July 25, 2019 - Issue: Vol. 165, No. 126 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 1st Session
All in House sectionPrev35 of 207Next
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3877, BIPARTISAN BUDGET ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 549, VENEZUELA TPS ACT OF 2019; AND WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII...; Congressional Record Vol. 165, No. 126
(House of Representatives - July 25, 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 H7390-H7396] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3877, BIPARTISAN BUDGET ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 549, VENEZUELA TPS ACT OF 2019; AND WAIVING A REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON RULES Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 519 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 519 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3877) to amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, to establish a congressional budget for fiscal years 2020 and 2021, to temporarily suspend the debt limit, and for other purposes. 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 thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 549) to designate Venezuela under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit nationals of Venezuela to [[Page H7391]] be eligible for temporary protected status under such section, 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 116-28 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) 30 minutes 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. 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 July 26, 2019. {time} 1215 The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), 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 Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Colorado? There was no objection. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, the Rules Committee met last night and reported a rule, House Resolution 519, providing for consideration of H.R. 3877, which is the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget, and provides for one motion to recommit. The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 549, the Venezuela TPS Act of 2019, also under a closed rule. The rule provides 30 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, and one motion to recommit, with or without instructions. Finally, the rule provides same-day authority through the legislative day of tomorrow, Friday, July 26, 2019. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased we are here today to bring up two important bipartisan pieces of legislation. Let me start with H.R. 3877, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019. For months, House Democrats have negotiated with the White House and the Senate in order to agree on budget levels for fiscal year 2020 so Congress can complete all the appropriations bills and avoid another governmental shutdown like we saw at the beginning of this year. Despite resistance from my friends on the Republican side of the aisle, the House is well underway with the appropriations process. We have passed 10 of the 12 appropriations bills, which fund nearly 96 percent of the Federal Government. Unfortunately, the Senate has yet to take up any of the 12 appropriations bills and, in fact, none of the bills have even been marked up by the Senate. The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 will set overall budget levels to avoid drastic cuts next year and allow House and Senate appropriators to negotiate final bills to avoid a shutdown and provide certainty to Americans and all the Federal employees who work for them. Importantly, this bill will also raise the debt ceiling for the next 2 years. Put simply, we cannot put in jeopardy the full faith and credit of the United States of America. This bill rightfully provides the Treasury Department the ability to continue paying our bills and honor the commitments the U.S. has already made. While Members on both sides of the aisle may not like everything in this deal, it is a compromise which supports critical investments for all Americans and, I believe, sets us on a strong path forward this fiscal year. The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 549, the Venezuela TPS Act of 2019. This bipartisan bill was debated on Tuesday under suspension of the rules, and I was disappointed more of my friends from the other side of the aisle didn't join every Democrat, 37 Republicans, and 1 Independent, to help get to the two-thirds vote required under suspension. Venezuela is currently in crisis. Their democratic institutions have been corrupted under the Maduro regime and, according to the U.N. Refugee Agency and the International Organization for Migration, more than 4 million Venezuelans have fled the country. I want to applaud the work of Representatives Darren Soto, Mario Diaz-Balart, and my friend, Donna Shalala, from the Rules Committee, for their work to advance this bill to provide temporary protected status for Venezuelan refugees already in the United States. That is why I am glad we have included this bill in the rule today, to ensure this bill passes the House as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, overall, this rule provides for consideration of two very important measures we need to get done before the upcoming district work period. I urge all my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bills. I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to thank my good friend, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. Mr. Speaker, we are here today on two items, both of which are actually bipartisan ideas. And though this has been an eventful week and month at the Rules Committee, I am pleased that we are ending on such a high note before we return to our districts. Of course, this rule is not all sunshine and roses. It does add same- day authority for any measure through tomorrow. My good friend, Chairman McGovern, had a term for this procedure in the last Congress. He called it ``martial law.'' I would remind my friends that pushing through bills on short notice, at the last minute, and using the martial law procedure is a recipe for potential disaster, and certainly is no way to make good law. It is also contrary to the commitment the Democrats made, upon taking the majority, to provide 72 hours notice before bringing a bill to the floor for a vote; a rule they already are violating with one of the measures today, albeit only by a matter of hours. I would also remind my friends that with consideration of the budget agreement today, there is absolutely no other legislation that is so critical and that must be done this week to justify needing this extraordinary procedure. The only thing my friends would use this martial law for is to advance highly-partisan messaging bills in order to appease some faction or other in their caucus ahead of the recess. That is a waste of the committee's time and a waste of the House's time. And I assure you, you will have plenty of time for these types of bills in the fall. On a much more positive note, though, as I said at the start of my remarks, the two bills covered by this rule today are actually bipartisan, and we should all be encouraged by that. One bill, H.R. 549, the Venezuela TPS Act of 2019, was brought up on the floor on suspension on Tuesday. It, unfortunately, failed to reach the required two-thirds threshold needed for passage under suspension of the rules. But I have every confidence that it will easily pass the House later today under this rule; and I certainly look forward to supporting it with my friends on the other side of the aisle. Mr. Speaker, a lot of people talk about the need for bipartisanship around here, but in our second bill for today, we have an excellent example of what the word actually means. H.R. 3877, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019, is as advertised. It is a bipartisan bill that sets budgetary needs for fiscal years 2020 and 2021. It suspends the debt limit until July 31 of 2021 to protect the full faith and credit of the Nation. And it avoids devastating sequestration cuts. I said a moment ago that this is an excellent example of what bipartisanship means, and I truly believe that to be the case. This is a bill that was negotiated between the President of the United States and the leaders of both [[Page H7392]] parties in both Houses of Congress, resulting in the kind of bipartisan, bicameral budget deal in which all Members can have confidence. Is this bill a perfect one? No, of course not. No bill ever is. I, myself, would have preferred that this bill address entitlement reform and deficit reduction, and I am certain that some of my friends on the other side of the aisle would have preferred a lower defense spending number. Some of my friends on my side of the aisle would have preferred a higher defense spending number. But even when we both agree that this bill isn't perfect, it is still a good deal for the American people. I think this bill achieves four bipartisan goals that I would like to highlight. First, with the passage of this bill, we would avoid the horrific consequences of defaulting on our national debt, which would lead to an economic chaos the likes of which none of us should ever wish to see. Second, in setting new budgetary levels, we will avoid the automatic and devastating sequestration cuts that would have taken effect at the beginning of October of this year. Third, it allows us to move forward with clarity on the appropriations process for the coming fiscal year and probably for the fiscal year after that. And fourth, it allows us to resume the process of rebuilding our military after years of underfunding left it with a severe readiness crisis. When the Commander in Chief tells us that he needs something to defend America, there can only be one answer, and that answer is yes. Mr. Speaker, I think every Member of the House can be proud of the work done by the leaders of both parties to get us to this point. All five of the people in question, the President, the Speaker, the House Republican Leader, the Senate Majority Leader, and the Senate Minority Leader, negotiated in good faith and produced a compromise bill that all five of them stand behind. In order to get there, every one of them had to give up some things. That is what it takes to make a compromise, and this is what makes this bipartisan bill possible. I know there are Members of this House who are disappointed with this bill. I, too, as I mentioned earlier, am not completely satisfied with it. But I trust my leaders to negotiate on our behalf. And when they came back with this deal, I trusted that this was the best compromise they could reach. Everybody had to give something to get something, and I trust that the leaders of my party achieved as much as they could in the course of the negotiation. The same should hold for my friends across the aisle with their leaders of their party. Working together, all five did exactly what leaders are supposed to do; they led and, in doing so, came to the best deal possible, not for each party, but for the whole Nation. Now it is up to the Members of the House to say yes and move forward with the passage of this bill. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Mr. Cole for his comments, particularly about the Venezuelan TPS legislation, as well as the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019. Truly, these are two bills that are supported by both sides of the aisle. Neither one is exactly perfect, but they are both good, and that is the kind of legislation we need to get through this body to the Senate and to the White House. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Shalala), my good friend. Ms. SHALALA. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule and H.R. 549, the Venezuela TPS Act of 2019, this is lifesaving, bipartisan legislation to designate TPS for Venezuelans, and I appreciate the generous remarks of Ranking Member Cole. The socialist, narco regimes of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro have plunged Venezuela into catastrophe. Venezuela was once a thriving democracy. Now the economy, the health sector, the education system, and virtually every democratic institution is in ruins. The Venezuelan economy has completely collapsed, and the inflation is expected to reach 10 million percent this year. More than 4 million refugees have fled the continuous worsening conditions in Venezuelan. They have fled to Colombia, to Brazil, to Peru, to so many countries, and they have come to the United States, following the footsteps of millions of refugees before them; those who have helped make this the greatest country on Earth. {time} 1230 They have come to our shores in search of the freedom, democracy, and security that the Maduro regime has stolen from them, and so many Venezuelans have come to south Florida where they have contributed so much to our diverse community. In my district, there are approximately 17,000 Venezuelan-born residents, so this is personal for us. These are our neighbors, our friends, our students, and our teachers. My constituents cannot safely return. As the vote on Tuesday demonstrated, we are ready to take legislative action to allow Venezuelans to apply for temporary protective status. TPS has bipartisan support in the House and in the Senate, but now it is time for the Senate to take this bill up. Our hope is that passage of this bill in our House will light the fire under the Senate. Bipartisan TPS legislation has passed through the Senate committees. Now more than ever, it is time for them to take it up and to get TPS signed into law. TPS is a fundamental, literally, lifesaving component to our approach to the crisis in Venezuela, but TPS alone won't solve the crisis. The United States and the international community must continue to put pressure on the regime to facilitate a peaceful change in leadership. We must expose the corrupt networks that prop up the Maduro government and meet the urgent basic needs of the poor, the hungry, and the sick. Because our ultimate goal is to secure a stable and peaceful transition of power for the Venezuelan people, I want to thank my Florida colleagues, including lead sponsors Mr. Soto and Mr. Diaz- Balart, as well as Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Debbie Mucarsel-Powell and also our Puerto Rican colleague, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon. I also want to thank Chairman McGovern for his work to help make sure this bill was included in this rule. Viva Venezuela. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by doing something unusual in a rules debate. I want to agree with everything my good friend from Florida had to say. I am very pleased with her work and my colleague Mr. Diaz- Balart's work on this legislation, as well as the other Members that she mentioned. This is an important bill for us to pass for exactly the reasons my friend laid out. The reality is we have an unfolding political crisis in Venezuela, and we have people at fear for their life and, frankly, leaving a collapsing economy. This country ought to be a refuge for people in those kinds of circumstances, so I share my friend's hope that we get this done here and then we get action in the United States Senate. I do want to advise the Chair, Mr. Speaker, that, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately bring up H.R. 336, the Strengthening America's Security in the Middle East Act of 2019, with an amendment that will make it identical to S. 1, which passed the Senate in a bipartisan vote of 77-23 earlier this year. This bill includes many critical provisions, but the most important section of this bill is the Combating BDS Act of 2019, which will allow a State or local government to adopt measures to divest assets from entities using boycotts, divestments, or sanctions to influence Israel's policies. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, the House passed H. Res. 246, a nonbinding resolution opposing the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement; and while I appreciate the House's action in passing that resolution, we can do better in opposing this heinous practice than simply passing a nonbinding resolution. Actions speak louder than words. We cannot just say we believe in something. We must do something. [[Page H7393]] H.R. 336 would do something. It would allow a State or local government to stand with us in defense of Israel. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with the 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 Oklahoma? There was no objection. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Kustoff), my good friend, for further explanation of this amendment. Mr. KUSTOFF of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my good friend from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for yielding. H.R. 336, the Strengthening America's Security Act in the Middle East Act, is the House companion to S. 1. This bill was so important that the United States Senate made it their top legislative priority and passed it with overwhelming bipartisan support. H.R. 336, a bill introduced by Ranking Member McCaul, combines four various policy initiatives that deal with the United States-Israel relationship. This legislation authorizes assistance in weapons transfers to Israel; extends defense cooperation with Jordan; establishes additional sanctions on individuals supporting the Syrian Government; and, most importantly, allows States to divest from entities that are boycotting Israel. Just this week, the House passed, with bipartisan support, a resolution opposing the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, also known as BDS. That resolution was a great stepping stone, but we need to do more. Now we must pass legislation with some teeth. There is no doubt that Israel is our greatest ally in the Middle East. It is the only Jewish state. Since her birth 71 years ago, the U.S.-Israel relationship has continued to grow stronger as we find new means for cooperation and ensure the safety of her and her people. It is time for the Democrat leadership to bring this crucial bill to the House floor for a vote. It is vital for all of us to come together and show our support for Israel. It is not solely Republican and not solely Democrat. We must continue to come together as a unified body to stamp out anti-Semitism and hate towards the only Jewish state, Israel. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just say to my friend, Mr. Kustoff, he and I served together on Financial Services, and there is agreement here. In fact, this resolution that he described as a great stepping stone, we just took and passed the resolution 2 days ago with 398 ``aye'' votes in favor of that. Today, though, we are here to focus on two other things, both of which are substantial measures in and of themselves, and we can look forward to other measures involving the anti-BDS movement or whatever we may be, but to deal with anti-Semitism. But today we are here, really, to applaud a deal that was cut among all of our leaders, Democrats and Republicans, that eliminates drastic cuts, approves funding, or funding levels, for the next year to 2 years, and allows America to move forward without the real potential of shutdown like we had for 35 days when the White House, earlier in this year, refused to deal on certain subjects and appropriations. Thankfully, we got through that. I think, at this point, cooler heads have prevailed, and we are moving forward on the Bipartisan Budget Act; and then, as Ms. Shalala said, we are dealing with, really, a humanitarian crisis that exists in Venezuela, at this point, to provide temporary protected status to those who fled their country, who are in America, many of whom are in Florida, to provide them some protection while they are here and to make sure that they can comfortably, if you will, remain here and not fear that they are going to have to be deported back to Venezuela, where we know there is a lot of strife and danger. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I agree with my friend very much. These two pieces of legislation are excellent, and they are must pass, and I look forward with working with him on that. But this is such an extraordinary outbreak of bipartisanship, I think we should go for broke and bring up this other legislation as well, which is equally bipartisan, as my friend says. I don't want to waste this magic moment, Mr. Speaker. We don't get many of them around here. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin), my good friend. Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so the House may take up H.R. 336, a bipartisan legislative package that would help fight back against the BDS movement, protect U.S. security in the Middle East by strengthening our alliances with Israel and Jordan, and sanction nefarious actors like Assad. The Senate version of this bill, S. 1, passed with an overwhelming bipartisan majority of 77-23. Surprisingly, the major point of contention for this package is the Combating BDS Act of 2019, a bipartisan bill that garnered over 100 cosponsors last Congress and would help combat the BDS movement. It is okay to have reasonable, legitimate concerns with any government in the world, including our own, but this hate-filled movement is not all about affirming the rights of Palestinians, as some suggest. It is about delegitimizing Israel by turning it into a pariah state cut off from all trade, tourism, military, diplomatic, and cultural ties with the rest of the world. BDS, whose founder was blatantly anti-Semitic, amounts to a declaration of economic war against Israel, with a goal of destroying it as the only Jewish state on Earth. I hear of college students all across our entire country who share very personal testimonials of how they are being targeted by blatant anti-Semitism in the name of BDS. Thankfully, this week, the House passed H. Res. 246, a resolution to forcefully condemn the BDS movement. Making a strong statement is great and should be celebrated, but we should wake up the next morning asking ourselves, challenging each other to what we can do about it. S. 1 has already passed the Senate, but it is not being brought up in this House, despite nearly 200 Members signing the discharge petition and over 100 cosponsors last Congress. This bill does not impede the right of any individual American to boycott or criticize Israel, as some suggest. Instead, H.R. 336 would combat the BDS movement by simply allowing State and local governments to have the right to counter the BDS movement by ending contracts with companies that boycott Israel, if they so choose, while protecting U.S. security in the Middle East. There were 350 cosponsors on the statement that was made earlier this week. There were nearly 400 votes on the House floor. Republicans and Democrats worked together through a process, from drafting the legislation to getting the bill marked up at committee, to passing on the House floor, and we should celebrate making a great statement. Now we should be passing a bill with teeth. We could do it right now. If this bill gets added to the voting before we leave here this week, I guarantee it passes. So not only did we, earlier this week, make a strong statement to combat the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic BDS movement, but we woke up the next day motivated to actually challenge ourselves to do something about it, and we got it done. The one thing that is concerning is that we keep asking for a vote on H.R. 336, and we are not getting an answer in response as to why it is not coming up for a vote or when it will come up for a vote. I would challenge anyone who has an answer to this question to please let us know, because we don't know what else to do other than bringing up today's proposal, for example. But if this is something that has already passed the Senate with a strong bipartisan majority, it is the right thing to do. We have almost unanimously condemned the BDS movement, and we are here on the House floor together with a bill that would pass, strongly? [[Page H7394]] Let's get it done. Let's get it done right now. There are a lot of people who would celebrate that big win. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to continue to focus on what is before us today, and what is before us today is dealing with the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela and dealing with the budget of the United States of America, two accomplishments, both bipartisan, that I think will really assist and protect so many people who fled Venezuela to America, and particularly to Florida, but also provides for funding caps that help us with veterans, with infrastructure, with foreign affairs across the board, with our military. The President tweeted the other day that the Bipartisan Budget Act was a real accomplishment for veterans and our military, and I agree. {time} 1245 I am sorry that Mr. Zeldin and Mr. Cole would like to bring up something else. In fact, I was fortunate enough to be in the chair when the BDS bill and the resolution, H. Res. 246, I think it was, was being debated and passed by an overwhelming majority and it really was a huge accomplishment, which I am afraid the arguments that the gentleman is making now minimize what was accomplished just 2 days ago. I think we need to remain focused on these major pieces of legislation that will guide America for the next 2 years and will protect Venezuelans who fled their country for at least 18 months. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin), my good friend. Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman who just spoke for expressing his gratitude and his celebration for what passed earlier this week and I appreciate his support for what passed earlier this week. I would actually suggest that doing something about that statement that we made is not minimizing the statement that we made, it is actually maximizing the statement that we made. We are minimizing the statement that we made if we wake up the next day and decide that we are not going to do anything about it by passing a bill with teeth. Again, I would ask anyone who has an answer to this question, when can we have a vote on S. 1 and H.R. 336? It is a simple question. I don't have the answer to it, but if anyone can answer that for us, it would really help those who genuinely, sincerely, passionately believe in this legislation. I know from my conversations with colleagues on the opposite side of the aisle, I know of a number of colleagues who would enthusiastically vote for S. 1/H.R. 336. And I know of friends, colleagues on the other side of the aisle who have asked for a vote on S. 1/H.R. 336. Mr. Speaker, now would be a good opportunity, I don't want to put the gentleman on the spot, but if anybody can answer that question, we are very interested in having a vote scheduled on this bill. Let's maximize the statement that we made by adding that. It will pass and it will go to the President and it will be signed into law, and we will celebrate not only a strong statement made, but maximizing that strong statement made by doing something about it and passing a bill with teeth. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. I want to begin by thanking my colleague for a good debate and, frankly, for both of us having the enjoyable and unusual position of being in favor of both the pieces of legislation that are dealt with in the rule. I want to go back and talk, just briefly, about the Venezuela TPS legislation that our good friend and our fellow Rules Committee member, Ms. Shalala, has. That is an important piece of legislation. That is an important statement of American principles. I think it is an important institutional moment for us in the House, because we are passing something jointly to try and get the other body to do something jointly as well, because I am quite convinced if that got to the floor, it would pass in a very substantial bipartisan way. I am glad to work with my friends to achieve this. I suppose I am even more pleased about the bipartisan Budget Act. I want to again congratulate the five leaders on both sides of the aisle who actually got this done. The President of the United States sat down and negotiated this. We have a lot of people on my side of the aisle that are big supporters of the President of the United States. I hope they show that support today by actually voting for the deal that he negotiated and has tweeted out that he supports. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate in our own Chamber the Speaker and the Republican leader, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. McCarthy, for also participating in that and working together. I know each one of them had to go back to their caucuses and probably deliver some news that people in those caucuses did not want to hear. That is certainly true on our side of the aisle. I know it is true on the gentleman's side of the aisle as well. That is what leaders do. They come to agreements and they go back, and they explain to their supporters, ``Hey, I couldn't get you everything you wanted, even though I wanted those things, too,'' but every now and then you need to sit down and put what is good for the American people first. We all know that a catastrophic debt ceiling crisis and default, what that would do to our economy, how many people that would put out of work. We all know what having an agreed-upon deal in terms of stability going forward for 2 years means for the American military, but for every other agency of government as well. These are huge, huge wins even if there was some sacrifice. Now, would I like to do some more on deficit reduction and entitlement reform? I absolutely would. We will continue to work on that. But any time I can come to an agreement that saves the economy, that provides government stability, that gives our military the ability to plan and to rebuild itself over a 2-year period, and that the Commander in Chief is asking me to do, I am going to vote for that every single time. I am very proud to be voting for it with my friends on the other side of the aisle, who also, again, had objectives in this that they weren't able to reach. Finally, I would be remiss--I do this as seldom as possible--but I will praise the United States Senate, because the majority leader and the minority leader were also indispensable in getting this done, and in many ways probably came to an agreement between themselves faster even than the other parties involved. But at the end of the day, again, both of those leaders, the majority leader and the minority leader in the Senate, had to go back and tell their caucuses, ``Look, this is the best deal I can get. I can't get everything I want. We are not going to achieve everything we would like to achieve.'' Again, I respect my colleagues who look at the deal and say, ``That is not good enough.'' That is fine, but can they tell me what is better that they can get passed? I see no alternative to this particular piece of legislation that is not worse. The worst thing to do would be to defeat this bipartisan budget agreement and then deal with sequester or a debt crisis or a shutdown or, at best, a CR that would project these quarrels forward into the next year. It is already a pretty tense political time between all sides. The fact, again, that we are coming together and making a bipartisan agreement really reflects well on our respective leaders on each side of the aisle and certainly on the President. I think if the Members will vote in a bipartisan fashion, it will reflect well on them and on the institution as well. Mr. Speaker, I know some doubted that we could ever work together. I think this is the most significant thing we have done together this year, and I just want to thank all concerned. Mr. Speaker, I look forward to supporting it enthusiastically. I hope others of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle will do the same. Mr. Speaker, with that, while I oppose the rule, I would certainly urge passage of both these important pieces of legislation, and I look forward to working with my friends in that regard. [[Page H7395]] Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) for his comments. I almost thought he was going to support the rule. I just felt it was moving in that direction, but not quite, but I do want to thank him. And, particularly, I think, during the 35 days that we were in shutdown mode at the beginning of this year, there were a lot of hard lessons learned by a lot of people, and there were a lot of people who suffered, starting with the people that needed assistance in one way or another by Federal employees who were, in effect, sitting at home waiting for us to open the government again. So, Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman, I think that hard lesson-- and we met pretty much every night in the Rules Committee, the Appropriations Committee, the gentleman is an appropriator--that was something that weighed heavily on all of us. Mr. Speaker, I do want to applaud the Republicans and Democrats, our leadership, and the White House in coming up with a compromise. I know there will be some on my side that will not support this for a variety of reasons, and I know there will be some on Mr. Cole's side as well, but, hopefully, we can garner enough support--and I think it will be strong support--today for both of these pieces of legislation that are brought up under the rule. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues for joining me to speak on the rule and these pieces of legislation. The rule provides for consideration of H.R. 549, the Venezuelan TPS Act, which we already know is supported by a bipartisan majority in this House. We also need and must pass H.R. 3877, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019. This legislation will raise the debt ceiling for 2 years and increases discretionary spending caps for fiscal year 2020 and fiscal year 2021. The deal achieves parity between increases in defense and nondefense spending and lets the House and the Senate get back to negotiation on all of the appropriations bills so that Congress can fulfill its constitutional duty of funding the government. As we look ahead to the next several weeks, which we will spend in our districts visiting with constituents and touring local businesses, I look forward to sharing with my constituents that despite our disagreements and everything that they may see on TV, we can still come together and get things done on behalf of America. Mr. Speaker, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question. The material previously referred to by Mr. Cole is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 519 At the end of the resolution, add the following: Sec. 4. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 336) to make improvements to certain defense and security assistance provisions and to authorize the appropriation of funds to Israel, to reauthorize the United States-Jordan Defense Cooperation Act of 2015, and to halt the wholesale slaughter of the Syrian people, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment described in section 5 of 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 Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec 5. The amendment referred to in Section 4 is an amendment to H.R. 336 to add at the end of the bill the following: SEC. 406. CLARIFICATION OF DEADLINE FOR REPORT ON ESTABLISHING AN ENTERPRISE FUND FOR JORDAN. For purposes of section 205(a), the term `stablishment of the United States Development Finance Corporation' means the end of the transition period, as defined in section 1461 of the Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development Act of 2018 (division F of Public Law 115-254). SEC. 407. FORM OF REPORT ON THE COOPERATION OF THE UNITED STATES AND ISRAEL WITH RESPECT TO COUNTERING UNMANNED AERIAL SYSTEMS. The report required under section 123(d) shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may include a classified annex. SEC. 408. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON WITHDRAWALS OF UNITED STATES FORCES FROM SYRIA AND AFGHANISTAN. (a) Findings--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The foreign terrorist organization al Qaeda, responsible for the attacks of September 11, 2001, maintains a presence in Afghanistan. (2) The Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham, better known by its acronym ISIS, flourished in the chaos unleashed by the civil war in Syria and at one point controlled extensive territory in Iraq and Syria. (3) Al Qaeda, ISIS, and their affiliates have murdered thousands of innocent civilians. (4) Al Qaeda, ISIS, and their affiliates have proven resilient and have regrouped when the United States and its partners have withdrawn from the fight against them. (b) Sense of Congress--Congress-- (1) acknowledges that the United States military and our partners have made significant progress in the campaign against al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS), and honors the contributions and sacrifice of the members of the United States Armed Forces who have served on the front lines of this fight; (2) recognizes the continuing threat to the homeland and our allies posed by al Qaeda and ISIS, which maintain an ability to operate in Syria and Afghanistan; (3) expresses concern that Iran has supported the Taliban in Afghanistan and Hizballah and the Assad regime in Syria, and has sought to frustrate diplomatic efforts to resolve conflicts in these two countries; (4) recognizes the positive role the United States and its partners have played in Syria and Afghanistan fighting terrorist groups, countering Iranian aggression, deterring the further use of chemical weapons, and protecting human rights; (5) warns that a precipitous withdrawal of United States forces from the ongoing fight against these groups, without effective, countervailing efforts to secure gains in Syria and Afghanistan, could allow terrorists to regroup, destabilize critical regions, and create vacuums that could be filled by Iran or Russia, to the detriment of United States interests and those of our allies; (6) recognizes that al Qaeda and ISIS pose a global threat, which merits increased international contributions to the counterterrorism, diplomatic, and stabilization efforts underway in Syria and Afghanistan; (7) recognizes that diplomatic efforts to secure peaceful, negotiated solutions to the conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan are necessary to long-term stability and counterterrorism efforts in the Middle East and South Asia; (8) acknowledges the progress made by Special Representative Khalilzad in his efforts to promote reconciliation in Afghanistan; (9) calls upon the Administration to conduct a thorough review of the military and diplomatic strategies in Syria and Afghanistan, including an assessment of the risk that withdrawal from those countries could strengthen the power and influence of Russia and Iran in the Middle East and South Asia and undermine diplomatic efforts toward negotiated, peaceful solutions; (10) requests that the Administration, as part of this review, solicit the views of Israel, our regional partners, and other key troop-contributing nations in the fight against al Qaeda and ISIS; (11) reiterates support for international diplomatic efforts to facilitate peaceful, negotiated resolutions to the ongoing conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan on terms that respect the rights of innocent civilians and deny safe havens to terrorists; (12) calls upon the Administration to pursue a strategy that sets the conditions for the long-term defeat of al Qaeda and ISIS, as well as the protection of regional partners and allies, while ensuring that Iran cannot dominate the region or threaten Israel; (13) encourages close collaboration between the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch to ensure continuing strong, bipartisan support for United States military operations in Syria and Afghanistan; and (14) calls upon the Administration to certify that conditions have been met for the enduring defeat of al Qaeda and ISIS before initiating any significant withdrawal of United States forces from Syria or Afghanistan. (c) Rule of Construction--Nothing in this section shall be construed as a declaration of war or an authorization of the use of military force. Sec. 6. Clause l(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 336. Mr. PERLMUTTER. 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. COLE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. [[Page H7396]] ____________________
All in House sectionPrev35 of 207Next