December 11, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 198 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session
All in House sectionPrev56 of 91Next
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3, LOWER DRUG COSTS NOW ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5038, FARM WORKFORCE MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2019; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE...; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 198
(House of Representatives - December 11, 2019)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages H10033-H10043] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3, LOWER DRUG COSTS NOW ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 5038, FARM WORKFORCE MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2019; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CONFERENCE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY S. 1790, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020 Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 758 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 758 Resolved, That at any time after adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3) to establish a fair price negotiation program, protect the Medicare program from excessive price increases, and establish an out-of-pocket maximum for Medicare part D enrollees, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed four hours, with three hours equally divided among and controlled by the respective chairs and ranking minority members of the Committees on Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means, and one hour equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their respective designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendments in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committees on Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means [[Page H10034]] now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-41, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such further amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 5038) to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide for terms and conditions for nonimmigrant workers performing agricultural labor or services, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-42, modified by the amendment printed in part C of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (S. 1790) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. All points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the conference report to its adoption without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate; and (2) one motion to recommit if applicable. Sec. 4. The chair of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence may insert in the Congressional Record not later than December 13, 2019, such material as he may deem explanatory of intelligence authorization measures for the fiscal years 2018, 2019, and 2020. Sec. 5. It shall be in order at any time through the legislative day of December 20, 2019, for the Speaker to entertain motions that the House suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV. The Speaker or her designee shall consult with the Minority Leader or his designee on the designation of any matter for consideration pursuant to this section. Sec. 6. The requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported through the legislative day of December 20, 2019. Sec. 7. On any legislative day of the first session of the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress after December 12, 2019-- (a) the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved; and (b) the Chair may at any time declare the House adjourned to meet at a date and time, within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article I of the Constitution, to be announced by the Chair in declaring the adjournment. Sec. 8. On any legislative day of the second session of the One Hundred Sixteenth Congress before January 7, 2020-- (a) the Speaker may dispense with organizational and legislative business; (b) the Journal of the proceedings of the previous day shall be considered as approved if applicable; and (c) the Chair may at any time declare the House adjourned to meet at a date and time, within the limits of clause 4, section 5, article I of the Constitution, to be announced by the Chair in declaring the adjournment. Sec. 9. The Speaker may appoint Members to perform the duties of the Chair for the duration of the periods addressed by sections 7 and 8 of this resolution as though under clause 8(a) of rule I. Sec. 10. Each day during the periods addressed by sections 7 and 8 of this resolution shall not constitute a calendar day for purposes of section 7 of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1546). Sec. 11. Each day during the periods addressed by sections 7 and 8 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule XIII. Sec. 12. Each day during the periods addressed by sections 7 and 8 of this resolution shall not constitute a legislative day for purposes of clause 7 of rule XV. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Florida is recognized for 1 hour. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Florida? There was no objection. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 758, providing for the consideration of H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act; H.R. 5038, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act; and the conference report to accompany S. 1790, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3 under a structured rule and makes in order 12 amendments, including the Republican substitute. The rule provides 4 hours of general debate, with 3 hours equally divided among and controlled by the chairs and the ranking minority members of the Committees on Education and Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means, and 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the majority leader and minority leader. The rule also provides a motion to recommit. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 5038 under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. It also provides for a motion to recommit. The rule further provides for consideration of the conference report to accompany S. 1790 with 1 hour of debate and a motion to recommit, if applicable. The rule also authorizes the chair of the Intelligence Committee to insert in the Congressional Record explanatory statements as he deems necessary. Finally, the rule provides housekeeping items to close out the first session of this Congress, such as same-day authority, suspension authority, district work period instructions, and language to convene the Second Session of the 116th Congress on January 7. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the bills in this rule. Mr. Speaker, only a few times in our history has Congress come together to pass legislation to dramatically improve the life of every American--Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Medicare's drug benefit, and, of course, the Affordable Care Act. We change lives. We save lives. Now, we continue that work with H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act. The passage of this bill will take this legislation forward to join those momentous commitments to the health and security of all Americans. Mr. Speaker, we pay more for our prescription drugs than any other country on Earth. We have made incredible advances in medical science and developed cures not only for our own people but also for the rest of the world. Yet, even when our own researchers and scientists have dedicated their lives to creating lifesaving drugs, too many of our fellow Americans can't afford to benefit from their brilliance. In the United States today, a disease or a chronic condition can force you into bankruptcy or require you to choose between paying for medicine or paying for food or rent. [[Page H10035]] Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3 makes fundamental reforms to reduce drug prices to keep the cost hikes to no more than inflation and to limit out-of- pocket costs for those on Medicare, employer plans, and private health insurance. To help secure these patient protections, we will require our government to negotiate prices directly with drug companies. Mr. Speaker, I served as Secretary of Health and Human Services for 8 years in the Clinton administration. I repeatedly asked for the ability to negotiate with drug companies. Only drug companies get to come to Medicare and set their own prices. {time} 1245 Hospitals don't get to do that; doctors don't get to do that; home healthcare agencies don't get to do that; and medical equipment providers don't get to do that. Negotiation is the hallmark of good governance and a standard feature of government policy. Mr. Speaker, we negotiate for everything, including military equipment and work with contractors. If we can negotiate for big ships, then we can negotiate for little pills. It is only drug companies that are able to write themselves a blank check from our taxpayers. Our legislation ends that practice. Now is the time to join every other country on Earth in allowing our government to bargain for better prices and to put a cap on our out-of- pocket costs. As citizens, we have always been willing to subsidize poorer countries. But subsidizing England, France, Canada, Germany, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark is not our responsibility. We are not their deep pockets. Mr. Speaker, we should not pay substantially more for the same medicines than people in those countries. The current broken system is costing our families and businesses hundreds of billions of dollars. We must not accept this waste or this unfairness any longer. Our bill is a solid plan to reduce out-of-pocket healthcare costs for every American, and it will create a huge savings for taxpayers. These savings will allow us to make significant investments in the extraordinary biomedical science institutions that foster innovation, such as the National Institutes of Health and our great research universities. These savings will allow us to modernize Medicare hearing and vision benefits and dental coverage. This bill will expand our capacity for innovation and make drug companies more efficient. H.R. 3 is a historic step forward, and it will make all of our lives better. Mr. Speaker, this rule also contains the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019. This bill empowers families to build lives in the United States without the constant fear of being uprooted. It prioritizes the well-being of immigrant families, many of whom provide essential support for our Nation's agricultural sector. This bill is an important step forward in improving our immigration system, in helping to make sure that we treat everyone with compassion and dignity. Finally, this rule also allows for consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act conference report. The first NDAA under our new Democratic majority fulfills one of Congress' crucial constitutional duties: providing for the common defense of our Nation. The final conference report delivers a wide-ranging list of priorities the American people strongly support, such as paid parental leave, the end of the widow's tax, better services for our men and women in uniform, and protections for Dreamers. This report is the product of months of hard work by Chairman Smith and members of the committee and will undoubtedly keep our country safe. Mr. Speaker, I proudly support these historic steps forward. Let's pass this rule and these bills. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank Ms. Shalala for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, today we are considering a bill that does a lot of things, and, if nothing else, this should be an object lesson on why you don't leave everything to the last minute because, indeed, that is what we have done in this year, this session of Congress. So we have got a rule that has three fairly different bills contained. We are considering a bill to reform the H-2A guest worker programs, the National Defense Authorization Act conference report, and H.R. 3, a bill that will limit American patients from treatments and cures of tomorrow. H.R. 5038, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, allows aliens who have worked in the United States for 180 days, are deportable, and have been continually present to be granted certified agricultural work status. The status may also be extended to a recipient's spouse and children. Certified workers can then apply for a green card path to citizenship, and they are not counted toward the statutory cap. In addition, the bill would subject H-2A users to a private right of action and will not provide long-term wage relief. While the H-2A guest worker visa program arguably needs reform, this bill expands the ability to obtain legal status without adequate requirements, documentation, or protections for the H-2A program users. Second, the National Defense Authorization Act is a bipartisan agreement to provide for a 3.1 percent pay raise for our troops, reform privatized military housing, continue rebuilding readiness, provide security assistance to our allies, and hold the Pentagon accountable through reports on auditability. The bill also protects the homeland by including my language requiring an effort to identify hostile International Mobile Subscriber Identity catchers, known as stingrays, which are used to locate and spy on Americans. Last, the NDAA repeals the widow's tax and prohibits the use of a chemical compound known as PFAS in firefighting foam after October 2024. I am pleased that we were able to reach an agreement to maintain the strongest military in the world. Now, let's turn to H.R. 3, the third bill that is being contained in this rather wide-ranging rule. This bill attempts to address the high cost of drugs, a goal of which I am supportive, but this bill severely limits patient access to potentially new lifesaving drugs. Republicans have offered a substitute bill, H.R. 19, the Lower Costs, More Cures Act of 2019, that includes bipartisan policies to lower drug costs for Americans. There are a lot of reasons that Members should support H.R. 19, which will now be our amendment in the nature of a substitute. Since it is H.R. 19, let me limit myself to 19 reasons. One, H.R. 19 will lower drug costs for American patients, while protecting access to new treatments and cures. Two, H.R. 19 is bipartisan, including more than 40 drug pricing policies that have passed through House and Senate committees this year. Three, H.R. 19 would pass--could pass--both Chambers of Congress and be signed into law in calendar year 2019. Four, H.R. 19 will cap out-of-pocket costs in Medicare part D for seniors at $3,100 per year, ensuring protection from the high cost encountered with prescription drugs. Five, H.R. 19 saves money for patients and their families rather than saving money just for the government. Six, H.R. 19 includes policies such as the CREATES Act and pay-for- delay to prevent pharmaceutical companies from gaming the system. Seven, H.R. 19 promotes healthy competition for lower cost generics. Eight, H.R. 19 corrects for the increased threshold it takes to reach catastrophic coverage in part D, which is not yet fixed for plan year 2020. This bill will provide seniors with a refund in 2020 for costs they should never have had to incur in the first place. Nine, H.R. 19 strengthens transparency and accountability in the existing drug pricing system. Ten, H.R. 19 lowers the cost of insulin by capping the costs for seniors in Medicare part D at $50 per month and adds additional incentives for insurance to cover their fair share of insulin costs. Eleven, H.R. 19 lowers the cost of drug administration by not paying drastically more for the same service, whether it is provided in a hospital or [[Page H10036]] other more traditionally expensive environments, the so-called site- neutral provision. Twelve, H.R. 19 establishes a new negotiator at the United States Trade Representative to ensure that America is not subsidizing the world's drug costs. Thirteen, H.R. 19 makes permanent a threshold of 7.5 percent of the adjusted gross income for purposes of the medical expense tax deduction in the Internal Revenue Code. Recall that, under the Affordable Care Act, this threshold was increased to 10 percent, which many seniors found onerous. It was reduced in the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to the threshold of 7.5 percent, but that threshold then expires, and it goes and reverts back to the 10 percent threshold at the end of this year. This would make that permanent. Fourteen, H.R. 19 requires pricing information in direct-to-consumer advertisements. Fifteen, H.R. 19 cracks down on pharmacy benefit managers by requiring more transparency in the reporting of aggregate rebates, discounts, and other price concessions. Sixteen, H.R. 19 helps access to prescription drugs in rural areas by reforming direct and indirect remuneration fees, the so-called dreaded DIR fee clawback that every community pharmacist dislikes so intensely. Seventeen, H.R. 19 increases transparency into patient listings so that manufacturers of generics and biosimilars will have adequate information to enter the market. Eighteen, H.R. 19 removes uncertainty at the pharmacy counter by requiring insurance companies to provide pricing information to doctors so that patients and their doctors can have discussions about what medicine is best for them and what the cost will be. Finally, number 19, H.R. 19 allows biomedical innovation to continue to thrive. It does not abandon the success of the 21st Century Cures bill. It lowers drug costs for Americans, while maintaining access to drugs that exist now and ensuring that that access is sustained in the future. Mr. Speaker, there are many more than three reasons to oppose H.R. 3, but let's limit ourselves to three reasons so compelling that, really, you shouldn't need to go into any more. Number one, the Congressional Budget Office, the Council of Economic Advisers, and the California Life Sciences Association have found that H.R. 3 will result in fewer drugs for Americans. There is no way to predict what could be included in this fewer drugs. It could be the cure for Alzheimer's; it could be the cure for ALS; or it could be the cure for pancreatic cancer. There is some disparity in the number of cures that would be lost with the passage of this bill, but here is the central thesis: Every organization that has looked at this has said that there will be fewer drugs introduced after the passage of this bill. {time} 1300 In addition, access to drugs that help or cure or maintain a healthy life will be at risk. The six-referenced countries in H.R. 3 have 30 to 60 percent fewer new medications than the United States of America. This is what is at stake today. Number 2, H.R. 3 claims to negotiate drug prices, but with a 95 percent excise tax for manufacturers who fail to reach a price agreement with the government, it is more akin to a hostage-taking and then shooting the hostage. There are concerns that this is unconstitutional under the Takings Clause of the Constitution. This takeover of the entire drug industry in the United States is not only bad policy but may be constitutionally perilous. Interestingly enough, when this bill was marked up in our committee, one of our Members on the Republican side spoke to this issue, tried to offer an amendment that would have provided severability, so that if the law was found to be unconstitutional, that the part that was unconstitutional could be struck down and the rest could stand. But for whatever reason, the majority rejected that amendment and it was defeated on a party line vote. Number three, and this is critically important, H.R. 3 will never become law. The majority leader of the other body has said that H.R. 3 is dead-on-arrival in the Senate. And President Trump has related how H.R. 3 is not good for Americans. I think it is important that we fight for a world where research into life-threatening illnesses never ceases, no matter how many failures occur before a cure is found. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, opposition to the underlying bill, H.R. 3, and I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess). Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren), the distinguished chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship. Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I am here to speak in support of the Farm Workforce Modernization Act, an event that should be a cause of joy for Members on both sides of the aisle and for America. We have tried and failed for dozens of years to deal with the issue of the farm workforce. We have never been able to get a majority vote on the floor of this House. So this year, we tried a different approach. Starting last March, we had stakeholders, the United Farm Workers Union, the growers and the farmers sit down together, listen to each other, understand each other and what their needs were. They were joined by a bipartisan group of members who cared about this issue, and we came up with this bill, a compromise that does this: It secures the status of the million or so farm workers who don't have their proper documentation by allowing them to get a certified agriculture worker visa that is renewable, and ultimately, if they wish, after a significant period of time, to apply for legal permanent residence. It streamlines the H-2A program, so it works better for employers and actually works better for workers. We stabilized the wages. We allowed the dairy industry to get access to the H-2A program. We increased the availability of farmworker housing while lowering the cost to employers. And, finally, once this whole thing is implemented, we have always believed that if you have a workable immigration system, you ought to enforce it. And so we will implement E-Verify after full implementation, but only for the Ag sector. I would note that the Farm Labor Organizing Committee of the AFL-CIO, UFW, Farmworker Justice, the Catholic Bishops--over 300 agricultural organizations have asked that we pass this bill. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter in support of the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. November 18, 2019. Hon. Nancy Pelosi, Speaker, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Kevin McCarthy, Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Speaker Pelosi and Minority Leader McCarthy: The undersigned groups, representing a broad cross-section of agriculture and its allies, urge you to advance the Farm Workforce Modernization Act (H.R. 5038) through the House to address the labor crisis facing American agriculture. A stable, legal workforce is needed to ensure farmers and ranchers have the ability to continue producing an abundant, safe, and affordable food supply. The effects of agriculture's critical shortage of labor reach far beyond the farm gate, negatively impacting our economic competitiveness, local economies, and jobs. Economists have found that every farm worker engaged in high- value, labor-intensive crop and livestock production sustains two to three off-farm jobs. As foreign producers take advantage of our labor shortage and gain market share, America will export not only our food production but also thousands of these farm-dependent jobs. Securing a reliable and skilled workforce is essential, not only for the agricultural industry but for the U.S. economy as a whole. The House must pass legislation that preserves agriculture's experienced workforce by allowing current farm workers to earn legal status. For future needs, legislation must include an agricultural worker visa program that provides access to a legal and reliable workforce moving forward. This visa program needs to be more accessible, predictable, and flexible to meet the needs of producers, including those with year-round labor needs, such as dairy and livestock which currently do not have meaningful access to any program. While the bill does include a few provisions that raise significant concerns for the agricultural community, we are committed to working together throughout the legislative process to fully address these issues. It is vital to move the Farm Workforce Modernization Act (H.R. 5038) through the House as a significant step in working to meet the [[Page H10037]] labor needs of agriculture, both now and in the future. Sincerely, African-American Farmers of California; AgCountry Farm Credit Services; AgriBank FCB; Agribusiness Henderson County (AgHC); Agricultural Council of California Agri-Mark, Inc.; Alabama Farmers Cooperative; Alabama Nursery & Landscape Association; Almond Alliance of California; Amalgamated Sugar Company LLC; American AgCredit; American Agri-Women; American Beekeeping Federation; American Mushroom Institute; American Pistachio Growers; American Seed Trade Association AmericanHort. Arizona Cattle Feeders' Association; Arizona Landscape Contractors Association; Arizona Nursery Association; Arkansas Rice Growers Association; Associated Milk Producers Inc.; Association of Virginia Potato and Vegetable Growers; Aurora Organic Dairy; AZ Farm & Ranch Group; Battlefield Farms, Inc.; Bipartisan Policy Center Action; Bongards' Creameries; Butte County Farm Bureau; California Ag Irrigation Association; California Alfalfa and Forage Association; California Apple Commission. California Avocado Commission; California Bean Shippers Association; California Blueberry Commission; California Canning Peach Association; California Cherry Growers and Industry Association; California Citrus Mutual; California Dairies, Inc.; California Farm Bureau Federation; California Fig Advisory Board; California Fresh Fruit Association; California Grain and Feed Association; California League of Food Producers; California Pear Growers; California Prune Board; California Seed Association; California State Beekeepers Association. California State Floral Association; California Sweet Potato Council; California Tomato Growers Association; California Walnut Commission; California Warehouse Association; California Wheat Growers Association; California Women for Agriculture; Cayuga Milk Ingredients; Central Valley Ag; Cherry Marketing Institute; Chobani; Clif Bar & Company; CoBank; Colorado Dairy Farmers; Colorado Nursery & Greenhouse Association. Colorado Potato Legislative Association; Compeer Financial; Cooperative Milk Producers Association; Cooperative Network Dairy Farmers of America, Inc.; Dairy Producers of New Mexico; Dairy Producers of Utah; Del Mar Food Products, Corp.; Driscoll's; Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative; Ellsworth Cooperative Creamery; Empire State Potato Growers; Far West Agribusiness Association; Farm Credit East; Farm Credit Illinois. Farm Credit Services of America; Farm Credit West; FarmFirst Dairy Cooperative; First District Association; Florida Agri-Women; Florida Blueberry Growers Association; Florida Citrus Mutual; Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association; Florida Nursery, Growers, and Landscape Association; Florida Strawberry Growers Association; Florida Tomato Exchange; Food Northwest; Food Producers of Idaho; Foremost Farms USA; Fresno County Farm Bureau. Frontier Farm Credit; Fruit Growers Marketing Association; Fruit Growers Supply; Georgia Green Industry Association; Glanbia Nutritionals; Grapeman Farms; GreenStone Farm Credit Services; Grower-Shipper Association of Central California; GROWMARK; Gulf Citrus Growers Association; Hop Growers of Washington; Idaho Alfalfa & Clover Seed Commission; Idaho Alfalfa & Clover Seed Growers Association; Idaho Apple Commission; Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry. Idaho Association of Highway Districts; Idaho Association of Soil Conservation Districts; Idaho Bankers Association; Idaho Cattleman's Association; Idaho Chamber Alliance; Idaho Dairymen's Association; Idaho Eastern Oregon Seed Association; Idaho Grain Producers Association; Idaho Grower Shipper Association; Idaho Hop Growers; Idaho Milk Products; Idaho Mint Growers Association; Idaho Noxious Weed Control Association; Idaho Nursery & Landscape Association; Idaho Onion Growers Association. Idaho Potato Commission; Idaho State Grange; Idaho Sugarbeet Growers Association; Idaho Water Users Association; Idaho Wool Growers; Idahoan Foods LLC; Idaho-Oregon Fruit and Vegetable Association; Illinois Green Industry Association; International Dairy Food Association; Iowa Institute for Cooperatives; Iowa State Dairy Association; J.R. Simplot Company; Kansas Cooperative Council; Kansas Dairy Association; Kanza Cooperative Association; Kings County Farm Bureau. Land O'Lakes, Inc.; Lone Star Milk Producers; Madera County Farm Bureau; Maine Landscape and Nursery Association; Maine Potato Board; Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative Association; Maryland Nursery, Landscape, & Greenhouse Association; Massachusetts Nursery and Landscape Association, Inc.; MBG Marketing; Mendocino County Farm Bureau; Merced County Farm Bureau; Michigan Agri-Business Association; Michigan Apple Association; Michigan Asparagus Advisory Board. Michigan Bean Shippers; Michigan Cider Association; Michigan Greenhouse Grower Council; Michigan Milk Producers Association; Michigan Nursery & Landscape Association; Michigan State Horticultural Society; Midwest Dairy Coalition; Mid-West Dairymen's Company; Milk Producers Council; Milk Producers of Idaho; Minnesota Area II Potato Council; Minnesota Milk Producers Association; Minnesota Nursery & Landscape Association; Missouri Rice Research and Merchandising Council; Montana Nursery & Landscape Association. Monterey County (CA) Farm Bureau; Mount Joy Farmers Cooperative Association; Napa County Farm Bureau; National All-Jersey; National Association of Produce Market Managers; National Council of Agricultural Employers; National Council of Farmer Cooperatives; National Farmers Union; National Grange; National Immigration Forum; National Milk Producers Federation; National Onion Association; National Potato Council; National Watermelon Association; Nebraska State Dairy Association. New American Economy; New England Apple Council; New England Farmers Union; New York Apple Association; New York Farm Bureau Federation; New York State Berry Growers Association; New York State Flower Industries; New York State Vegetable Growers Association; Nezperce Prairie Grass Growers Association; Nisei Farmers League; North American Blueberry Council; North Carolina Nursery & Landscape Association; North Carolina Potato Association; Northeast Dairy Farmers Cooperatives. Northeast Dairy Foods Association, Inc.; Northeast Dairy Producers Association; Northern Plains Potato Growers Association; Northern Virginia Nursery & Landscape Association; Northwest Ag Co-op Council; Northwest Dairy Association/Darigold; Northwest Farm Credit Services; Northwest Horticultural Council; Ohio Apple Marketing Program; Ohio Dairy Producers Association; Ohio Nursery & Landscape Association; Olive Growers Council of California; Oneida-Madison Milk Producers Cooperative Association; Orange County Farm Bureau; Oregon Association of Nurseries. Oregon Dairy Farmers Association; Oregon Potato Commission; Pacific Coast Producers; Pacific Egg and Poultry Association; Pacific Seed Association; Pennsylvania Co-operative Potato Growers; Pennsylvania Landscape & Nursery Association; Plant California Alliance; POM Wonderful; Porterville Citrus; Potato Growers of America; Potato Growers of Idaho; Potato Growers of Michigan; Prairie Farms Dairy, Inc.; Premier Milk Inc. Produce Marketing Association; Professional Dairy Managers of Pennsylvania; RBI Packing LLC; Reiter Affiliated Companies; Richard Bagdasarian, Inc.; Riverside County Farm Bureau; Rocky Mountain Farmers Union; San Diego County Farm Bureau; San Mateo County Farm Bureau; Santa Clara County Farm Bureau; Santa Cruz County Farm Bureau; Scioto Cooperative Milk Producers' Association; Select Milk Producers, Inc.; Seneca Foods Corporation; Sierra Citrus Association. Snake River Sugar Company; Solano County Farm Bureau; Sonoma County Farm Bureau; South Dakota Association of Cooperatives; South Dakota Dairy Producers; South East Dairy Farmers Association; Southeast Milk Inc.; Southern States Cooperative; St. Albans Cooperative Creamery, Inc.; Stanislaus County Farm Bureau; State Horticultural Association of Pennsylvania; Summer Prize Frozen Foods; Sunkist Growers; Sun-Maid Growers of California; Sunsweet Growers, Inc. Tennessee Nursery & Landscape Association; Texas Agricultural Cooperative Council; Texas Association of Dairymen; Texas Citrus Mutual; Texas International Produce Association; Texas Nursery & Landscape Association; The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture; The SF Market and San Francisco Produce Association; Tillamook County Creamery Association; Tree Top, Inc.; Tulare County Farm Bureau; U.S. Apple Association; U.S. Rice Producers Association; United Ag; United Dairymen of Arizona; United Egg Producers; United Fresh Produce Association. United Onions, USA; United Potato Growers of America; Upstate Niagara Cooperative, Inc.; Utah Farmers Union; Utah Horticulture Society; Valley Fig Growers; Ventura County Agricultural Association; Ventura Pacific; Vermont Dairy Producers Alliance; Virginia Apple Growers Association; Virginia Nursery & Landscape Association; Virginia State Dairymen's Association; Visalia Citrus Packing Group, Inc.; WA Wine Institute; Washington Growers League; Washington State Dairy Federation. Washington State Nursery & Landscape Association; Washington State Potato Commission; Washington State Tree Fruit Association; Wawona Frozen Foods; West Virginia Nursery & Landscape Association; Western Growers Association; Western States Dairy Producers Association; Western United Dairies; Wine Institute; WineAmerica; Wisconsin Dairy Business Association; Wisconsin Potato & Vegetable Growers Association; Wonderful Citrus; Wonderful Orchards; Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentlewoman. Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues, Mr. Newhouse, Mr. Simpson, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Diaz-Balart, Mr. Panetta, Mr. Costa, Mr. Correa, Ms. Escobar, Mr. Peterson--I am going to get in trouble because there are more people than I can mention in the 15 seconds, but this has been a very large bipartisan effort. [[Page H10038]] It should be a model on how we can legislate and get something done for the American people. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), a valuable member of the Committee on Appropriations. Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the underlying bill, the Agriculture Workforce Modernization Act. Now, when you read the title, maybe folks will think that this is only an agriculture bill. But in reality, this bill also helps to deal with a vital national security issue: A stable supply of agricultural goods produced here in the United States of America. Not by a foreign power who does not have our interests in mind, and could use our food security as a weapon, but, no, agricultural products grown here by patriotic American farmers. And this issue will not happen by itself. The H-2A system that our farmers now use to get their workforce--frankly, when they are not able to find American workers--is absolutely broken. It is antiquated, and it is just not responsive to the changing needs of the patriotic American farmer. That is why Members from both sides of the aisle have come together with over 300 farming organizations to draft a bill that ensures that in the United States of America those who grow our food will be able to continue to grow our food and have the adequate workforce that they need. No bill is perfect, and this one isn't perfect either. But, again, this bill, if it moves forward and gets to the President's desk--and this bill, if it moves forward, can be changed and tweaked to make sure that it gets to the President's desk--and if we don't do that, we will be, frankly, letting down our farmers, letting them down one more time, and, again, opening up the door to a national security threat that we do not need to allow to happen. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the underlying bill. But before I yield back, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank a few people. Some have already been thanked: Mike Carlton from Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association, for his work to ensure that Florida's agricultural interests were represented in the negotiations. I also would like to thank a few staffers: I thank David Shahoulian from the Committee on the Judiciary who has been amazing over these years; Carrie Meadows from Representative Newhouse's staff; and also Cesar Gonzalez, my chief of staff, who has been invaluable, by the way, in years of working to try to have solutions to an issue that we all know needs to take place. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Diaz-Balart), my colleague for representing Florida in the negotiations so well. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Pappas). Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Speaker, when I travel around New Hampshire asking constituents what is on their minds, there is no topic more urgent or more personal than combatting the skyrocketing cost of prescription drugs. I have heard from a senior who is unable to retire because his life is dependent on drugs that cost $3,000 out-of-pocket. I have heard from a mother who shares a painful chronic condition with her daughter and has to decide every month whose prescription to fill because she can't fill both on her fixed income. Americans can no longer afford Big Pharma's runaway costs. That is why I am proud to support H.R. 3, which makes historic reforms to drive down the cost of prescription drugs while expanding and strengthening Medicare. This package also includes my Advancing Enrollment and Reducing Drug Costs Act, which makes prescription drugs more accessible for seniors. My provision assists low-income seniors by automatically enrolling them in Medicare Part D's subsidy program, ensuring they receive this benefit without jumping through bureaucratic hoops. It is time to deliver transformational change and pass H.R. 3 to ensure the health and well-being of the American people. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, this bill, H.R. 3, runs the risk of quickly stifling innovation in the new drug space. A preliminary Congressional Budget Office analysis of this bill has stated that it would result in 15 fewer new drugs coming on the market over the next 10 years, and we all know drugs are in the pipeline for much longer than that. The actual pipeline to deliver new product is 14 years, so it is that second 10 years where the real risk of this bill becomes apparent. The cure for Alzheimer's may be one of those ones that is included in that list of drugs that are never developed in the first place. That is why we need to defeat H.R. 3. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch). Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, today, the House is going to have an opportunity to do something that has long-needed to be done and will benefit every single American in every single business that is providing health insurance for their valued employees. We have a chance to pass the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act. Here is what is significant about it, but first a word about Elijah: In April of 2017, Elijah and I went to the White House and met with President Trump, who said all the right things: ``Why are we getting ripped off by Pharma?'' ``Why can't we import safe medications?'' ``Why can't we lower costs?'' Today, President Trump, we are going to do it. Two things are finally being done: First, the House of Representatives, on behalf of all consumers, is going to allow the Health and Human Services secretary to negotiate prices, not just pay the rip-off prices demanded. Second, we are adopting an idea that President Trump had: ``Put a cap, 120 percent.'' We will not pay more than that, what other countries pay for the same medication. President Trump put it in his blunt way: ``We are being suckers.'' We are putting a cap on that price. This will lower the cost of prescription drugs over 10 years by a half a trillion dollars. Finally, our government is standing up on behalf of consumers in not protecting Pharma against unlimited price gouging. And second, what is inspiring to me about this is the benefits go to everyone. Employers in Vermont, they want their employees to have healthcare, but those premiums keep going up and up and they have to trade healthcare benefits for wages and salary increases. So that means our employers are going to get the benefit of lower premiums; our individuals are going to get the benefit of lower premiums; and seniors, who have been hammered with co-pays and deductibles, are going to get lower costs as well. Individual drugs, too, you won't be getting killed on those, folks with insulin and others. So let's pass this for Elijah. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Washington State (Mr. Newhouse), previous member of the Rules Committee and a valuable member of the Committee on Appropriations. Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Texas for yielding. I rise today in strong support of the underlying legislation, H.R. 5083, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act. This is a critical piece of legislation for my constituents, certainly in Central Washington, but for farmers and ranchers across the country in need of a stable and legal workforce. I am grateful for my friend, Representative Lofgren, for including Republicans in these negotiations and bringing together a diverse bipartisan group of Members of Congress, agricultural stakeholders, farmers and producers, labor unions and farmworker associations to write a piece of legislation that will go a long way toward [[Page H10039]] providing certainty for our Ag industry. The House has failed to address Ag labor reform since 1986. For the last 30 years, the crisis facing farmers has only been exacerbated, and the need for fixes has become even more clear. Today, we have an opportunity to continue this process and bring relief to farmers and ranchers, not just those I represent, but dairy farmers in the Midwest, Wisconsin, Indiana, Ohio, Michigan and Northeast, New York and Maine; the famous peach orchards of Georgia and South Carolina; and certainly the orange groves in Texas and the salad bowl of California and Arizona--all across the country. Like past efforts, this bill may not be the perfect solution, but it is a significant improvement over the status quo. This legislation stabilizes our current workforce by implementing the first of its kind, merit-based immigration program for agricultural workers who have spent decades in our fields. The bill streamlines our current H-2A program and reduces the bureaucratic red tape for farmers. It addresses rising costs of guest worker wages and implements E-Verify for the Ag industry, something Republicans have been asking for since the rollout of the program. Despite the progress this legislation makes, there is still work to do. It does not address every sector of our Nation's Ag industry. We still have to find a solution for our processors. We need to improve the equitable housing options. There are many other aspects of our broken immigration system we must work together to fix. {time} 1315 A ``yes'' vote today on this bill is a vote to continue the process and get this bill to the Senate. I want to thank the staff, certainly Travis Martinez and Carrie Meadows, but also David Shahoulian and Betsy Lawrence on Ms. Lofgren's staff. Many people have put a lot of time into this effort. Our farmers and ranchers desperately need relief. Men and women who contribute to our ag industry need certainty. This bill is the first step. I urge my colleagues to vote for the underlying legislation and encourage their input as we continue to perfect the bill and send it to the President's desk. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett). Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, for those insured who rely on insulin or who are fortunate enough to win the lottery to have their drugs selected to be negotiated, this is a valuable piece of legislation. But for 30 million Americans who are uninsured, they are denied any guarantee of lower prices. Inexplicably, this rule rejects a proposal by me and 28 of our colleagues to provide relief for the uninsured. It bars all of my amendments to improve H.R. 3, including those that addressed outrageous new drug launch prices; price spike protection, which price spikes are occurring at an alarming rate, by the thousands; and ensuring negotiation for those drugs where the taxpayers are actually picking up the tab to finance the research that produces the drug. Of all of these, the most troubling concerns the uninsured. USA Today just published a powerful op-ed by Nicole Smith-Holt. It is entitled: ``My Son Died From Rationing Insulin. Democrats' Drug Pricing Plan Still Wouldn't Help Him.'' She writes of her son, age 26, who aged out of his parents' insurance and had a job with no benefits. She expresses the same concern that a group of Michigan high schoolers recently wrote me in a compelling letter that they are raising money to help those who lack insurance buy their drugs, saying: ``Drug manufacturers should not be able to determine who does and who does not get better. Everyone deserves to be healthy . . . .`' And everyone deserves to be helped by our legislation, but some are left out. My goal has never been to turn this bill to the right or to the left, but to deal with those and provide assurances to those who have been left out by it. Under this legislation, it will still remain illegal, a violation of Federal law, to negotiate lower drug prices on two-thirds of the drugs---- The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas. Mr. DOGGETT. It remains illegal to negotiate on two-thirds of the drugs that are covered by Medicare. Prescription drug price gouging, enabled by government-approved monopolies without any restraint, is not limited to one disease or one class of drugs. The perfect should certainly not get in the way of the good in drafting such legislation, but we should be doing more to deliver the good we promised. I reluctantly oppose this rule. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, I want to share a letter that I received. This is from a woman who had lost her daughter to suicide following an episode of severe postpartum depression. She writes: After many long years of research and development, on 3/19, calendar year 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved Zulresso, the first medicine to successfully treat moderate to severe postpartum depression worldwide. It is a 60-hour IV treatment, administered in a certified hospital setting. It is effective in as little as 20 hours. Had this medicine been available, I feel that my daughter would be alive today. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor). Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Florida (Ms. Shalala) for yielding time and, also, for her leadership throughout the years in fighting to keep drug costs low. It really matters to families all across this country. I feel like shouting this from the top of the Capitol dome: We are going to pass a bill that will allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices in America. This is kind of an all-American concept, isn't it, negotiate fair prices? But for too long, Big Pharma, these drug companies, have gouged American families and consumers, and they have taken advantage of it, haven't they? I mean, these prices are astronomical. Families across America are often paying 4, 5, 10 times more the amount for their prescriptions than families in other countries. That is not right, and it is especially not right in this country where it is the U.S. taxpayer who is often providing the funding for the basic research to develop these drugs. So let's all shout it from the Capitol dome, the very top: We are going to allow--we are going to direct Medicare to negotiate prices to bring the cost of prescription drugs down. We are going to not just contain that in Medicare, but make sure that it is spread, and those cost savings are realized for all of the families who rely on private insurance. And then, with the billions of dollars in savings, we are going to improve Medicare. For a long time, Medicare has not provided comprehensive benefits for vision, for hearing, for dental care. These are fundamental health services. So what a winning proposition for American families. And I am so proud that it is the Democrats and our new majority that can deliver on this promise for the people. Lower drug costs now. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as may consume. If we defeat the previous question, Republicans will amend the rule immediately to consider H.R. 2207, the Protect Medical Innovation Act of 2019. This bill, which now has 256 bipartisan cosponsors, will repeal the excise tax on medical devices that is set to go into effect January 1, 2020. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? There was no objection. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Brooks), my good friend, a valuable member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Mrs. BROOKS of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, we can move to pass H.R. 2207. Why is it so important that we repeal this disastrous medical device tax? Since 2013, when I came to Congress, my colleagues and I across the aisle [[Page H10040]] have worked in a bipartisan way to delay and, ultimately, defeat this disastrous tax. And why is that so important? It is not just about the economics of a tax; it is about patients. This is about innovation for patients, and higher taxes mean fewer innovations will be developed for patients. Fewer lives will be saved because, when we tax this critical industry, it will make it harder for them to come up with and fund the next lifesaving technology. Tell that to the over a million people a year, worldwide, who receive implants like pacemakers. These folks rely on these lifesaving devices. So many of the innovations will not come to market. Medical devices allow patients to undergo fewer intensive procedures, with shorter hospitalizations and rehabilitation time, which ultimately lowers the overall cost of patient care. Beyond patient care, this is an amazing industry; and if we tax these businesses, jobs will be lost. We already know that, when the tax was in place, 29,000 jobs were lost in this industry. These are high-paying jobs in States across the country. Indiana is one of the top States in the country to have these types of medical device jobs. These pay 30 percent higher. The degree of expertise and the skill of these workers, particularly in the area of research and development and manufacturing, is unbelievable. And these people work day in and day out to provide better medical devices to consumers, not just here in this country, but around the globe. So reinstating this medical device tax, which will take place on January 1 of 2020, will hurt the success not just of these businesses, but it will roll back innovations and stifle R&D of these lifesaving and life-altering medical advances. We have a chance, with 256 cosponsors, to stand together and repeal this tax. I urge this body to pass the repeal of the medical device tax. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan). Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Florida for yielding. Today, the House considers historic legislation to lower prescription drug prices and deliver a transformational expansion to Medicare under H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act of 2019. The namesake of this bill inspired many Members of this body, myself included, to act boldly on behalf of working families like the one I grew up in. It is time to flip the status quo on a system that has pocketed billions off the backs of patients like my dad who suffer from chronic diseases like MS. I am proud to have championed a provision which added a critical lever of transparency and accountability by requiring a GAO study on the negotiation program, essentially ensuring that there is no unfair manipulation or gaming at play. While I regret that my amendment to support baseline knowledge of addiction among prescribers was not made in order, I look forward to supporting this important bill. I am grateful to leadership, my colleagues, and the committees of jurisdiction for bringing us all here to this point today. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird) to speak on the amendment as part of the defeat of the previous question. Mr. BAIRD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 60,000 direct and indirect jobs that the medical device industry brings to my home State. The last 4 years, Congress has worked together to continually suspend the medical device tax because they know that it doesn't make sense. This tax is a bane to innovation; it damages our manufacturing sector; it raises healthcare prices; and it hurts high-paying jobs. What our medical device industry needs more than anything is certainty. There has been enough upheaval in our healthcare system over the last decade to last us a lifetime. Let's show our support for the hardworking Americans, the good jobs, the patients, and the employers and permanently repeal this tax. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Correa). Mr. CORREA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Farm Workforce Modernization Act of 2019. I want to thank Representative Lofgren for her leadership, as well as colleagues on both sides of the aisle, for making this vote today happen. It will be a historical vote. California, my home State, is our Nation's bread basket; yet, over 40 percent of California's farms don't have the workforce they need to feed our population. The same is true for many farms across the country that depend on skilled immigrant farmworkers. These men and women work in our fields to plant, care, and harvest our produce that feeds our families, both in the U.S. and internationally. They do good work, good honest work, but live in an uncertain situation. Farm owners and farmworkers agree that this reform is desperately needed. This bill offers a stable workforce for our farmers, who need to compete in the global food markets, and provides an earned legal status for farmworkers. I urge passage of H.R. 5038. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Bucshon) to continue our speakers on the defeat of the previous question and in support of their amendment. Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Speaker, there are over 150 medical device companies in the State of Indiana representing more than 20,000 jobs. These are high-paying, stable jobs, with more than $1 billion in Indiana payrolls. But, more importantly, they provide lifesaving products for the American consumer. As a physician, I know the importance of the innovation and the technological advances these companies provide, and the medical device tax is an onerous tax that is helping to stymie this innovation and technology. {time} 1330 By defeating the previous question, we can bring up H.R. 2207, the Protect Medical Innovation Act of 2019, and finally repeal permanently the onerous excise tax on the sale of medical devices in our country. This will allow for more treatments, and this will allow for more cures. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren). Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I want to make a few additional comments on the Farm Workforce Modernization Act since the gentlewoman from Florida had a little bit of time to provide. There have been some who have criticized, I think incorrectly, the bill, that it does not actually stabilize wages in the H-2A program. That is incorrect. The bargain that was made by the United Farm Workers union and the various employer groups was to: first, freeze wages for 1 year; second, to limit how fast wages could rise to 3.25 percent or how low to 1.5 percent; and also, to preclude changes in the middle of a contract, so there would be stability. I just wanted to get that issue on the table. People who misunderstand it will be relieved to know that that is not correct. I want to address another issue, which has to do with the legalization provision. We have several million farmworkers in the United States today. Half of them don't have their proper papers. They are living in a state of fear. I was out in the Central Valley recently. These are hardworking people who have been here for decades in some cases. There is no line for them to get into to get legal. They are so afraid that they are afraid to go to mass. This bill allows them to apply for a temporary visa, an agricultural worker visa that is renewable. It allows them to go back and forth if they need to go to a funeral in their country of birth. It allows them to work legally. After an extended period of time, if they want, they can apply to become legal permanent residents of the United States, or they can just stay on their temporary visas. Their families are included because we should not be in the position of breaking up hardworking families. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman from California. Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to note that this bill is the product of a lot of time. It was introduced [[Page H10041]] in October. It was marked up in the Judiciary Committee before Thanksgiving, and here we are today, not that far from Christmas, finally, hopefully, passing it. We have been in discussions with various Senators. There is nothing ever for sure with the United States Senate, but I will say there is a recognition and an interest that doing nothing is not acceptable for farmers or for farmworkers. I hope we can pass this bill today. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence) to continue to speak on the amendment that we will offer if we defeat the previous question, Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. As ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, I thank my colleague, Dr. Burgess, for his steadfast leadership on this issue. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to join 255 of my colleagues as a cosponsor of H.R. 2207, the Protect Medical Innovation Act. I rise today to remind my fellow Members that time is running out. We must repeal the medical device tax before it goes into effect on January 1, 2020. This bill has broad bipartisan support from Members in both Chambers who recognize the detrimental impact this tax has on constituents who rely on lifesaving medical devices or are employed by the industry. If Congress fails to act this year, the seemingly small 2.3 percent excise tax would have a significant impact on patients and the healthcare industry. The medical device industry employs 400,000 hardworking Americans, including 20,000 Hoosiers. When the medical device tax was in effect, nearly 20,000 industry jobs were lost nationwide. Eighty percent of these medical manufacturing companies are small businesses that need certainty. They need certainty in order to continue their research and investment in critical lifesaving medical innovations. This is a tax on innovation and competitiveness, a tax on patients, and a tax on working families. It is time to end this job-killing tax once and for all. I urge my fellow Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question so we can support H.R. 2207. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have remaining. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas has 5\1/2\ minutes. The gentlewoman from Florida has 6\3/4\ minutes. Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, we have been hearing from our colleagues from Indiana about the excise tax on medical devices and how important it is to repeal that excise tax on medical devices. That tax has been delayed several times but does go into effect January 1. It is a 2.8 percent excise tax on gross receipts. We are talking in H.R. 3 about a 95 percent excise tax. They are talking about the number of jobs that have been killed with a 2.8 percent Federal excise tax. How many jobs are going to be lost with a 95 percent excise tax? Again, as I said earlier, this is not a good faith negotiation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services. This is akin to a hostage situation because the threat of a 95 percent excise tax hangs over that discussion. We have heard a lot about innovation. Let me share with you an excerpt from a letter that I received from a constituent after the introduction of H.R. 3. The letter says: ``I started taking antidepressants when I was 15. Since then, I have been hospitalized three different times for attempts at suicide. Now I am at a place where I have found the medication that works for me; it is literally lifesaving. This medication is only possible through years of careful research and investment and in good supply because of a free market. ``If we had allowed a bill like H.R. 3 to pass into law previously, then the medications that have helped me might not exist. I cannot imagine a world where people just like me might go without the proper medication due to government overreach.'' The story is repeated over and over again. Mr. Speaker, Congress passed at the end of the session in calendar year 2016 the last bill signed into law by President Obama, the 21st Century Cures Act. Mr. Speaker, since the time that bill was signed into law, it really has been impressive the number of new things that are coming onto the market and those new things that are just over the horizon. This bill, H.R. 3, strips the ability for the 21st Century Cures Act to deliver on the promise. But here is the good news. The Rules Committee, in its wisdom, made available an amendment in the nature of a substitute. I have discussed H.R. 19 in some detail. The amendment in the nature of a substitute will be the text of H.R. 19 so Members will have an opportunity to vote for bipartisan consensus agreements that will lower drug prices now, that will protect innovation in the future, and that, most importantly, could be signed into law before the end of the year. Think about it. This is a deliverable that we have within our power to bring to the American people. We should not give up on that chance. I have been speaking against H.R. 3. The NDAA, which is also included in this legislation, I do support. I cannot support the guest worker bill. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. Let's take up the amendment about the excise tax on medical devices, and I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, we have heard doomsday predictions from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that our Nation's drug innovation will be decimated by this bill. Mr. Speaker, if I thought this bill would slow down or eliminate our brilliant biomedical research and development enterprise, I would not support it. Nothing could be further from the truth. The truth is that much of our drug innovation starts with our own government-funded research paid for by the taxpayers either at the National Institutes of Health or at our great research universities, two of which I have led. This bill provides critical additional investments in NIH. $10 billion will extend research investments in projects like Cancer Moonshot to accelerate cancer research and make more therapies available to more patients. It will also help fund innovation and research for rare diseases and fighting antimicrobial resistance, which currently kills 35,000 Americans per year. This bill also makes explicit that pharmaceutical companies should be able to recoup the costs of research and development and still make a profit. Nine out of 10 Big Pharma companies spend more on marketing, sales, and overhead than research. Maybe they won't be making as big of a profit as they currently do because they will no longer be able to take the American people to the cleaners, but they will make a substantial profit. Medicare will continue to cover all the drugs they cover today so that patients' choices will not be limited. Rather, patients' choices will be expanded. Patients will no longer be leaving drugs behind at the pharmacy counter because they can't afford them. It is time to end sky-high drug prices. It is also time to reform Medicare benefits for the 21st century. This bill does exactly that by finally adding vision, dental, and hearing benefits to the Medicare program. Seniors have been asking for this for a long time, and the quality of life of millions of Medicare beneficiaries will improve with access to these benefits. I also look forward to the passage of the Farm Workforce Modernization Act and the conference report for the NDAA. These are bipartisan pieces of legislation that will improve our national security and the lives of families and workers across this Nation. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question. The material previously referred to by Mr. Burgess is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 758 At the end of the resolution, add the following: Sec. 13. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 2207) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the excise tax on medical devices. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment [[Page H10042]] thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 14. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 2207. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mr. BURGESS. 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, this 15- minute vote on ordering the previous question will be followed by 5- minute votes on: Adoption of the resolution, if ordered; and The motion to table the motion to reconsider H.R. 729. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 227, nays 189, not voting 14, as follows: [Roll No. 668] YEAS--227 Adams Aguilar Allred Axne Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Boyle, Brendan F. Brindisi Brown (MD) Brownley (CA) Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Carson (IN) Cartwright Case Casten (IL) Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu, Judy Cicilline Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Cox (CA) Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Cunningham Davids (KS) Davis (CA) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Delgado Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doggett Doyle, Michael F. Engel Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Finkenauer Fletcher Foster Frankel Fudge Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Golden Gomez Gonzalez (TX) Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Haaland Harder (CA) Hastings Hayes Heck Higgins (NY) Himes Horn, Kendra S. Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster (NH) Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lewis Lipinski Loebsack Lofgren Lowenthal Lowey Lujan Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Matsui McAdams McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Moore Morelle Moulton Mucarsel-Powell Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Norcross O'Halleran Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Perlmutter Peters Peterson Phillips Pingree Pocan Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Richmond Rose (NY) Rouda Roybal-Allard Ruiz Ruppersberger Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell (AL) Shalala Sherman Sherrill Simpson Sires Slotkin Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stanton Stevens Suozzi Swalwell (CA) Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres Small (NM) Trahan Trone Underwood Van Drew Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wild Wilson (FL) Yarmuth NAYS--189 Abraham Allen Amash Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bergman Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Bishop (UT) Bost Brady Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Byrne Calvert Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Chabot Cheney Cline Cloud Cole Collins (GA) Comer Conaway Cook Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson (OH) Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Duncan Dunn Emmer Estes Ferguson Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flores Fortenberry Foxx (NC) Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Gianforte Gibbs Gohmert Gonzalez (OH) Gooden Granger Graves (GA) Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hagedorn Harris Hartzler Hern, Kevin Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Hill (AR) Holding Hollingsworth Hudson Huizenga Hurd (TX) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) King (IA) King (NY) Kinzinger Kustoff (TN) LaHood Lamborn Latta Lesko Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Marchant Marshall Massie Mast McCarthy McCaul McClintock McHenry McKinley Meadows Meuser Miller Mitchell Moolenaar Mooney (WV) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nunes Olson Palazzo Palmer Pence Perry Posey Ratcliffe Reed Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Riggleman Roby Rodgers (WA) Roe, David P. Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose, John W. Rouzer Roy Rutherford Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sensenbrenner Shimkus Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spano Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Stivers Taylor Thompson (PA) Thornberry Timmons Tipton Turner Upton Wagner Walberg Walden Walorski Waltz Watkins Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Woodall Wright Yoho Young Zeldin NOT VOTING--14 Aderholt Barragan Gabbard Gosar Hunter LaMalfa Lieu, Ted Newhouse Norman Porter Rooney (FL) Serrano Walker Wexton {time} 1412 Mr. ARRINGTON changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.'' Mr. ROSE of New York changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So the previous question was ordered. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. personal explanation Ms. PORTER. Mr. Speaker, I was present but my vote did not register on rollcall No. 668 on December 11, 2019 due to a machine malfunction. I voted by inserting my machine card into the machine with several minutes remaining. The system apparently did not record my ``yea'' vote. I was present on the House floor for the duration of the vote. Had my vote been recorded, it would have been recorded as ``yea.'' The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Panetta). The question is on the resolution. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mr. BURGESS. 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 222, nays 190, not voting 18, as follows: [Roll No. 669] YEAS--222 Adams Aguilar Allred Axne Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Boyle, Brendan F. Brindisi Brown (MD) Brownley (CA) Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Cartwright Case Casten (IL) Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Chu, Judy Cicilline Cisneros Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Cox (CA) Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Cunningham Davids (KS) Davis (CA) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Delgado Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doyle, Michael F. Engel Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Finkenauer Fletcher Foster Frankel Fudge Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Golden Gomez Gonzalez (TX) Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Haaland Harder (CA) Hastings Hayes Heck Higgins (NY) Himes Horn, Kendra S. Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Kennedy Kildee Kilmer Kim Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster (NH) Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lewis Lipinski Loebsack Lofgren Lowenthal Lowey Lujan Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Matsui McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Moore Morelle Moulton Mucarsel-Powell Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Norcross O'Halleran Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Perlmutter Peterson Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Richmond Rose (NY) Rouda [[Page H10043]] Roybal-Allard Ruiz Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell (AL) Shalala Sherman Sherrill Simpson Sires Slotkin Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stanton Stevens Suozzi Swalwell (CA) Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres Small (NM) Trahan Trone Underwood Van Drew Vargas Veasey Vela Velazquez Visclosky Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wexton Wild Wilson (FL) Yarmuth NAYS--190 Abraham Allen Amash Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bergman Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Bishop (UT) Bost Brady Brooks (AL) Brooks (IN) Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Byrne Calvert Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Chabot Cline Cloud Cole Collins (GA) Comer Conaway Cook Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson (OH) Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Doggett Duncan Dunn Emmer Estes Ferguson Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Flores Fortenberry Foxx (NC) Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Gianforte Gohmert Gonzalez (OH) Gooden Gosar Granger Graves (GA) Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Hagedorn Harris Hartzler Hern, Kevin Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Holding Hollingsworth Hudson Huizenga Hurd (TX) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Khanna King (NY) Kinzinger Kustoff (TN) LaHood Lamborn Latta Lesko Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Marchant Marshall Massie Mast McAdams McCarthy McCaul McClintock McHenry McKinley Meadows Meuser Miller Mitchell Moolenaar Mooney (WV) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nunes Ocasio-Cortez Olson Palazzo Palmer Pence Perry Peters Posey Ratcliffe Reed Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Riggleman Roby Rodgers (WA) Roe, David P. Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose, John W. Rouzer Roy Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sensenbrenner Shimkus Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spano Stauber Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Stivers Taylor Thompson (PA) Thornberry Timmons Tipton Turner Upton Wagner Walberg Walden Walker Walorski Waltz Watkins Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Woodall Wright Yoho Young Zeldin NOT VOTING--18 Aderholt Barragan Carson (IN) Cheney Gabbard Gibbs Hill (AR) Hunter Joyce (PA) King (IA) LaMalfa Lieu, Ted Newhouse Norman Rooney (FL) Ruppersberger Rutherford Serrano {time} 1418 So the resolution was agreed to. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Stated against: Mr. JOYCE of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 669. Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 669. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. Mr. HARRIS. I object. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard. ____________________
All in House sectionPrev56 of 91Next