[Pages H5206-H5214]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

END CHINESE DOMINANCE OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN AMERICA ACT OF 2024

Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution
1430, I call up the bill (H.R. 7980) to amend the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 to exclude vehicles the batteries of which contain materials
sourced from prohibited foreign entities from the clean vehicle credit,
and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1430, the
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on
Ways and Means printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted and
the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

H.R. 7980

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``End Chinese Dominance of
Electric Vehicles in America Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FROM CLEAN VEHICLE CREDIT OF VEHICLES
CONTAINING MATERIALS SOURCED FROM PROHIBITED
FOREIGN ENTITIES.

(a) In General.--Section 30D(d)(7) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
``(7) Excluded entities.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term
`new clean vehicle' shall not include any vehicle--
``(i) with respect to which any of the components contained
in the drive battery or any material contained in such a
component was extracted, processed, recycled, manufactured,
or assembled by a prohibited foreign entity, or
``(ii) the drive battery of which is designed,
manufactured, or produced using any process attributable to
any licensing, royalty, service, or similar agreement with a
prohibited foreign entity the estimated total contract cost,
including variable, contingent, or sales-based payments, of
which exceeds $5,000,000.
``(B) Prohibited foreign entity.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), the term `prohibited foreign entity'
means--
``(i) any foreign entity of concern (as defined in section
40207(a)(5) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act),
``(ii) any entity with respect to which the government of a
covered nation has the right or power (directly or
indirectly) to appoint or approve the appointment of a
covered officer, or
``(iii) any entity 25 percent or more of the capital or
profits interests of which are owned (directly or indirectly)
in the aggregate by 1 or more of the following:

``(I) A covered nation or an entity described in clause (i)
or (ii).

[[Page H5207]]

``(II) A citizen, national, or resident of a covered
nation.
``(III) An entity organized under the laws of a covered
nation.

``(C) Covered officer.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term `covered officer' means--
``(i) any member of the board of directors, board of
supervisors, or an equivalent governing body,
``(ii) the president, senior vice president, chief
executive officer, chief operating officer, chief financial
officer, or general counsel, or
``(iii) any individual who performs duties usually
associated with a title listed in clause (i) or (ii).
``(D) Covered nation.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term `covered nation' has the meaning given such term in
section 4872(d) of title 10, United States Code.
``(E) Drive battery.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term `drive battery' means, with respect to a vehicle, the
battery from which the electric motor of such vehicle draws
electricity.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to vehicles placed in service after the date of
enactment of this Act.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for
1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking
minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means, or their respective
designees.
The gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith) and the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Kildee) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).

General Leave

Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
and submit extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Missouri?
There was no objection.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the End Chinese Dominance of
Electric Vehicles in America Act introduced by my good friend and Ways
and Means colleague, Mrs. Carol Miller of West Virginia.
For years, the Chinese Communist Party has been doing everything it
can do to dominate the electric vehicles market from the critical
minerals needed to build EV batteries to the vehicles themselves.

{time} 0915

Through forced labor practices, market distorting subsidies, and
illegal trade mechanisms, China for years has manipulated the global
marketplace for electric vehicles and their components. Instead of
using the critical minerals in our own backyard to compete, the Biden-
Harris administration has put an effective ban on recovering those
materials and minerals in the U.S., furthering China's competitive
advantage.
To make matters worse, pushed by their radical environmentalist base,
the Harris-Biden administration is now using American taxpayer dollars
to further China's dominance of the EV market.
When Vice President Harris cast the deciding, tiebreaking vote for
the inflation expansion act, she and every Democrat in Congress handed
a massive gift to the Chinese Government and its cronies.
While the letter of the law, as written by Senator Manchin, states
these tax handouts are off-limits to foreign entities of concern like
China, the Harris-Biden administration wrote ridiculously weak
implementation regulations that every Chinese businessman should love.
The foreign entity of concern regulations for the inflation expansion
act's EV credits, put out by the Department of the Treasury, are
insulting. They are insulting to every American who cares about
national security and who doesn't want to see their tax dollars flow to
China.
One has to ask: Why not copy the exact same regulations that the
Department of Commerce put out when implementing the semiconductor
grants in the Chips and Science Act?
If they were good then, why not now?
If the Harris-Biden administration was concerned enough about China
accessing U.S. tax dollars that they wrote language prohibiting any
Chinese national from having a 25 percent stake in a U.S. company
receiving grants, then why not do the exact same thing here?
Why, instead, write a massive implementation loophole that allows any
Chinese billionaire with unofficial ties to the Chinese Communist Party
to receive U.S. taxpayer subsidies?
The answer is simple. The current occupants of the White House are
conflicted. They are conflicted between pretending to be tough on China
and being responsive to the radical environmentalists who control their
party.
It is time we put the brakes on giving taxpayer money to Chinese
billionaires and the Chinese Communist Party.
When Democrats controlled Washington, they opened the door for China
to take billions from hardworking taxpayers.
Under Republican leadership of the House of Representatives, we are
fighting back on the side of American taxpayers and for the security
and prosperity for our Nation, not for the Chinese Communist Party.
This legislation shuts down the loopholes that the Harris-Biden
administration have created that allow Chinese billionaires and
manufacturers to profit from American taxpayer dollars.
America's working families should not be forced to subsidize a nation
whose decades of unfair trade practices and government subsidies have
led to lost jobs, shuttered factories, and hollowed-out communities
right here at home.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and join me in
telling China that the days of fleecing American taxpayers are over.
Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation,
and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, when it comes to the future of auto manufacturing, we
have basically two options. We can either let China continue to
dominate manufacturing, including the production of electric vehicles,
as they have now for years, or we can invest in American manufacturing
to create American jobs and make sure American workers are building
these vehicles here in the United States.
The electric vehicle tax credit is helping us to compete with China,
lowering costs for our consumers, and making sure we continue to make
vehicles here in America with American workers and not overseas.
During the pandemic, of course, we had an economic crisis. Now,
America has one of the strongest economies in the world. Over the last
several years, 16 million new jobs have been created. There has been
record small business growth. The stock market is near all-time highs.
Wages are up and inflation is, in fact, coming down.
Additionally, for the first time in a long time, we are seeing a
manufacturing boom right here in America. Under the last
administration, we were shipping American jobs overseas. Currently,
hundreds of thousands of new manufacturing jobs have been created here
in the United States with more manufacturing projects being planned or
under construction.
To protect these jobs and to combat China's unfair trade practices,
the Biden-Harris administration has announced that tariffs on Chinese
electric vehicles would go from 25 percent to 100 percent. We are
seeing the results of these efforts in my district, huge economic
projects and investments that are putting people to work in good-paying
manufacturing jobs, jobs at companies like SK Siltron in Bay County and
Hemlock Semiconductor in Saginaw County, jobs you can raise a family on
and that are helping us to lead the way to a new, clean energy economy.
The bill that we are debating today would reverse all of that work.
Let's see it for what it is. It is a partisan attempt to undermine
efforts to boost American manufacturing, to onshore our supply chains,
and to lower costs for consumers. This is important: Ironically, this
bill would make it harder for us to compete with China.
These new, unclear restrictions under this bill would make it
completely unworkable and lead the auto industry and battery
manufacturers to pull back their U.S. investments and to pull back on
investing in manufacturing for those critical elements right here in
the United States and from friendly countries and to, instead, go back
to relying on China.

[[Page H5208]]

The outcome would undermine our economic competitiveness, undermine
our national security, and undermine our resilience in our automotive
supply chain. It would jeopardize billions of dollars of investment,
and it would jeopardize hundreds of thousands of jobs. This bill is the
wrong direction for American workers, it is the wrong direction for
American consumers, and it is the wrong direction for our economy.
For these reasons, Madam Speaker, I urge my colleague to oppose this
legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may
consume to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Miller).
Mrs. MILLER of West Virginia. Madam Speaker, today we are considering
important legislation that will take steps to ensure the Chinese
companies can no longer be the ultimate beneficiary of the luxury
electric vehicle tax credits that Democrats enacted last Congress.
When Democrats enacted the poorly named and poorly written Inflation
Reduction Act, they sold the American people a false bill of goods.
They said that the bill would help secure domestic supply chains and
decrease our dependence on the Chinese Communist Party in critical
industries. They were wrong.
Republicans knew at that time that this would not be the result of
the IRA, but, unfortunately, the Biden-Harris administration has been
determined to cede as much market share and too many of our taxpayer
dollars to foreign adversaries with the implementation of these credits
as possible.
The Biden administration has been more concerned about bowing to
radical environmentalists than actually helping develop these
technologies right here in America.
This legislation will close the Chinese billionaire loophole that
currently allows those entities owned by billionaires from countries of
concern to benefit from the electric vehicle subsidies, as long as
their ties to these hostile governments are deemed unofficial.
The Biden-Harris administration has put out regulations on the
electric vehicle credit that effectively exclude battery inputs from
being subject to any limitations at all. This bill will also ensure
none of the components going into the battery are sourced from China.
Finally, this bill will prevent companies from benefiting from this
tax break if they merely partner with foreign entity of concern firms
without developing any domestic intellectual property or knowledge
transfer.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' and to choose
American taxpayers over Chinese billionaires. The choice is clear.
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, let me first just quickly respond because I have heard
this point made several times in reference to luxury vehicles purchased
by wealthy individuals. It is interesting because the electric vehicle
tax credit was first put into law and came into effect in 2009. In
2017, the entirety of the Federal Government was controlled by
Republicans, and by their own definition they scoured every line of the
U.S. Tax Code to present to this Congress and pass legislation to
address what they saw as the weaknesses in the Tax Code.
Looking at everything, including the electric vehicle tax credit,
what was the result?
It was huge tax cuts to those very wealthy individuals, and unlike
our policy, no cap on the price of a vehicle.
Madam Speaker, when my friends on the other side of the aisle look at
the electric vehicle tax credit in 2017, they allowed a millionaire to
buy a vehicle priced at any price. What we did when we wrote our
electric vehicle tax credit is put a cap on the income of individuals
who qualified for the credit. My friends on the other side of the aisle
did not put a cap on the price of a vehicle that is eligible for the
credit. They had no cap on the price of the vehicle.
Let's see this for what it is. It is not an attempt to make right the
electric vehicle tax credit. It is an attempt to stop the electric
vehicle tax credit and to end the electric vehicle tax credit.
Instead of having, perhaps, some de minimis elements and untraceable
elements that may come from another country included in a battery, what
the majority is proposing is policy that would have the entire car come
from China, 100 percent of its value built in China. That is the wrong
direction for this country.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from California
(Ms. Chu), who is a great member of the House Ways and Means Committee.
Ms. CHU. Madam Speaker, this bill is yet another excuse by
Republicans to undermine the Inflation Reduction Act even as it
delivers historic benefits to millions of Americans.

This landmark legislation extended and expanded the 30D tax credit to
support the adoption of clean vehicles. These credits are not only
supporting our transition to a clean economy, they are creating
American jobs, bolstering American manufacturing, and strengthening
American supply chains.
This bill would undercut the Biden-Harris administration's work to
implement these credits under the guise of cracking down on foreign
adversaries, and, yet again, this bill includes a harmful provision
that would target immigrants who came to the United States from an
adversary country but who themselves have nothing to do with their
governments of origin.
This is the latest Republican bill this week that follows the
shameful playbook of fear-mongering and discrimination that will harm
Chinese and Asian-American immigrant communities without doing anything
to improve national security or decrease our reliance on foreign
energy.
Consider that there are countless immigrants who come from countries
like China to the United States to start a business. Sometimes those
immigrants are fleeing persecution in their country of origin. However,
under this bill, if a Chinese immigrant starts a business that produces
components for electric vehicle batteries, then any claimed vehicle
that uses components from their business would be categorically
ineligible from benefiting from the tax credit.
That means every car manufacturer would be punished for working with
this business even if it is located here in the U.S. and employing
American workers with absolutely no connection to any foreign
government or foreign government-controlled entity.

{time} 0930

Because of the way this bill was poorly drafted, it is even possible
that it could target immigrants who have become U.S. citizens. This is
simply xenophobic and wrong.
I want to be clear: There are legitimate national and economic
security concerns that the U.S. faces with these foreign governments.
To make sure we are addressing these concerns, it is important to
prevent foreign adversaries benefiting from our tax credit, but that
is, in fact, exactly what the Inflation Reduction Act already does and
what the Biden-Harris administration has been upholding in their
implementation of this law.
What I do staunchly object to is any legislation that creates
enormous, disproportionate barriers for any individual solely because
of their country of origin. The supposedly innocuous restriction of
certain rights in the name of economic or national security can be just
the start of the wholesale violation of our communities' civil rights.
The bottom line is this bill will hurt our transition to clean
vehicles.
Madam Speaker, I oppose this bill, and I urge my colleagues to vote
``no.''
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Madam Speaker, the language from this bill comes directly from the
U.S. Department of Commerce. It is nothing new.
Democrats are accusing, as we just heard, Republicans of having
hateful motives, that this bill codifies a standard set forth by their
own administration, the Harris-Biden administration. If this language
is xenophobic, that is an issue that should be taken up with President
Biden's Commerce Secretary, Gina Raimondo.
What this language does do is recognize that the Chinese Communist
Party's influence extends beyond government officials listed on
government rosters. Its control over its people and economy is less
transparent than in Western democracies. That boils down to the fact
that Republicans think it is

[[Page H5209]]

our responsibility to make sure that taxpayer dollars are not being
sent directly to our adversaries, while Democrats will spare no cost
forcing everyone to drive an electric vehicle.
Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Moolenaar), the chair of the Select Committee on the
Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese
Communist Party.
Mr. MOOLENAAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the End Chinese
Dominance of Electric Vehicles in America Act of 2024.
The American people do not want to fund our enemies. The American
people do not want CCP-affiliated companies setting up shop in their
towns and neighborhoods. The American people do not want to be held
hostage to the whims of the Chinese Communist Party's supply of
critical minerals. Under the current regulations brought about by the
Inflation Reduction Act, these nightmares have become our reality.
The End Chinese Dominance of Electric Vehicles in America Act is an
important start toward this objective. It aligns with the goal of my NO
GOTION Act, which would end the IRA's subsidies for CCP-affiliated
companies.
If we want to encourage American energy innovation, we cannot be
subsidizing CCP companies at the same time. Funding CCP-aligned
companies makes the United States weaker and the CCP stronger, and we
need to end it.
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of the Ways and Means Committee.
Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, Republicans are true masters, masters at
naming bills that do exactly the opposite of what they say they do.
They sure have the wrong name on this bill. They call it: End Chinese
Domination Act. It ought to be called the ``guarantee act.'' It
guarantees Chinese domination, because they are undermining America's
ability to compete with the Chinese who have dominated this market.
After listening to their fossilized friends, about the only progress
that House Republicans have made is that they move from becoming total
climate deniers to just becoming climate obstructionists. They are just
here in case someone else decides to do something about the climate,
and the climate crisis is truly engulfing our world.
This is the latest Republican bill where America going a little
greener just seems to make them a little redder because a transition is
needed here in the United States from an industry we did not have fully
developed. These inflexible, micromanaging requirements will have the
opposite effect they say they will intend.
It will take more than tough talk to stand up to Chinese domination.
It takes careful American manufacturing and developing it. We don't
want to cede the world to China and its domination, but all they offer
is a white flag of surrender to the Chinese, jeopardizing domestic jobs
and weakening American industry, ensuring that it is China that will
profit at our expense.
While Democrats have championed cleaner vehicles, Republicans have
attempted to throw us into their favorite gear, reverse. They have
tried to reverse just about everything that we have done to respond to
the climate crisis.
We know the transportation sector is so very important because it
represents about 28 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions. We have
taken the steps to promote clean vehicles that don't generate these
emissions with last Congress' historic climate legislation.
From this summer's suffocating heat, the wildfires, the extreme
storms, the intense weather, the growing tropical diseases in our area,
we know the climate crisis is already here. We don't have to sizzle
further to do something about it, and our clean vehicle credits have
helped consumers absorb the cost, beginning the transition to a greener
and renewable future.

It has helped jump-start our EV industry, leading to more than $175
billion in new investments in building electric vehicles and creating
over 100,000 jobs while decreasing emissions. Our investments are
designed to make our domestic industry and our domestic workers
competitive in the world.
Our tax incentives for going green are used to boost American workers
and build more factories, as is happening right here in the USA.
This bill that is being offered today would impose impossible
tracking requirements on battery components and critical minerals. This
simply is not possible, and it is not necessary. Tracking every screw
is truly nuts.
We have reasonable transition rules already in place to enable us to
make it in America. That is what we need to do. If Republicans undo
these rules, they will not only jeopardize American manufacturing jobs,
they will only strengthen China.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Madam Speaker, the only time a surrender white flag is waved in this
country to China is whenever the Democratic Party that is controlled by
the environmentalists will not allow Americans to use their own
critical minerals and natural resources in this country for the
products that we should deliver.
Banning the opportunity for Americans to be able to mine our own
critical minerals is what empowers China, is what surrenders the flag
to China.
Until the Democratic Party pushes back at the environmentalists that
control them, the American people will suffer and the Chinese will
benefit.
For my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who continue to
claim that the 2017 tax relief only went to the wealthy, I would like
to remind them that the Trump tax cuts applied across the board and
mostly went to individuals and families. In fact, if those tax cuts
expire next year, 70 percent of the tax increases will fall on
households earning less than $500,000 a year. Let's contrast this with
Democrats' green energy welfare.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record this analysis from the Joint
Committee on Taxation showing that big corporations with more than $1
billion in sales are receiving over 90 percent of special interest
electricity subsidies like those in the inflation expansion act, which
Vice President Harris was the tiebreaking vote to become law.

Congress of the United States,

Joint Committee on Taxation,

Washington, DC, March 31, 2023.

Memoradum

Tentative Energy Credits by Industry

This memorandum is in response to your request for data on
claims for certain energy credits by industry, including
credits claimed by management companies. Below we report the
tentative claims for credit under Code section 45, the credit
for electricity produced from certain renewable resources,
and the tentative claims for credit under section 48, the
energy investment credit, by C corporations for the 2019 and
2020 tax years. The amounts reported are the tentative claims
for credit before any limitation that the taxpayer might face
and before any audit adjustment that might occur. For each of
section 45 and section 48 we report the dollars of credit
claimed by industry using the North American Industrial
Classification System (``NAICS'') code level. Presenting
these data at a finer level of detail potentially would
create concerns of disclosure of information specific to
taxpayers. For example, for section 45 we removed 2020 data
for the wholesale and retail trade industry as the sample
size became too limited.

TENTATIVE SECTION 45 CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED FROM CERTAIN
RENEWABLE RESOURCES
[Millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Code 2018 2019 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
22 Utilities................................. 1,138 989 1,263
221100 Electric Power Generation, 571 460 578
Transmission and Distribution...........
All other utilities...................... 567 529 684
31 Manufacturing............................. 515 266 188
41 Wholesale and Retail Trade................ 760 990 na
52 Finance and Insurance..................... 943 877 871
524 Insurance............................ 461 407 420
All other finance and insurance.......... 482 469 451
55 Management of Companies (Holding 1,909 2,880 3,385
Companies)..................................
551111 Bank Holding Companies............ 1,898 2,839 3,354
551112 Other Holding Companies........... 11 41 31
All Other Industries......................... 317 318 1,704
Total................................ 5,581 6,319 7,410
------------------------------------------------------------------------

TENTATIVE SECTION 48 ENERGY CREDIT
[Millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Code 2018 2019 2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing, and 13 10 na
Hunting.....................................
22 Utilities................................. 1,127 1,118 1,191
221100 Electric Power Generation, 999 906 1,063
Transmission and Distribution...........
All other utilities...................... 128 212 128
23 Construction.............................. 36 67 39
31 Manufacturing............................. 342 245 247
42 Wholesale Trade........................... 81 175 147
44 Retail Trade.............................. 271 299 547
52 Finance and Insurance..................... 658 657 1,372
522110 Commercial Banking................ 120 19 202
522120 Savings Institutions, Credit 31 54 51
Unions..................................
524 Insurance............................ 403 389 539
All other finance and insurance.......... 104 194 581
53 Real Estate and Rental Leasing............ 31 17 20

[[Page H5210]]

55 Management of Companies (Holding 2,231 2,749 3,169
Companies)..................................
551111 Bank Holding Companies............ 2,216 2,729 3,144
551112 Other Holding Companies........... 15 20 25
All Other Industries......................... 102 187 316
Total................................ 4,891 5,524 7,047
------------------------------------------------------------------------

We note this analysis is based on income tax returns filed
by C corporations where taxpayers report the industry in
which they are primarily engaged, identifying the industry by
the code numbers established under the NAICS. This is self-
reported, and the Internal Revenue Service does not
necessarily verify the accuracy of the classification stated
by the taxpayer.

DISTRIBUTION DATA

This memorandum is in response to your request of March 28,
2023, for data on the distribution of claims for certain
energy credits by the gross receipts of the taxpayer. Below
we report the tentative claims for credit under Code section
45, the credit for electricity produced from certain
renewable resources, and the tentative claims for credit
under section 48, the energy investment credit, by C
corporations for the 2019 tax year and 2020 tax year. The
amounts reported are the tentative claims for credit before
any limitation that the taxpayer might face and before any
audit adjustment that might occur. For each of section 45 and
section 48 we report the dollars of credit claimed
categorized by gross receipts reported on line 1c of Form
1120, U.S. Corporation Income Tax Return.

TENTATIVE SECTION 45 CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED FROM CERTAIN
RENEWABLE RESOURCES
[Tax years 2019 and 2020, millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 2020
-------------------------------------------
Gross Receipts Category Amount Amount
of Percentage of Percentage
Credit Share Credit Share
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than $1 billion........ 349 5.5% 231 3.1%
$1 billion-$25 billion...... 2,538 40.2% 2,560 34.6%
More than $25 billion....... 3,432 54.3% 4,619 62.3%
-----------------------------
Total................... 6,319 100.0% 7,409 100.0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------

TENTATIVE SECTION 48 ENERGY CREDIT
[Tax years 2019 and 2020, millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 2020
-------------------------------------------
Gross Receipts Category Amount Amount
of Percentage of Percentage
Credit Share Credit Share
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than $1 billion........ 571 10.3% 558 7.9%
$1 billion-$25 billion...... 2,731 49.4% 2,740 38.9%
More than $25 billion....... 2,222 40.2% 3,748 53.2%
-----------------------------
Total................... 5,524 100.0% 7,047 100.0%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Details may not sum to totals due to rounding.

Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, big banks received three times
more benefits from these tax credits than any other industry.
Madam Speaker, I yield such time as she may consume to the
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney).
Ms. TENNEY. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for clarifying some
of those very important facts.
I rise in strong support of Congresswoman Carol Miller's H.R. 7980,
the End Chinese Dominance of Electric Vehicles in America Act, which I
was pleased to support when it passed out of the Ways and Means
Committee this April.
The bill addresses a significant oversight in the implementation of
electric vehicle subsidies under the so-called Inflation Reduction Act.
Let's also call it the Green New Deal, as many Democrats called it
before it was even passed and signed into law.
Carol Miller's bill, H.R. 7980, ensures that taxpayer dollars aren't
used to subsidize the Chinese Communist Party, as they are in the
Democrat's Green New Deal. The Biden-Harris administration failed in
its implementation and opened the door for Chinese state enterprises to
exploit these subsidies, undermining our national security and our
economic interests all across the Nation.
The Treasury's lenient regulations enable individuals and companies
with indirect ties to the Chinese Communist Party to access our
taxpayer-funded subsidies meant for American innovation and jobs in
American businesses.
This bill, Carol Miller's bill, closes two critical loopholes.
First, the billionaire loophole, which allows wealthy Chinese
businessowners to benefit from U.S. tax credits if they invest in
American EV projects, will be eliminated under Carol Miller's bill.
Second, the Chinese manufacturing loophole will be closed, stopping
China and the Chinese Communist Party from using its dominance in the
battery supply chain to qualify for electric vehicle credits.
By supporting this bill, we take an important step in safeguarding
American manufacturers, closing loopholes that benefit our adversaries,
and standing firm against the Chinese Communist Party's influence and
ability to dominate the American market.
It is time for Congress to address the issues created by the Biden-
Harris administration and keep American tax dollars out of the hands of
the Chinese Communist Party.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this vital act to
safeguard American taxpayers, American innovation, and workers in
America and stand up for American innovation and technological
independence.
Mr. KILDEE. Madam Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Mrs. Dingell), who has been a leader on all issues related to
the auto sector and has been a great partner as a member of the Energy
and Commerce Committee to myself and on the Ways and Means Committee in
promoting electric vehicles, allowing America to reclaim its
manufacturing heritage.
Mrs. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I thank my dear friend from Michigan,
who has been a partner on all of these issues.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in very strong opposition to H.R. 7980,
the so-called End Chinese Dominance of Electric Vehicles in America
Act. This bill will not end Chinese electric vehicle dominance. In
reality, it will ensure it.
The Inflation Reduction Act's 30D tax credit was designed to level
the playing field for American autoworkers who faced fierce competition
from very heavily subsidized Chinese competitors. However, what this
bill would effectively do is eliminate this vital tool, making it
harder for American companies to compete.
Instead of promoting American innovation and creating jobs in this
country, this bill would push companies to import more batteries from
Chinese suppliers.

{time} 0945

H.R. 7980 would lead to American job losses, and it would have a
ripple effect throughout the economy. It would impact suppliers,
manufacturers, and our domestic autoworkers throughout communities that
rely on our domestic auto industry.
I will read a tweet from United Auto Workers this morning: ``The
House GOP is going after nearly 2,000 battery manufacturing jobs in
Michigan''--Mr. Kildee is in my home State--``that we negotiated under
our master agreement. We urge a no vote on H.R. 7980. Don't get
distracted by their rhetoric and don't take the bait. This bill is an
attack on good union jobs in the United States, and we're not going to
stand for it.''
That is the UAW, who wants those jobs here in the United States of
America, not China.
If this bill passes, it will kill good-paying union auto
manufacturing and building trade jobs here. This bill would undermine
the United States' ability to compete in the global EV market, and it
blatantly ignores the fact that American automakers are already
diversifying their supply chains and reducing their reliance on China.
I remind my colleagues: I am not old, but I am seasoned. I was a
child in the 1970s, but I remember when the domestic auto industry was
caught flatfooted. The key to the American auto industry being
competitive is we are competing in a global marketplace, not just here.
The global marketplace is demanding EVs. In the 1970s, the domestic
auto industry wasn't ready for small-car vehicles when gasoline prices
went up, and we lost a decade. We closed small towns in our State. We
have never recovered. Those jobs have never come back.
Madam Speaker, I am committed with my colleagues in Michigan to
keeping our industry competitive in a global marketplace. We cannot
make that mistake again. This time, we must be ready to innovate and do
so in a competitive way.
Republicans want to ship our jobs overseas. I want them home, here in
this country. Democrats fight every day to ensure our jobs stay in our
communities and invest in America.
At the end of the day, the bill hurts everyday Americans who support
and have benefited the most from the IRA's historic domestic
investments.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to
recommit

[[Page H5211]]

this bill back to committee. If the House rules permitted, which it did
not, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to
this bill.
My amendment assures that certain investments made in reliance upon
the rules and regulations promulgated under the Inflation Reduction Act
are not undercut by Congress changing the rules.
This amendment ensures that these crucial projects that made
significant investments upon the enactment of the Inflation Reduction
Act will continue to operate to produce EV batteries and electric
vehicles here in this country and that the jobs that these investments
have brought to the districts in which they are located won't be lost
to foreign manufacturers.
We want them here. I want them built by American autoworkers; not
subsidized by China, who wants to dominate us.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the
text of this amendment immediately prior to the vote on the motion to
recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Weber of Texas). Is there objection to
the request of the gentlewoman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleagues will join me in
voting for this motion to recommit.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I could not disagree more with the prior comments. In fact, the best
way to define my opinion of the prior comments would be to justify
something we use where I come from. I come from the Ozark Hills, and we
refer to that as hogwash because this bill right here will actually
protect American autoworkers instead of Chinese autoworkers.
It is delusional to think any other thing because, if you are
subsidizing the Chinese and not the American resources, the American
manufacturer and the American worker lose.
Mr. Speaker, since the prior speaker is actually from the State of
Michigan and Michigan has had a lot of conversations about a company
that is coming in called CATL, that is a Chinese battery company that
has partnered with Ford. They partnered with Ford, even though it is a
Chinese battery company, to get these resources.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record this article reporting that the
founder of CATL, that leading Chinese battery company, said: ``CATL's
partnership with Ford Motor on an electric vehicle battery plant in the
U.S.,'' which is in Michigan, ``will not be affected by the White
House's new rules on Chinese involvement in such projects.''
He also continued in this and said: ``The plant structure was
designed under the definition of the foreign entity of concern, so
there will be no impact''--that there will be no impact--``on further
implementation.''
With these EV handouts, China wins, and the American manufacturer and
the American worker lose.

[From Nikkei Asia, Dec. 7, 2023]

CATL Says Ford Project on Track Despite New U.S. Battery Rules

(CISSY ZHOU, Nikkei staff writer)

Hong Kong--CATL's partnership with Ford Motor on an
electric vehicle battery plant in the U.S. will not be
affected by the White House's new rules on Chinese
involvement in such projects, Zeng Yuqun, the founder of the
Chinese battery giant, told Nikkei Asia.
``The plant structure was designed under the definition of
the foreign entity of concern (FEOC), so there will be no
impact on further implementation,'' Zeng said.
In February, Ford announced it would start producing low-
cost lithium-ion batteries by 2026 at its plant in Michigan
using technology licensed from CATL, the world's biggest
maker of EV batteries.
The move has drawn fire from U.S. lawmakers over concerns
that American subsidies and grants under the U.S. Inflation
Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law would
flow to a Chinese entity.
Last week, the Biden administration proposed new guidelines
regarding a concept known as a foreign entity of concern
(FEOC). The guidelines are aimed at addressing what
Washington sees as America's overreliance on EV batteries
manufactured in China--a powerhouse in the field, commanding
significant control of various parts of the supply chain. Six
of the world's 10 largest EV battery manufacturers are
Chinese.
Under the new rules, which take effect in January, a joint
venture would be classified as an FEOC if a company from one
of four designated countries--China, Iran, North Korea and
Russia--holds a stake of 25 percent or more, or if a company
entered into a licensing agreement with another entity that
entitles the latter to exercise ``effective control'' over
the production of the battery components. An FEOC would be
ineligible for tax credits and grants.
CATL, meanwhile, is continuing its research and development
push. On Thursday, it announced plans to establish its
international headquarters in Hong Kong and to set up an R&D
center in the city. The company currently has more than
18,000 researchers and over 22,000 patents, a number that is
increasing by more than 7,000 each year, according to Zeng.
The investment will be worth over 1 billion Hong Kong
dollars ($128 million) and create more than 500 jobs,
according to Hong Kong Financial Secretary Paul Chan.
With a global market share of 37 percent, CATL supplies
batteries to major automakers including Tesla, Volkswagen,
BMW and Nissan Motor.
Zeng, the founder, said CATL will intensify its development
efforts, particularly by establishing a strong R&D center in
Hong Kong. The products generated by the R&D center will be
patented, and CATL will license these patents for a fee.
Additionally, it can provide services to outside companies
for a fee, according to Zeng.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Williams), the chair of the
Small Business Committee.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R.
7980 to end the dangerous Chinese dominance of electric vehicles in
America.
Mr. Speaker, EVs are inefficient, they are expensive, and they are
totally unreliable. For 4 years, this administration has pushed this
phony industry, forcing these cars on the American people and the
American car dealer and furthering their China-first, America-last
agenda.
I can say firsthand because I am the expert in this room on the car
business. I sold my first car in 1971. I have been a car dealer for 52
years. I still have my car dealerships, and I can say the demand for
electric vehicles simply is not there among Americans.
No one is buying them. I repeat: No one is buying them. The
Democrats' irresponsible Inflation Reduction Act provided EV tax
credits with lenient FEOC rules, which allows Chinese companies to
benefit and be eligible for these EV tax credits.
This is why we need to pass the End Chinese Dominance of Electric
Vehicles in America Act, to close these loopholes and to prevent China
from recovering tax credits funded by the American taxpayer.
When taxpayer dollars are spent, they should be used to invest in
American businesses. That is a new concept. Let's invest in America.
Let's invest in the American worker. Quality manufacturing comes from
that, not to line the pockets of the CCP.
Mr. Speaker, again, I feel like I am the expert in this. We need to
get right and side with America for a change.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stand with the American people
and vote in favor of H.R. 7980 to ensure taxpayer dollars don't go to
Chinese billionaires and manufacturing companies.
In God we trust.
Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Mr. Speaker, as Members have heard, the electric vehicle tax credit
is helping the U.S. compete with China, lowering our costs for our
consumers, making sure that we can continue to make those vehicles here
in America with American workers.
As my colleague from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell) pointed out, history
doesn't repeat itself but it rhymes. It was in the early 1970s that the
U.S. auto industry and the U.S. economy failed to see the future,
failed to embrace it. We lost market share, from which we have not ever
quite recovered. We can't let that happen again.
The legislation before us would reverse the progress that we have
made in competing with what has been Chinese dominance of electric
vehicles. We have created American jobs. We have created American
investments throughout our supply chain. This legislation would make it
harder for us to compete with China.
Mr. Speaker, the Democrats and Republicans have stood together in the
past on a bipartisan basis to stand up to China, to protect U.S.
manufacturing from unfair trade practices. Of course, our historic work
on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act ensures the products made in
Xinjiang

[[Page H5212]]

with forced labor don't enter our markets and undermine American
workers.
Just listening to the speakers, particularly the last speaker, we
know what is going on here because it was now said out loud. Members on
the other side of the aisle oppose not just electric vehicle tax
credits, but Republicans oppose electric vehicles entirely. If
Republicans don't want to buy an electric vehicle and if an American
doesn't want to buy an electric vehicle, don't buy it. Let's not cede
the future to China.
We hear a lot from folks who don't live and work among the people,
whose jobs and lives depend on U.S. manufacturing. The practical effect
of this legislation is to do what the majority has now said Republicans
want to do, and that is end electric vehicle manufacturing in America.
What does that mean? It means China will build those vehicles. We
have seen this before. We saw it in the early 1970s when we put our
heads in the sand and decided that we could just dictate that everyone
had to buy an American car rather than rolling up our sleeves and doing
what we have to do to compete.
We don't want to have that happen again. China will win the electric
vehicle war, will win the market if, in fact, we allow this legislation
to become law.
The legislation that has been proposed is opposed by American
companies, is opposed by American workers, as Mrs. Dingell just pointed
out, because they know that this strengthens China's hand.
Mr. Speaker, the other point I make, which I made reference to
earlier, is my Republican colleagues have scoured the tax code. The
majority did it in 2017. I find it interesting. When my colleagues on
the other side of the aisle looked at the EV tax credits back then, the
majority didn't put an income cap on what Americans would qualify.
Republicans allowed millionaires to qualify for the electric vehicle
tax credit.

We said ``no'' to that. We included an income cap.
Republicans allowed the highest-priced luxury electric vehicles to
qualify for the credit. We said ``no.'' We are going to put an MSRP cap
so that moderately priced vehicles would benefit largely from the
credit.
Most interestingly, when Republicans scoured the tax code to find
anything that the majority wanted to change, my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle didn't even include any restriction on the sourcing
of any component of an electric vehicle from the People's Republic of
China.
Under their tax policy in 2017, an electric vehicle tax credit could
apply to a vehicle that had 100 percent of its battery fully
constructed in China. We said ``no,'' and we developed a policy to
transition us to American production and sourcing from American
companies or our friends and allies.
Mr. Speaker, this bill does not reduce our dependence on Chinese
vehicles. It increases our dependence on that. It is a partisan attempt
to undermine the work that we have done to bring those manufacturing
jobs back here. It will make it harder for us to compete against China.
It makes it more difficult for us to secure our supply chains. It would
raise taxes on hardworking families.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is the wrong direction for American workers,
for American consumers, for our economy. American industry opposes it.
American workers oppose it. I oppose it. I urge my colleagues to oppose
it, as well.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my
time to close.
Mr. Speaker, Congress has a choice to make today: Do we stand with
America's taxpayers, or do we follow the lead of the Harris-Biden
administration and stand with the Chinese Communist Party? This bill
will undo and block harmful policies that allow Chinese billionaires
and manufacturers to pocket American taxpayer money.

{time} 1000

We wouldn't have to be here today, stopping China from taking that
money, if Vice President Harris had not chosen to cast the tiebreaking
vote for the inflation expansion act. It significantly expanded tax
credits for luxury vehicles and has been implemented to allow for
loopholes and giveaways so that foreign entities of concern, along with
the wealthy and the well-connected, are the ones who are benefiting.
For decades, China has used every morally and ethically questionable
tool in its toolbox, including illegal practices, to gain an unfair
advantage in key industries. It is doing the same exact thing with
electric vehicles today.
Yet, the Biden-Harris administration thinks American taxpayers owe
China a helping hand. Workers in auto factories, battery plants, miners
in idle critical mineral mines, and everyday taxpayers will be the ones
who pay the price, Mr. Speaker.
I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will join us
in standing up for American workers, American manufacturers, and
American taxpayers and vote ``yes.''
In the end, we are asking you to vote for what you said you were
voting for in your own law just 2 years ago in the inflation expansion
act. To do otherwise is to keep putting more taxpayer money into the
pockets, Mr. Speaker, of Chinese billionaires and the Chinese Communist
Party.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1430, the previous question is ordered
on the bill, as amended.
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

Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. 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:

Mrs. Dingell of Michigan moves to recommit the bill H.R.
7980 to the Committee on Ways and Means.

The material previously referred to by Mrs. Dingell is as follows:

Mrs. Dingell moves to recommit the bill H.R. 7980 to the
Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to report the
same back to the House forthwith, with the following
amendment:
At the end of section 2, add the following:
(c) Exception for Certain Newly Operational, Under
Construction, or Planned, Projects.--Notwithstanding
subsection (b), the amendment made by this section shall not
apply with respect to any battery produced, or vehicle
manufactured, at any of the following projects:
(1) The project of Nanotech Energy located at 311 Otterson
Dr., Suite 60, Chico, CA 95928.
(2) The project of Harbinger Motors located at 12821 Knott
St., Garden Grove, CA 92841.
(3) The project of Hyundai Motor Group, LGES located at
10484 US-280, Ellabell, GA 31308.
(4) The project of Soulbrain MI located at 2141 N. Touby
Pike, Kokomo, IN 46901.
(5) The project of Toyota Material Handling located at 5559
Inwood Dr., Columbus, IN 47201.
(6) The project of Tesla Inc., Panasonic Corp. located at
Electric Avenue, Sparks, NV 89434.
(7) The project of Tesla located at Electric Avenue,
Sparks, NV 89434.
(8) The project of Aqua Metals located at 5370 Kietzke Ln,
Reno, NV 89511.
(9) The project of Cirba Solutions located at 512 Hocking
St., Lancaster, OH 43130.
(10) The project of Grob Systems located at 1070 Navajo
Dr., Bluffton, OH 45817.

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.
Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on
the question of passage.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 195,
nays 210, not voting 26, as follows:

[Roll No. 416]

YEAS--195

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amo
Auchincloss
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Budzinski

[[Page H5213]]

Bush
Caraveo
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Davis (NC)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Golden (ME)
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gonzalez, V.
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jacobs
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Panetta
Pappas
Pelosi
Perez
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Wild
Wilson (FL)

NAYS--210

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
De La Cruz
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Fong
Foxx
Franklin, Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Gonzales, Tony
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Lopez
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luna
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Maloy
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rulli
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NOT VOTING--26

Brownley
Crenshaw
DesJarlais
Evans
Ferguson
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Granger
Graves (LA)
Greene (GA)
Grijalva
Jayapal
Keating
Meuser
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Pallone
Peltola
Quigley
Salazar
Trone
Waters
Wexton
Williams (GA)
Wilson (SC)

{time} 1031

Messrs. BERGMAN, DUARTE, CALVERT, WALTZ, Mrs. MILLER of Illinois,
Messrs. BANKS and VAN DREW changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
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. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217,
nays 192, not voting 22, as follows:

[Roll No. 417]

YEAS--217

Aderholt
Alford
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bean (FL)
Bentz
Bergman
Bice
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brecheen
Buchanan
Bucshon
Burchett
Burgess
Burlison
Calvert
Cammack
Caraveo
Carey
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chavez-DeRemer
Ciscomani
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Collins
Comer
Crane
Crawford
Cuellar
Curtis
D'Esposito
Davidson
Davis (NC)
De La Cruz
Diaz-Balart
Donalds
Duarte
Duncan
Dunn (FL)
Edwards
Ellzey
Emmer
Estes
Ezell
Fallon
Feenstra
Finstad
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Flood
Fong
Foxx
Franklin, Scott
Fry
Fulcher
Gaetz
Garcia, Mike
Gimenez
Golden (ME)
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez, V.
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guest
Guthrie
Hageman
Harris
Harshbarger
Hern
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Houchin
Hudson
Huizenga
Hunt
Issa
Jackson (TX)
James
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Kean (NJ)
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kiggans (VA)
Kiley
Kim (CA)
Kustoff
LaHood
LaLota
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langworthy
Latta
LaTurner
Lawler
Lee (FL)
Lesko
Letlow
Lopez
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Luna
Luttrell
Mace
Malliotakis
Maloy
Mann
Massie
Mast
McClain
McClintock
McCormick
McHenry
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (OH)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Mills
Molinaro
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Moran
Murphy
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunn (IA)
Obernolte
Ogles
Owens
Palmer
Pence
Perez
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rulli
Rutherford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Self
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Strong
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Tiffany
Timmons
Turner
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Van Orden
Wagner
Walberg
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (NY)
Williams (TX)
Wittman
Womack
Yakym
Zinke

NAYS--192

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Amo
Auchincloss
Balint
Barragan
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bowman
Boyle (PA)
Brown
Budzinski
Bush
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Carter (LA)
Cartwright
Casar
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Cherfilus-McCormick
Chu
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crockett
Crow
Davids (KS)
Davis (IL)
Dean (PA)
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Deluzio
DeSaulnier
Dingell
Doggett
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Fletcher
Foster
Foushee
Frankel, Lois
Frost
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Garcia, Robert
Goldman (NY)
Gomez
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Harder (CA)
Hayes
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Hoyle (OR)
Huffman
Ivey
Jackson (IL)
Jackson (NC)
Jacobs
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Kamlager-Dove
Kaptur
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Landsman
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Lee (PA)
Leger Fernandez
Levin
Lieu
Lofgren
Lynch
Magaziner
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McClellan
McCollum
McGarvey
McGovern
Meeks
Menendez
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moskowitz
Moulton
Mrvan
Mullin
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Nickel
Norcross
Ocasio-Cortez

[[Page H5214]]

Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pelosi
Peters
Pettersen
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Ramirez
Raskin
Ross
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Ryan
Salinas
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Scholten
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Slotkin
Smith (WA)
Sorensen
Soto
Spanberger
Stansbury
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Sykes
Takano
Thanedar
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tokuda
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Underwood
Vargas
Vasquez
Veasey
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson Coleman
Wild
Williams (GA)

NOT VOTING--22

Babin
Brownley
Crenshaw
DesJarlais
Evans
Ferguson
Gallego
Garamendi
Garbarino
Granger
Graves (LA)
Grijalva
Jayapal
Keating
McCaul
Peltola
Quigley
Salazar
Trone
Wexton
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)

{time} 1040

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

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, Hurricane Francine preparation,
response, and recovery efforts require my presence in south Louisiana,
causing me to miss the vote series today. Had I been present, I would
have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 416 and YEA on Roll Call No. 417.

Personal Explanation

Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I was otherwise detained
seeking medical attention after taking ill. Had I been present, I would
have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 416 and YEA on Roll Call No. 417.

____________________