KELLY of Mississippi, ELLZEY, and DUNCAN
changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. LaHOOD and VAN DREW changed their vote from ``nay'' to
``yea.''
So the question was decided in the affirmative, and title VII of the
bill was retained.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

Barragan (Beyer)
Bass (Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks (Fleischmann)
Brown (OH) (Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas (Correa)
Crist (Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi (Garcia (IL))
Lamb (Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk (Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez (Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters (Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Neguse)

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was
read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

Mr. HUDSON. Madam Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to
recommit.
The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Hudson moves to recommit the bill H.R. 7910 to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hudson is as follows:

Strike the text of the bill and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Secure Every School and
Protect Our Nation's Children Act'' or as the ``STOP II
Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASED AUTHORIZATION OF FUNDING FOR CERTAIN
PROGRAMS.

(a) Byrne-JAG.--For fiscal year 2023, there is authorized
to be appropriated to the Attorney General to carry out the
grant program under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C.
10151 et seq.), in addition to any amounts made available for
such purpose, $500,000,000, to remain available until
expended: Provided, That such amounts shall be used for
additional personnel.
(b) COPS.--For fiscal year 2023, there is authorized to be
appropriated to the Attorney General to carry out the grant
program under part Q of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10381 et seq.), in
addition to any amounts made available for such purpose,
$500,000,000, to remain available until expended: Provided,
That such amounts shall be used as provided under paragraphs
(1) and (2) of section 1701(b) of such Act (34 U.S.C.
10381(b)).
(c) STOP School Violence.--Subsection (a) of section 2705
of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act
of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10555) is amended to read as follows:
``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
$833,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2023 through 2028, of
which--
``(1) $555,333,334 shall be made available to the BJA
Director to carry out this part; and
``(2) $277,666,666 shall be made available to the COPS
Director to carry out this part.''.
(d) Grants for Mental Health Guidance Counselors.--Section
4112 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 7122) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``, other than
subsection (c),'' after ``this subpart''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Mental Health Guidance Counselors.--There authorized
to be appropriated for the hiring of mental health guidance
counselors by State and local educational agencies
$1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2023.''.
(e) Offset.--Of the unobligated balances from amounts made
available under sections 602(a)(1) and 603(a) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 802(a)(1), 803(a)) on the date of
enactment of this Act, $7,055,000,000 is rescinded as of such
date: Provided, That such rescission shall be applied first
on a pro rata basis to the unobligated balances of the
payment amounts allocated by the Secretary of the Treasury
pursuant to subsection (b)(3)(B) of section 602 of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 802): Provided further, That any
remaining amounts to be rescinded shall be applied next on a
pro rata basis to the unobligated balances of the payment
amounts allocated by the Secretary of the Treasury pursuant
to subsection (b)(1)(B) and (b)(2)(B) of section 602 of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 802): Provided further, That any remaining
amounts to be rescinded shall be applied on a pro rata basis
to the unobligated balances of the payment amounts allocated
by the Secretary of the Treasury for each of the entities
authorized to receive payments under section 603 of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 803).

SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL AUTHORIZED USE OF STOP SCHOOL VIOLENCE
GRANTS.

Section 2701 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (34 U.S.C. 10151) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``paragraphs (5)
through (9)'' and inserting ``paragraphs (5) through (10)'';
and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by redesignating paragraph (9) as paragraph (10); and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following:

[[Page H5394]]

``(9) Assessment of a school to find weaknesses in security
and identify any lack of coverage in mental health support
staff for students.''.

SEC. 4. FEDERAL CLEARINGHOUSE ON SCHOOL SAFETY BEST
PRACTICES.

(a) In General.--Subtitle A of title XXII of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:

``SEC. 2220D. FEDERAL CLEARINGHOUSE ON SCHOOL SAFETY BEST
PRACTICES.

``(a) Establishment.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Secretary of Education, the Attorney General, and the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall establish in
the Department a Federal Clearinghouse on School Safety Best
Practices (in this section referred to as the
`Clearinghouse').
``(2) Purpose.--The Clearinghouse shall be the primary
resource of the Federal Government to identify and publish
online through SchoolSafety.gov, or any successor website,
best practices and recommendations relating to school safety
for use by State educational agencies and local educational
agencies, institutions of higher education, State and local
law enforcement agencies, health professionals, and the
general public.
``(3) Personnel.--
``(A) Assignments.--The Clearinghouse shall be assigned
such personnel and resources as the Secretary considers
appropriate to carry out this section.
``(B) Detailees.--The Secretary of Education, the Attorney
General, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services may
detail personnel to the Clearinghouse.
``(4) Exemptions.--
``(A) Paperwork reduction act.--Chapter 35 of title 44,
United States Code (commonly known as the `Paperwork
Reduction Act') shall not apply to any rulemaking or
information collection required under this section.
``(B) Federal advisory committee act.--The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply for the
purposes of carrying out this section.
``(b) Clearinghouse Contents.--
``(1) Consultation.--In identifying and publishing best
practices and recommendations pursuant to subsection (a)(2),
the Clearinghouse may consult with appropriate Federal,
State, local, Tribal, and private sector entities, and
nongovernmental organizations.
``(2) Criteria.--Best practices and recommendations of the
Clearinghouse identified and published pursuant to subsection
(a)(2) shall, at a minimum--
``(A) incorporate comprehensive school safety measures,
including threat prevention, preparedness, protection,
mitigation, incident response, and recovery to improve the
safety posture of a school, including relating to the health,
safety, and welfare of persons in school settings;
``(B) include any evidence or research rationale supporting
the determination of the Clearinghouse that the best practice
or recommendation at issue has been shown to have a
significant effect on improving the safety posture of a
school, including relating to the health, safety, and welfare
of persons in school settings, including--
``(i) relevant research that is evidence-based supporting
such best practice or recommendation;
``(ii) findings and data from previous Federal or State
commissions recommending improvements to the safety posture
of a school, including relating to the health, safety, and
welfare of persons in school settings; or
``(iii) other supportive evidence or findings relied upon
by the Clearinghouse in determining best practices and
recommendations to improve the safety posture of a school,
including relating to the health, safety, and welfare of
persons in school settings; and
``(C) include information on Federal grant programs for
which implementation of such best practices or
recommendations is an eligible use for any such program.
``(3) Other best practices and recommendations.--To the
greatest extent practicable, in identifying and publishing
best practices and recommendations pursuant to subsection
(a)(2), the Clearinghouse shall so identify and publish, as
appropriate, best practices and recommendations to improve
the safety posture of a school, including relating to the
health, safety, and welfare of persons in school settings,
adopted by a Federal, State, local, Tribal, or private sector
entity or nongovernmental organization.
``(c) Assistance and Training.--The Secretary, acting
through the Clearinghouse, may publish materials to assist
and train State educational agencies and local educational
agencies and State and local law enforcement agencies
regarding the implementation of best practices and
recommendations identified and published pursuant to
subsection (a)(2).
``(d) Continuous Improvement.--The Secretary shall--
``(1) collect for the purpose of continuous improvement of
the Clearinghouse--
``(A) data analytics;
``(B) user feedback on the implementation of best practices
and recommendations identified and published pursuant to
subsection (a)(2); and
``(C) any evaluations conducted on implementation of such
best practices and recommendations; and
``(2) in coordination with the Secretary of Education, the
Attorney General, and the Secretary of Health and Human
Services--
``(A) regularly assess best practices and recommendations
identified and published pursuant to subsection (a)(2) with
respect to which there are no resources available through
Federal Government programs for implementation; and
``(B) establish an external advisory board comprised of
appropriate State, local, Tribal, and private sector entities
and nongovernmental organizations, including organizations
representing parents of students attending elementary schools
or secondary schools, to--
``(i) provide feedback on the implementation of best
practices and recommendations identified and published
pursuant to subsection (a)(2); and
``(ii) propose additional recommendations for best
practices for inclusion in the Clearinghouse.
``(e) Parental Assistance.--The Clearinghouse shall produce
materials to assist parents of students with identifying
relevant Clearinghouse resources related to supporting the
implementation of Clearinghouse best practices and
recommendations identified and published pursuant to
subsection (a)(2).
``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Elementary school.--The term `elementary school' has
the meaning given such term in section 8101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(2) Evidence-based.--The term `evidence-based' has the
meaning given such term in section 8101 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
`institution of higher education' has the meaning given such
term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1001).
``(4) Local educational agency.--The term `local
educational agency' has the meaning given such term in
section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(5) Parent.--The term `parent' has the meaning given such
term in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(6) Secondary school.--The term `secondary school' has
the meaning given such term in section 8101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
``(7) State educational agency.--The term `State
educational agency' has the meaning given such term in
section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2220C the
following new item:

``Sec. 2220D. Federal Clearinghouse on School Safety Best Practices.''.

SEC. 5. NOTIFICATION OF FEDERAL CLEARINGHOUSE ON SCHOOL
SAFETY BEST PRACTICES.

(a) Notification by the Secretary of Education.--The
Secretary of Education shall provide written notification of
the publication of the Federal Clearinghouse on School Safety
Best Practices (referred to in this section as the
``Clearinghouse'') under section 2220D of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002, as added by section 4, to--
(1) every State educational and local educational agency;
and
(2) other Department of Education partners in the
implementation of the best practices and recommendations of
the Clearinghouse, as determined appropriate by the Secretary
of Education.
(b) Notification by the Secretary of Homeland Security.--
The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide written
notification of the publication of the Clearinghouse under
section 2220D of the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added
by section 4, to--
(1) every State homeland security advisor;
(2) every State department of homeland security; and
(3) other Department of Homeland Security partners in the
implementation of the best practices and recommendations of
the Clearinghouse, as determined appropriate by the Secretary
of Homeland Security.
(c) Notification by the Secretary of Health and Human
Services.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall
provide written notification of the publication of the
Clearinghouse under section 2220D of the Homeland Security
Act of 2002, as added by section 4, to--
(1) every State department of public health; and
(2) other Department of Health and Human Services partners
in the implementation of the best practices and
recommendations of the Clearinghouse, as determined
appropriate by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(d) Notification by the Attorney General.--The Attorney
General shall provide written notification of the publication
of the Clearinghouse under section 2220D of the Homeland
Security Act of 2002, as added by section 4, to--
(1) every State department of justice; and
(2) other Department of Justice partners in the
implementation of the best practices and recommendations of
the Clearinghouse, as determined appropriate by the Attorney
General.

[[Page H5395]]

SEC. 6. GRANT PROGRAM REVIEW.

(a) Federal Grants and Resources.--The Secretary of
Education, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary
of Health and Human Services, and the Attorney General shall
each--
(1) review grant programs administered by their respective
agency and identify any grant program that may be used to
implement best practices and recommendations of the Federal
Clearinghouse on School Safety Best Practices (referred to in
this section as the ``Clearinghouse'') under section 2220D of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as added by section 4;
(2) identify any best practices and recommendations of the
Clearinghouse for which there is not a Federal grant program
that may be used for the purposes of implementing the best
practice or recommendation as applicable to the agency; and
(3) periodically report any findings under paragraph (2) to
the appropriate committees of Congress.
(b) State Grants and Resources.--The Clearinghouse shall,
to the extent practicable, identify, for each State--
(1) each agency responsible for school safety in the State,
or any State that does not have such an agency designated;
(2) any grant program that may be used for the purposes of
implementing best practices and recommendations of the
Clearinghouse; and
(3) any resources other than grant programs that may be
used to assist in implementation of best practices and
recommendations of the Clearinghouse.

SEC. 7. RULES OF CONSTRUCTION.

(a) Waiver of Requirements.--Nothing in this Act or the
amendments made by this Act shall be construed to create,
satisfy, or waive any requirement under--
(1) title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990
(42 U.S.C. 12131 et seq.);
(2) the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 701 et seq.);
(3) title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.
2000d et seq.);
(4) title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C.
1681 et seq.); or
(5) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. 6101 et
seq.).
(b) Prohibition on Federally Developed, Mandated, or
Endorsed Curriculum.--Nothing in this Act or the amendments
made by this Act shall be construed to authorize any officer
or employee of the Federal Government to engage in an
activity otherwise prohibited under section 103(b) of the
Department of Education Organization Act (20 U.S.C. 3403(b)).

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the
previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.
The question is on the motion to recommit.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. HUDSON. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Members will record their votes by electronic device, and this will
be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 198,
nays 228, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 244]

YEAS--198

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Jacobs (NY)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-
Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NAYS--228

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Biggs
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Boebert
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown (MD)
Brown (OH)
Brownley
Buck
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cawthorn
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gaetz
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gohmert
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gosar
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Massie
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roy
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes
remaining.

{time} 1911

Mr. GALLEGO changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th
Congress

Barragan
(Beyer)
Bass
(Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks
(Fleischmann)
Brown (OH)
(Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas
(Correa)
Crist
(Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois
(Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez
(Garcia (TX))
Guest
(Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD)
(LaHood)
Johnson (TX)
(Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi
(Garcia (IL))
Lamb
(Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez
(Neguse)
Loudermilk
(Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC)
(Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez
(Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA)
(Keller)
Torres (NY)
(Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters
(Garcia (TX))
Welch
(Pallone)
Wilson (FL)
(Neguse)

[[Page H5396]]

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution
8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 223,
nays 204, not voting 1, as follows:

[Roll No. 245]

YEAS--223

Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko

Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Upton
Vargas
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--204

Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duncan
Dunn
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gimenez
Gohmert
Golden

Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell

Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Katko
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Letlow
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Malliotakis
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey

Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Taylor
Tenney

Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--1

Hollingsworth

{time} 1920

So the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH
CONGRESS

Barragan
(Beyer)
Bass
(Blunt Rochester)
Boebert (Gaetz)
Brooks
(Fleischmann)
Brown (OH)
(Beatty)
Bucshon (Gibbs)
Cardenas
(Correa)
Crist
(Wasserman Schultz)
DeFazio (Stanton)
Evans (Beyer)
Frankel, Lois
(Wasserman Schultz)
Gomez (Garcia (TX))
Guest (Fleischmann)
Johnson (SD) (LaHood)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kirkpatrick (Pallone)
Krishnamoorthi
(Garcia (IL))
Lamb
(Blunt Rochester)
Leger Fernandez (Neguse)
Loudermilk
(Fleischmann)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
Mace (Donalds)
McEachin (Beyer)
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Moulton (Neguse)
Payne (Pallone)
Price (NC) (Manning)
Ruiz (Correa)
Rush (Jeffries)
Ryan (Beyer)
Sanchez
(Garcia (TX))
Sewell (Beatty)
Sherman (Beyer)
Sires (Pallone)
Spartz (Banks)
Strickland (Takano)
Suozzi (Beyer)
Swalwell (Correa)
Taylor (Fallon)
Thompson (PA) (Keller)
Torres (NY)
(Blunt Rochester)
Vargas (Takano)
Walorski (Banks)
Waters
(Garcia (TX))
Welch (Pallone)
Wilson (FL)
(Neguse)

____________________