August 22, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 149 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session

[Pages H4270-H4299]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       DELIVERING FOR AMERICA ACT

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House 
Resolution 1092, I call up the bill (H.R.

[[Page H4271]]

8015) to maintain prompt and reliable postal services during the COVID-
19 health emergency, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate 
consideration in the House.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1092, an 
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules 
Committee Print 116-61, modified by the amendment printed in House 
Report 116-480, is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered 
read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 8015

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Delivering for America 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. PROMPT AND RELIABLE POSTAL SERVICES DURING COVID-19 
                   PANDEMIC.

       (a) In General.--During the period beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act and ending on the last day of the 
     COVID-19 public health emergency or January 31, 2021, 
     whichever is later, the United States Postal Service may not 
     implement or approve any change to the operations or the 
     level of service provided by the Postal Service from those in 
     effect on January 1, 2020, that would reduce service 
     performance or impede prompt, reliable, and efficient 
     services, including any of the following actions:
       (1) Any change in the nature of postal services which will 
     generally affect service on a nationwide or substantially 
     nationwide basis.
       (2) Any revision of service standards.
       (3) Any closure or consolidation of any post office or 
     postal facility, or any reduction of such office or facility 
     hours.
       (4) Any prohibition or restriction on the use of overtime 
     or overtime pay to Postal Service officers or employees.
       (5) Any change that would prevent the Postal Service from 
     meeting its service standards or cause a decline in 
     measurements of performance relative to those service 
     standards.
       (6) Any change that would have the effect of delaying 
     deferring, or curtailing mail, allowing for the non-delivery 
     of mail to a delivery route, or increasing the volume of 
     undelivered mail.
       (7) Treating election mail as any class of mail other than 
     first-class mail, regardless of whether such treatment 
     requires payment of overtime pay to officers or employees of 
     the Postal Service.
       (8) Removing, decommissioning, or any other stoppage of 
     mail sorting machines, other than for routine maintenance.
       (9) Removing or eliminating any mail collection box that is 
     available to the public.
       (10) Enacting any rule, policy, or standard the purpose or 
     effect of which would delay the delivery of mail to or from a 
     government entity.
       (11) Instituting any hiring freeze.
       (b) Reversal of Policies Hindering Delivery of Mail.--The 
     United States Postal Service shall reverse any initiative or 
     action that is causing delay in processing or delivery or 
     non-delivery of the mail.
       (c) Election Mail.--
       (1) Policy on postmarks.--It shall be the policy of the 
     United States Postal Service to postmark, which shall include 
     any imprinted indicia from the Postal Service that indicates 
     the date of receipt, all election mail processed by the 
     Postal Service.
       (2) Same-day processing.--The United States Postal Service 
     shall ensure, to the maximum extent practical, that election 
     mail is processed and cleared from any postal facility or 
     post office on the same day it is received at such a facility 
     or post office.
       (d) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``COVID-19 public health emergency'' means the 
     public health emergency declared by the Secretary of Health 
     and Human Services on January 27, 2020, with respect to the 
     2019 Novel Coronavirus;
       (2) the term ``election mail'' means mail consisting of--
       (A) voter registration application forms, completed voter 
     registration application forms, and voter registration cards 
     or similar materials;
       (B) absentee and other mail-in ballot application forms, 
     blank absentee and other mail-in ballots, and completed 
     absentee and other mail-in ballots; and
       (C) other materials relating to an election which are 
     mailed by a State or local election official to individuals 
     who are registered to vote in the election; and
       (3) the term ``government entity'' means the Federal 
     Government or any State (as that term is defined in section 
     311 of title 5, United States Code) or local government and 
     any subdivision thereof.

     SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE POSTAL SERVICE.

       There is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
     otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal year ending September 
     30, 2020, for an additional payment to the Postal Service 
     Fund (established under section 2003 of title 39, United 
     States Code), $25,000,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended. Of the amount appropriated in the previous 
     sentence, $15,000,000 shall be transferred to ``United States 
     Postal Service--Office of Inspector General--Salaries and 
     Expenses''.

     SEC. 4. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act shall be construed to alter or 
     otherwise effect the terms and conditions of section 3406 of 
     title 39, United States Code (relating to balloting materials 
     under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting 
     Act).

     SEC. 5. BUDGETARY EFFECTS.

       (a) In General.--The amounts provided by this Act are 
     designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     4(g) of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (2 U.S.C. 
     933(g)).
       (b) Designation in the Senate.--In the Senate, this Act is 
     designated as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     4112(a) of H. Con. Res. 71 (115th Congress), the concurrent 
     resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 
2 hours, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.
  The gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney) and the 
gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Comer) each will control 1 hour.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise 
and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on H.R. 8015.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 5 
minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Delivering for America 
Act. I also rise in strong support of the brave postal workers across 
this Nation who are continuing to deliver the mail for the American 
people in the middle of a global pandemic.
  The Postal Service is a critical component of America's 
infrastructure. It provides a lifeline of medication, supplies, and 
mail for all Americans, everywhere they live, especially in this time 
of need.
  Earlier this year, the Postal Service asked Congress to help. They 
asked us for $25 billion in critical assistance to help navigate 
through this crisis, just like all these other industries did, 
businesses and entities that received Federal funds from Congress.
  This was not a Democratic request. It came from the Postal Service, 
and it was supported unanimously by the Board of Governors, all of whom 
were appointed by President Trump.
  In response to this urgent request, the House acted. The House said 
yes. We acted swiftly to help the Postal Service. We voted to include 
$25 billion in the HEROES Act, and we passed it on May 15.
  Unfortunately, the President would not agree, and the request has 
languished for more than 3 months. And now we know why, because the 
President told us why. He admitted on national television that he was 
blocking the $25 billion in order to hobble mail-in voting. That is 
what he said, and I would like to read it to you.
  ``They want $25 billion for the post office. Now they need that money 
in order to make the post office work, so it can take all of these 
millions and millions of ballots.''
  Regrettably, it does not end there. Now the new Postmaster General is 
using this lack of funding to justify sweeping and damaging changes to 
Postal Service operations, and we have seen the results: national 
headlines about delays of days and weeks in mail, veterans desperately 
waiting for their medications, sorting machines being ripped out and 
put in dumpsters.
  Yesterday, some of my Republican colleagues argued at the Rules 
Committee that there are ``no delays.'' That is right, no delays 
happening anywhere. They claimed repeatedly that there is no data that 
proves these delays are real.
  But we have eyes, and we have heard accounts from across this Nation, 
from our districts and every district in this Nation, and we have the 
Postmaster General himself who admitted yesterday that there are, in 
fact, delays, that he feels bad about them, and that he is working 
feverishly to address them.
  In addition, this afternoon, we have something else. We have new 
information. We have received new internal Postal Service documents 
showing nationwide performance data from July and August, official post 
office data. These new documents show that the delays we have all heard 
about are actually far worse than previously expected and told us. And 
they are across the board. They are across this Nation.

[[Page H4272]]

  This afternoon, I am making these new documents available to all 
Members of the House, and I urge you to review them carefully. They 
will be available on the floor during this debate.
  The bill we are considering today is simple. It does two things. 
First, it provides the $25 billion the Postal Service requested on a 
bipartisan basis to help during the coronavirus crisis. Second, it 
returns delivery standards to the way they were before the Postmaster 
General recently caused all those delays, which has an impact on the 
delivery and the ability of Americans to vote by mail.
  This is not a partisan issue. It makes absolutely no sense to 
implement these dramatic changes in the middle of a pandemic less than 
3 months before the November elections.
  The American people do not want anyone messing with the post office. 
They certainly do not want it to be politicized. They just want their 
mail, they want their medicines, and they want their mail-in ballots 
delivered in a timely way. And that is exactly what our bill does.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 8015, the Delivering 
for America Act. This is the result of a legislative process only 
slightly less absurd than the conspiracies, insinuations, and 
fabrications that gave rise to the purported need for it.
  I mean, just this second, the sponsor of the bill says she has data 
now that we can all receive while we are voting on the bill. I mean, is 
this data from a whistleblower? We all know their record with 
whistleblowers.
  The process is broken. Regardless, we are here today debating a bill 
to simultaneously hamstring and bail out the Postal Service. We have 
had no committee hearings or markups. On Monday, we will hear from the 
new Postmaster General, after we vote on the bill. It makes no sense. 
The result is deeply flawed.
  Although Dr. Fauci advised that there is no reason Americans cannot 
vote in person, citizens choosing to vote by mail must have their 
ballots delivered in a timely manner. The Postmaster General has 
pledged that is his mission. And on Friday, before the Senate, he 
pledged ballots would be delivered faster than first-class mail, 
without rate increases.
  I want to turn now and, one by one, debunk the Democrats' conspiracy 
theories.
  First, Democrats claim DeJoy is removing blue collection boxes to 
sabotage the election. This is an absurd claim. This removal process is 
routine. The Postal Service has removed 35,000 boxes over the last 10 
years. Under President Obama, at least 12,000 mailboxes were removed, 
and no one cried foul then.
  Second, Democrats claim Postmaster DeJoy is removing mail sorters to 
intentionally slow the mail. These sorters were on track to be removed 
prior to his appointment and reflect the reality that mail volume is 
down 33 percent over the past 15 years.

                              {time}  1345

  The third Democrat claim is that the Postal Service cannot manage 
volume resulting from the upcoming election. In 2019, the Postal 
Service handled an average of 471 million pieces of mail each day. 
Assuming all 158 million registered voters decided to vote by mail, the 
total volume of requested and mailed ballots would not exceed a typical 
day of total USPS mail volume.
  Fourth, the Democrats claim the Postmaster General's pilot program 
and his efforts to reduce excessive overtime were intended to sabotage 
the election. The Postmaster General testified he never sought to 
eliminate overtime. Instead, he sought to get postal operations on time 
so there would be less need to rely on overtime and reduce extra mail 
truck trips. With overtime costs of $1.1 billion in 2018 alone, why 
wouldn't you try to improve on that?
  The Fifth Democratic claim is that the Postal Service General Counsel 
sent letters to the Senate election boards to intimidate and stoke 
fears. Letters were also sent in May, well before Postmaster DeJoy took 
over--remember, the Postmaster has only been in office 60 days--saying 
what the U.S. Postal Service has been saying for years, that some State 
election boards have deadlines and requirements that simply do not 
consider the reality of Postal Service operations and logistics 
constraints.
  If a State allows voters to request absentee ballots 1 day before the 
election, why wouldn't the Postal Service advise there might be a 
problem.
  Sixth. Democrats are acting like any mail delays are new and 
orchestrated by Postmaster General DeJoy. As I have said time and time 
again, I have been hearing about postal delays for years. Where there 
are delays, it makes sense to figure out why, and it makes even more 
sense to do something to fix them.
  And, finally, the false narrative that the Postal Service is running 
out of money and will cease operations before the election. Currently, 
the Postal Service has over $15 billion cash on hand, that's enough to 
keep it solvent until August 2021, and enough time for us to do the 
right thing.
  Like the Russia hoax and the impeachment sham, the Democrats have 
manufactured another scandal for political purposes.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, first, in response, 
this is not a Democratic conspiracy theory. Republican officials from 
across this country, elected and appointed, have expressed their own 
concerns about postal delays and the President's comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District 
of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, even during this pandemic with most agencies 
down, we had not heard complaints from the Postal Service until Louis 
DeJoy was appointed Postmaster General. On the contrary, the pandemic 
had not kept our mail from being faithfully delivered.
  Almost immediately after DeJoy assumed office, pandemonium broke out. 
For example, in Ward 8 of my district, there was no mail for 2 weeks. 
And the District and 46 States have been warned by the Postal Service 
itself that it cannot guarantee that all mail ballots will arrive in 
time to be counted.
  Mr. DeJoy did not tell the truth at the Senate hearing yesterday. We 
know that from a July 15 memorandum directing employees explicitly to 
leave mail behind and to significantly cut overtime. We know that from 
an August 7 Postal Service action that reassigned 23 top executives 
with decades of institutional knowledge of postal operations in order 
to centralize operations. We know and will bring out before this 
hearing is over today that the Post Office continues to be sabotaged.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), a member of the Education Committee.
  Ms. FOXX of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, during my time in this 
Chamber I have devoted myself to finding the truth and working toward 
good governance. That requires gathering the facts and exposing the 
lies. It is in this light that I rise today to oppose H.R. 8015, the 
so-called Delivering for America Act.
  H.R. 8015 aims to solve a made-up crisis by forcing the Postal 
Service to double down on the very same activities that have caused it 
to lose money consistently each year since 2006. Then they give the 
Postal Service another $25 billion to lose with no strings attached.
  Mr. Speaker, there is no immediate Postal Service crisis. Democrats 
manufactured this crisis and are using it to create fear and advance 
their agenda. The Postal Service currently has $14 billion in cash on 
hand, which is enough to sustain operations through August of 2021. 
This comes on top of the fact that the Postal Service has not even 
touched the $10 billion loan that Congress extended to it in the 
recently passed CARES act.
  The Postal Service has many long-term problems, but there is no 
short-term crisis. If Democrats were serious about ensuring the 
longevity of the Postal Service, we would finally pass bipartisan 
measures like the Postal Service Reform Act of 2017 that was championed 
by former Representatives Meadows and Cummings. This bill would enact 
meaningful reforms, keep mailing costs down, encourage innovation, and 
not require additional taxpayer bailouts.

[[Page H4273]]

  Our current Postmaster General DeJoy took the job despite being 
vilified in public. He was unanimously selected by the bipartisan U.S. 
Postal Service Board of Governors because the board saw tremendous 
value in his decades of experience managing and growing a successful 
nationwide logistics company. He certainly had the qualifications to 
work with Congress and take on the task of postal reform.
  Mr. Speaker, we need long-term solutions to fix the long-term 
problems of the Postal Service. H.R. 8015 merely aims to score 
political points on an issue that does not even exist. I urge my 
colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes 
to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly), the distinguished 
chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Speaker, we just heard more of the same on the 
other side of the aisle, denial and disinformation. And I find it 
particularly ironic that my friend from North Carolina would cite the 
unanimous decision of the Board of Governors.
  Well, guess what? That same Board of Governors unanimously 
recommended the $25 billion you are declining that is in this bill 
today. It is interesting how we cherry-pick facts.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Delivering for America 
Act.
  There is an ongoing and concerted effort to disrupt the timeliness of 
mail delivery and to erode public confidence in the Postal Service, all 
leading, if successful, to the largest voter suppression in American 
history since Jim Crow.
  The effort is being directed by the new Postmaster General, Louis 
DeJoy, a crony and major donor of the President. A President who 
opposes mail-in voting for everyone apparently but himself and his 
wife. A President who has called the Postal Service a joke and a scam, 
and who threatened to veto the CARES Act with $2 trillion for 
desperately needed assistance all over this country simply to block 
this funding.
  On August 18, the Postmaster General announced, finally, he put a 
hold on some of the sweeping operational changes that were not only 
misguided amid a pandemic, but actually eroded public confidence in 
America's favorite government agency, the Postal Service.
  All in a day's work for someone unqualified and unfit to begin with 
for the office he now occupies.
  By now we should all know better than to take the administration at 
its word. And despite the Postmaster's reported retreat, the sabotage 
continues. The Postmaster is still not advocating for additional 
funding for the Postal Service, despite the recommendation by his own 
Board of Governors. He is still not committed to using overtime as a 
tool during the pandemic to compensate for 40,000 postal workers who 
have had to quarantine or gotten sick.
  The Postmaster's announcement didn't commit to reversing the cuts to 
service and capacity, especially restoring sorting machines that 
absolutely are critical tools in moving large volumes of mail, 
especially on the eve of a consequential national election.
  That is why this bill would restore the service delivery standards 
and operations in place before Mr. DeJoy took office.
  The Postmaster's announcement didn't include an agenda to support 
election mail that demonstrates a commitment to helping the Postal 
Service fulfill its historic role in this upcoming election in a 
pandemic. That is why this bill will ensure that election mail is 
prioritized for expedited delivery, as has been the practice in 
previous years.
  The Postmaster's announcement did not explain to the public, whom he 
serves, how an executive could fail so spectacularly and still keep his 
job. So we still have work to do because the sabotage continues.
  We must restore public confidence in the Postal Service and its 
ability to support voting by mail during the worst pandemic in 100 
years. American democracy demands no less.
  That is our history. That is the history Mr. DeJoy ignored, and that 
is the awesome responsibility he betrayed.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I want to add, there is no evidence of the 
charges of the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. 
Massie).
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, in March, Speaker Pelosi called me a 
dangerous nuisance for insisting that at least half of Congress come 
back to vote on a $2 trillion bailout bill. This week, she has called 
Congress into session to vote on a post office bill that is nothing but 
political posturing.
  Now, Speaker Pelosi told us we would probably be back in August to 
vote on a PPP bill. What she didn't tell us is that the PPP would stand 
for Pelosi's political posturing.
  Let me read a quote from the chief operating officer of the U.S. 
Postal Service that might explain what is going on. ``The decision to 
consolidate mail processing facilities recognizes the urgent need to 
reduce the size of the national mail processing network to eliminate 
costly underutilized infrastructure.'' That was the chief operating 
officer under Obama and Biden. In fact, that is from a press release in 
2012 when they announced they were closing nine processing facilities 
in the State of Kentucky. In fact, they didn't remove the equipment, 
they locked the doors and turned out the lights and shut it down 
forever, even in Lexington, Kentucky, our second biggest city in 
Kentucky. A year earlier they closed down a processing facility in my 
district, the Obama administration did--Obama/Biden.
  I include those press releases in the Record.

                            [Feb. 23, 2012]

              Kentucky Mail Processing Closings Announced

       Kentuckiana District--As a result of studies begun five 
     months ago, the Postal Service has made the decision to move 
     all mail processing processing operations from:
       Bowling Green, KY Processing and Distribution Facility 
     (P&DF) to the Nashville, TN, Processing and Distribution 
     Center (P&DC).
       Campton, KY, Customer Service Mail Processing Center 
     (CSMPC) to the Louisville, KY, P&DC.
       Elizabethtown, KY, CSMPC to the Louisville P&DC.
       Hazard, KY, CSMPC to the Knoxville, TN, P&DC.
       Lexington, KY, P&DC to the Louisville P&DC and the 
     Knoxville P&DC.
       London, KY P&DF to the Knoxville P&DC.
       Paducah, KY, P&DF to the Evansville, IN, P&DF.
       Somerset, KY, CSMPC to the Knoxville P&DC.
       Once the transfers are completed, the mail processing 
     operation at the closing sites will cease. There will be no 
     change to any of the retail units, business mail entry units 
     or vehicle maintenance facilities at these locations at this 
     time.
       It also has been determined as a result of the study of the 
     Louisville, KY, Annex, that there was no significant 
     opportunity to improve efficiency or service through 
     consolidation of mail processing operations, and no changes 
     will be made at this time.
       The Postal Service has experienced a 25 percent decline in 
     First-Class Mail volume since 2006, and receives no tax 
     dollars for its operations, relying instead on the sale of 
     postage, and postal products and services.
       ``The decision to consolidate mail processing facilities 
     recognizes the urgent need to reduce the size of the national 
     mail processing network to eliminate costly underutilized 
     infrastructure,'' said Chief Operating Officer. 
     ``Consolidating operations is necessary if the Postal Service 
     is to remain viable to provide mail service to the nation.''
       Specific dates have not been set for the transition. Until 
     a specific date has been announced, residential and business 
     mailers will continue to be served through the current 
     facilities.
       In December 2011, the Postal Service agreed to impose a 
     moratorium on closing or consolidating post offices and mail 
     processing facilities prior to May 15, 2012, to give Congress 
     and the Administration the opportunity to enact an 
     alternative plan.
       This delay was designed to allow Congress sufficient time 
     to enact comprehensive postal legislation. In the meantime, 
     the Postal Service continued all necessary steps required for 
     the review of these facilities, including public 
     notifications, public input meetings and consideration of 
     public comments.
       Implementation of this consolidation is contingent upon the 
     outcome of pending rulemaking for a proposal to revise 
     existing service standards. This announcement is provided in 
     advance so that appropriate planning and notification can be 
     made in accordance with existing employee agreements.
       A list of mail processing studies and their status is 
     available at usps.com/ourfuturenetwork. Specific information 
     about individual studies, including public meeting summaries 
     and summary briefs, is posted on the website, usps.com/
     areamailprocessing, as it becomes available.
                                  ____


                            [Apr. 28, 2011]

      Ashland Mail Processing Operations Moving to Charleston, WV

       Ashland, KY--As a result of a study begun in September 
     2010, the Postal Service has

[[Page H4274]]

     made the decision to move mail processing operations from the 
     Ashland Processing and Distribution Facility to the 
     Charleston WV Processing and Distribution Facility.
       Kentuckiana District Manager James W. Kiser said, ``Given 
     the drastic 20 percent decline in mail volume the Postal 
     Service has experienced since 2007, we must take action to 
     reduce the size of our mail processing network. Consolidating 
     operations and placing our people where we need them is 
     necessary if the Postal Service is to remain viable to 
     provide mail service to the nation.''
       I understand our employees' concern over this move,'' Kiser 
     added, ``but the consolidation makes sense given the fiscal 
     realities. The Charleston facility has the capacity to handle 
     the additional workload and we can realize significant 
     savings by shifting operations there.''
       The transition is expected to be completed by January 2012. 
     Some employees may be reassigned to the Charleston facility 
     or to other vacant positions as a result of the move.
       This move will not cause any changes in local mail 
     delivery,'' said Kiser. ``Letters mailed to local addresses 
     will be delivered the next day, the same as before. I am 
     confident the transition will be smooth and transparent to 
     our customers and they will continue to receive the same 
     excellent service they always have.''
       There will be no change in service standards for 96.3 
     percent of mail. However, as a result of the consolidation, 
     service to 403-406, 413-414, 417-418, 430-432 and 456 will 
     change from overnight to 2-day. Service to 246-248, 250-253, 
     258-259 and 261-266 will improve from 2-day to overnight. 
     ``The significant cost savings and productivity gains 
     expected from this consolidation were deciding factors in 
     making this very difficult decision,'' said Kiser.
       Full retail services will still be available at the Ashland 
     Post Office.
       The Ashland Business Mail Entry Unit will remain open for 
     large volume business mailers. Large volume business mailers 
     will be able to bring their mail to the Ashland Business Mail 
     Entry Unit at 1140 Carter Ave.

  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Speaker, my mail, if I send it to my neighbor, goes 
to Charleston, West Virginia, before it comes back to Kentucky. Is this 
part of some vast conspiracy? No. It's part of a decade's long 
realignment process where the post office is trying to match the needs 
of the consumers to the post office infrastructure.
  These voter suppression conspiracies, who knows what the Democrats 
will blame next. Last month they were blaming the Census, this month 
they are blaming the post office, probably next month they will blame 
Amtrak.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Lynch), the chair of the 
Subcommittee on National Security for the Committee on Oversight and 
Reform.
  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Subcommittee on National 
Security, I want to rise in strong support of H.R. 8015, the Delivering 
for America Act.
  This urgent legislation would reverse the ill-advised changes to mail 
delivery that the new Postmaster General has implemented to the injury 
of every American's right to vote, and at a serious peril to our 
democracy.
  In my own district, in the city of Boston and city of Brockton, the 
Postal Service has removed at least six high-capacity mail sorting 
machines in the mail facility in South Boston, and two more from the 
postal processing and distribution center in the city of Brockton, 
causing a 4- to 5-day delay right now in the city of Brockton.

                              {time}  1400

  Why would someone do that 10 days before a congressional primary in 
Massachusetts in the midst of a pandemic when people are being asked to 
vote by mail in order to keep themselves safe?
  Mr. Speaker, I was elected on 9/11, the day of the terrorist attacks 
on our country. As horrific as that day was, I feel proud that our 
Nation came together, as Americans do in difficult times. We mourned 
our fallen heroes. We tried to comfort their families. And we turned to 
face our adversary together, Democrat and Republican.
  Looking back, I believe our democracy was less in danger then than it 
is today. I say that for two reasons. First, because we were united 
then, and we are divided today. And we know who divides us. Secondly, 
back then, the threat was external. But today, at this moment, the 
greatest threat to our democracy is the current administration.
  I call on my colleagues: Stand together. Stand together and defend 
democracy. Defend your own constituents' right to vote. I urge my 
colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 8015.
  Defend democracy. You will miss it when it is gone.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Hice), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Government Operations.
  Mr. HICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member and my 
friend for yielding.
  I would counter by saying the greatest threat to democracy in the 
country is the current majority in the House of Representatives. What 
we are doing even right here today, what we are doing right now, we 
haven't even had a hearing on this.
  We are going to have a hearing on Monday for something we are voting 
on today. Absolute political malpractice is what we are watching right 
here. Why do we even debate this? Why don't we have a vote and then 
debate it? That is the same issue as what we are doing right now.
  My Democratic friends over here are blaming the President as though 
he is involved in voter suppression. We want to talk about voter 
suppression. We want to talk about influencing the vote.
  Our own Speaker Pelosi just a little while ago had a press conference 
in which she was touting, 100 days ago, the HEROES Act passed. What she 
did not say was what was in the HEROES Act: forbidding States from 
having voter ID.
  We are going to have universal mail-in ballots, no voter ID. We are 
going to have ballot harvesting across the country. So, we have no 
purging of votes. We are just going to send out millions of ballots, 
among which deceased people are there, folks who have moved, or ballots 
just being sent out all over the place. There will be no voter IDs 
required. Yet, all these ballots, somebody is going to vote for them 
and send them back in. Talk about political malpractice.
  The chairwoman herself ought to be the first to stand up and testify 
of the disaster of her own election that took over 6 weeks or 
thereabouts to get the results because these mail-in ballots kept 
coming and coming and coming, thousands of which were thrown out. It 
opened doors for lawsuits in your own election.
  It is just absolute insanity what we are doing here, to me. It is a 
representation of why people are so disgusted with Washington.
  We talk about the delays in the mail service. In April this year, we 
had a briefing--not a hearing, a briefing--to inform us of the delays 
that were going to be brought about in the Postal Service due to COVID. 
Well, that is happening. We have thousands of postal workers who are 
not working because of COVID.
  We also have great delays--would you not agree?--in cities like 
Portland, like Chicago. Of course, there are incredible delays. People 
are scared to death to even deliver the mail in cities like this. Here 
we come to a place like this to bail out the Postal Service with $25 
billion that the Postmaster General himself says they do not need, with 
$14 or $15 billion cash on hand and another $10 billion waiting, if 
needed, in the Treasury.
  This is absolutely unneeded. Yet, this bill is going to give an 
additional $25 billion without any reforms.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in the 
Rules Committee, the other side kept claiming that there was no data 
about the slowdown in the mail, absolutely none.
  Well, this new report, this data, shows a 10 percent decline in 
service since July 1 after the new Postmaster General came into office 
and implemented a slowdown of the mail.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Mrs. Bustos).
  Mrs. BUSTOS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I rise in support of the Delivering for America Act. The post office 
is a lifeline to rural communities. More than 1,000 people in the 
district that I serve have written to my office desperate to save the 
Postal Service: a disabled veteran who depends on the post office to 
deliver lifesaving medication; a small business owner who needs the 
post office to deliver her products in an efficient and cost-effective 
way, so she can feed her family; seniors who must self-

[[Page H4275]]

isolate because they are at high risk, who depend on the Postal Service 
for the supplies they need each and every day.
  The Postal Service is more than a service; it is part of who we are. 
For Joseph in Peoria, he was a child waiting for that decoder ring to 
come through the mail. For Heather in Pekin, it is a care package full 
of old family photos after losing a loved one. For Joseph in Kewanee, 
it is a letter from his best friend serving in Afghanistan.
  Birth certificates, college acceptance letters, the mortgage paid 
off, the Postal Service delivers the American Dream. We cannot let it 
fail.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Ferguson), the chief deputy whip.

  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to wish my mother a happy 
birthday. Happy birthday, mom. I wish I were there to celebrate with 
you. But instead, I am in D.C., voting on a senseless bill that was 
designed strictly for political purposes and will put your beloved 
grandchildren further into debt.
  Now, I have watched my colleagues on the other side of the aisle come 
up with some intellectually dishonest stuff in the past. I have seen it 
happen more times than I care to count, but this effort takes the cake. 
Just look at what Postmaster General DeJoy said when he testified 
before the Senate last week and clearly addressed the litany of 
baseless claims.
  First of all, he stated that no reforms would be implemented between 
now and the election. Overtime will not be cut between now and 
November. And the very thing the USPS needs more than anything else, 
reform, is going to be delayed.
  He said the removal of the drop boxes will cease, something that I 
remember well because it happened when I was mayor of my hometown of 
West Point, Georgia, and our town was furious about it then. I just 
wish my colleagues on the other side of the aisle had found religion 
about this issue back then instead of sitting up here fighting over 
what color to paint the fire hydrants while Rome burned.
  This bill calls for 25 billion additional dollars. The postmaster has 
already testified there is over $13 billion cash on hand, another $10 
billion in loans they won't need.
  I want someone to explain to me how you are going to spend $25 
billion between now and November. We know how this place works. On an 
unauthorized appropriation, we all know that before you spend money 
here, you have to have a plan, and I haven't seen one. Then, that plan 
has to be reviewed and then commented on and reviewed again. Then one 
more time, it probably has to be reviewed. Then, there is the whole 
procurement process, bid process on equipment, background checks on new 
employees, the lawsuits on the procurement process because the special 
interest group said that they weren't notified in time so they could 
get preferential treatment on the government contract. And surely, 
there will be the customary environmental review.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Cisneros). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Georgia.
  Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, surely there will be the customary 
environmental review to understand the impact on the spotted blue tail 
south Georgia armadillo being run over by all the new mail trucks.
  This bill is a sham. It is a shame. It is not needed right now. We 
are piling up money. We might as well put it on The National Mall, have 
a bonfire, invite Americans to bring their lawn chairs and a cooler of 
beer to watch the bonfire, so they can see firsthand how this place 
wastes money.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  The other side of the aisle has a double standard. Congress provided 
hundreds of billions of dollars to all sorts of industries, businesses, 
large and small entities across the country to help them cope with the 
coronavirus crisis. We did not require them to come forward with 
detailed plans of how they are going to spend their money. But they 
want it for the Postal Service.
  Now, the Postal Service made a public request, and they requested it 
and presented it to the Board of Governors, who are appointed by 
President Trump, and the Board approved it unanimously. That is far 
more than all these other entities that we have given billions of 
dollars to did. And we should support the Postal Service now.
  On top of it, the CBO came out with an estimate that this money would 
be spent in the next fiscal year, and that they needed it. The CBO 
record can be found online.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. 
Mfume).
  Mr. MFUME. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  I heard someone on the other side said something that disturbed me, 
so it has actually taken me off my remarks because it can't go 
unaddressed.
  For the gentleman to say that Democrats, the majority party here in 
the House, are the greatest threat to American democracy that the world 
has ever known, that means we are more threatening than Putin and the 
Russians, more threatening than this terrible pandemic around us. It is 
the sort of thing that I would admonish my side never to say about the 
other side, and it is the sort of thing that I think takes us away from 
why we are here.
  We are here to have debate and discussion and to reasonably disagree 
on things. At the end of the day, we are calling for a vote as we 
normally do. Things are voted up; things are voted down. That has been 
the process that I have come to know over all these years.
  We are here because Americans who are Democrats and Republicans and 
independents are not getting their mail on time. We are here because 
there has been a 10 percent slowdown in the last 66 days. We are here 
because sorting machines have been dismantled at an accelerated rate, 
not the normal rate, an accelerated rate all across America.
  We are here because mailboxes, without density studies, are being 
snatched. They have been removed over the years, but it has 
accelerated. It has accelerated to such an extent that now people are 
wondering: Where is their medication? Where is their check?
  It is veterans. It is our small businesses that are hampered by this. 
It is senior citizens. So, we are not here mysteriously on a Saturday 
to point fingers and to call names.
  The other side has a right to disagree, but this is a problem. I 
don't know about your constituents, but all of mine are telling me that 
they can't get their mail on time. They expect more. If the first 
     Postmaster General looked back at this day, I am sure Ben 
     Franklin would be spinning in his grave.
  We have an issue before us. We ought to go at it with vigorous 
debate. At the end of the day, I may lose and you may win, or I may win 
and you may lose, but the American public loses without us standing up 
for this issue.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, obviously the last speaker, the gentleman 
from Maryland, missed the part where one of his Members proclaimed that 
the President was the greatest threat to democracy.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. 
Grothman), the ranking member of the Committee on Oversight and 
Reform's National Security Subcommittee.
  Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  This is a very interesting debate today. I think it would be a good 
debate to be reviewed by every political science class in the country 
as we analyze how Congress has spent us to a $25 trillion debt.
  We have a situation today in which the U.S. Postal Service is sitting 
on $15 billion. They have the right to borrow $10 billion from a 
stimulus package bill we passed earlier. They are making more money 
this year than last year because deliveries of packages are up. But 
despite all these numbers, the majority party has decided to spend an 
additional $25 billion.
  Now, I like the post office. I really do. But when you have an agency 
that can spend $25 billion that is unspent right now, $24 billion, and 
you introduce a bill to say they need another $25 billion, and if you 
don't vote for that $25 billion bill, it means you don't want children 
to get little toys they are

[[Page H4276]]

going receive in the mail, or it means that we don't like the post 
office, that is outlandish.

                              {time}  1415

  There are other things we can look at as well.
  They talk about getting rid of post offices. In the first 3 years in 
which President Trump has complete control of the administration, they 
will be getting rid of less post office boxes than Obama from 2013 to 
2016--I don't have the numbers before 2013; it might be 4 years in a 
row--in the greatest year in which President Trump got rid of 
mailboxes.
  Another thing to point out is, even if every single person in this 
country votes absentee, which they won't, it would only increase mail 
that month by 1\1/2\ percent. So we have no crisis here. It is 
something they will easily be able to handle.
  The idea that we are even talking about spending another $25 billion 
today is indicative of why this country is going to wind up spending 
itself into oblivion.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), the distinguished chair of 
the Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished chair for 
yielding and for her tremendous leadership.
  The post office is as American as motherhood, baseball, and apple 
pie. It is one of the only entities actually mentioned in the United 
States Constitution. It has been around for hundreds of years. The 
first Postmaster General was Dr. Ben Franklin. It is part of the heart 
and soul of this country, and the attacks on the post office by the 
Trump administration are shameful.
  The American people deserve a Postal Service that delivers Social 
Security checks to senior citizens, delivers medicine to disabled 
veterans, delivers unemployment insurance checks to displaced 
Americans, and, yes, delivers ballots to those who choose to vote by 
mail in the midst of a deadly pandemic, because no American should ever 
have to choose between their health, safety, and well-being on the one 
hand and the constitutional right to vote on the other.
  This is why we need a fully functional Postal Service. Don't mess 
with USPS.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the balance of our time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has 43\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Cloud), another Oversight and Reform Committee ranking member.
  Mr. CLOUD. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Comer for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, you will never hear me complain about having to come to 
Washington to vote. After all, it is an honor to serve the people of 
this great Nation and our constitutional obligation to be here present 
to vote on the issues facing America.
  So the question today is: Are there issues that need to be addressed 
in the United States Postal Service?
  There certainly are. We all know that there are. After all, the USPS 
has been on the Government Accountability's High Risk List since the 
beginning of the Obama-Biden administration.
  The systemic issues are not new. They did not creep up all of a 
sudden in the last few weeks since the new Postmaster has been in 
office. They have been here for awhile. So, if we are really trying to 
address the issues, there is room for discussion.
  The late Chairman Elijah Cummings and the now White House Chief of 
Staff Mark Meadows have a bill that has some serious effort put into 
it.
  Tomorrow we will be having a hearing with the Postmaster to discuss 
the bill we are arguing today and voting on.
  The White House has offered a $10 billion package, which the Speaker 
has rejected.
  So there are options if we want to address the real issues, but today 
is not about a serious effort. Today's effort is yet another 
smokescreen, another conspiracy theory forced upon the American people 
to distract us from the real problems facing the American people; to 
distract from the Speaker's unwillingness to work with the White House 
to protect schools, hospitals, and small businesses; to extend PPP to 
mom-and-pop businesses that are on the brink and the families connected 
to them; to address the heartbreaking violence and destruction in our 
cities and streets.
  The American people are tired of this, tired of lurching from one 
manufactured crisis to another, tired of leadership by fear-mongering, 
tired of this House preferring to campaign on issues rather than to fix 
them.
  The bill offered today will not save the USPS or provide for long-
term sustainability. Today's effort is another attempt to mask the fact 
that this House under this leadership is doing very little for the 
American people.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), another member 
of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  I rise to support the Delivering for America Act, to protect a pillar 
of our democracy and fortify a lifeline so many Americans count on.
  This bill would provide urgently needed Postal Service funding and 
bar its leaders from compromising its services during this COVID-19 
crisis.
  We all know the motto: ``Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of 
night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed 
rounds.'' But, of course, no one foresaw that any American President 
would willingly crowbar our mail system to sway an election. So the 
Delivering for America Act will safeguard our democracy from any 
Presidential subversion.
  This legislation will also allow our mail carriers to do their job by 
ensuring overtime and proper equipment are available.
  It will make sure intentional service delays are avoided so our 
seniors get their Social Security checks and prescriptions.

  It defends our veterans, who count on this noble occupation for work 
and rely on the postal system to deliver their medicine.
  My State, Florida, just completed a primary where nearly 60 percent 
of the counted ballots arrived by mail. Savvy seniors and residents 
reeling from a summer of viral outbreaks wanted the safety that only 
mail-in balloting provided.
  This year, our country saw half a million primary ballots rejected, 
and a main reason they get tossed is due to postal delays.
  These brave frontline workers are delivering goods amid a pandemic, 
and it has taken its toll on their workforce. So in a State like 
Florida, known for its razor-thin Presidential elections, we can't 
afford to have 59 sorting machines left on the sidelines.
  Blocking postal employees from overtime is not an option, especially 
when it may hold up hundreds of ballots that decide the Presidency.
  The Delivering for America Act helps defend our democracy from the 
hypocrisy of a President who casts mail-in ballots himself one day, 
then tries to meddle in our neighbor's mailbox the next.
  Don't mess with the USPS. Pass this good bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, that ship has sailed.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Gibbs), another great member of the Oversight and Reform Committee.
  Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, once again, my colleagues on the other side 
of the aisle are pulling the wool over the American people's eyes.
  We are here today not to debate or conduct public policy for the 
benefit of the Nation; we are here so they can perform in political 
theater. If you have any doubt about that, this coming Monday, the 
Oversight and Reform Committee is having a hearing with the Postmaster 
General about this same issue.
  So we are voting first, then we are having hearings? I think that is 
you-know-what backwards.
  My colleagues on the left are faking outrage over a made-up crisis to 
score points during an election. The United

[[Page H4277]]

States Postal Service is under no greater stress than it was before the 
coronavirus pandemic and well before this election cycle.
  The facts have been laid out by experts, by independent journalists, 
by regular citizens who do the job the mainstream media refuses to do. 
Rather than find out and report what is really going on, we have 
mainstream media parroting Speaker Pelosi's conspiracy theory.
  Here are the facts:
  The post office is solvent through most of 2021 and will be able to 
operate for the 2020 election. They have $15 billion cash on hand. They 
have a $10 billion line of credit they have not used.
  If every single American voted by mail this cycle, it would be as low 
as one-quarter of the mail the post office handles daily.
  We have heard a lot about the sorting machines. First-class mail has 
really tapered off and the volume of packages has increased, so that is 
an efficiency standard that is doing better.
  During the 5-year span of the Obama administration, 14,000 blue 
collection boxes were removed from the streets.
  Twice during election years, the Obama administration proposed 
funding cuts to the Postal Service. Where was the outrage then? There 
was none.
  Removing and relocating collection boxes where they are more useful 
is common sense, not a conspiracy.
  Postmaster DeJoy testified and has come out publicly saying they are 
not going to do any more cost-cutting measures before the election, so 
everything is frozen.
  What the other side really wants is universal mail voting, not 
absentee voting, which we all support. They want universal mail voting. 
We just mail out ballots to anybody, and who knows who they will be. 
All that is going to do is sow the seeds, if the election doesn't go 
their way, to create more chaos and more division in this country.
  You won't hear any of these facts from the mainstream media.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. GIBBS. Mr. Speaker, this bill provides funding that is already 
there. Creating and peddling this conspiracy theory is irresponsible 
and reckless. At a time when Russia and China are meddling in our 
elections, we don't need help from Congress peddling fake news.
  This is one bill that needs to be labeled, ``Return to sender.''
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the distinguished chair of 
the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, see this mask? What does it say? ``United 
States Postal Service.'' Not ``business''; ``service.''
  For every American, no matter how remote they live, they can get 
mail. They can get their prescriptions. They can have a small business 
in Powers, Oregon, pretty remote from everything, and use the Postal 
Service.
  Now, you can't have it both ways, guys. You say the Postal Service 
doesn't have a problem. Well, wait a minute. DeJoy is making these cuts 
because he says it has a revenue problem. He has prohibited overtime 
because they have a revenue problem. They can't move their delivery 
vehicle more than four times on a route. Eight-mile-long route, you are 
going to walk 2 miles each way.
  Guess what? Mail is getting delayed all across the country.
  The fact is, before the pandemic, they were breaking even or making 
money if we did away with the stupid prefunding of 75 years of 
healthcare that was put in in the dark of the night by the Bush 
administration in a lameduck Congress, and 309 people in this House, 
including 87 Republicans, voted for that in February, but it hasn't 
happened.

  So you can't have it both ways.
  But there is no doubt that the mail is being delayed. I am hearing it 
from everywhere.
  Ms. Lorey, she cares for a blind elderly veteran: I ordered the VA 
refills for him. They were so late arriving, we had to ration out his 
most important medication from two pills a day to one pill a day until 
the prescription arrived.
  Ms. Trudy, Eugene, Oregon: My husband is a Vietnam war veteran. His 
meds are delivered by mail. I love my husband. I want him to get the 
meds he needs to survive.
  Last year, the Postal Service delivered 125 million VA prescriptions 
on time, but somehow, with the efficiency measures and the cuts--which 
I guess they don't need to make, but he is making because of the 
financial crisis--they can't deliver VA meds on time. They can't 
deliver prescription drugs for seniors and many other Americans who are 
required by their insurance plan to get their meds through the mail 
with just-in-time delivery, which isn't happening.
  You cannot deny those things.
  Why are they happening? How are you going to fix it?
  You are up here blathering about all sorts of crap. Talk about how we 
are going to restore this Postal Service in the United States of 
America to efficiency.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Norman), another great member of the Oversight and Reform 
Committee.
  Mr. NORMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to apologize to the American 
taxpayers for this total sham of a process that the Democrats and this 
leadership are trying to spread. They continue to have Trump 
derangement syndrome.
  Here are the questions I would ask my Democrat colleagues:
  If the Democrats are so concerned, then why have we not had a hearing 
about the Postal Service issues since June 15 of 2019?
  If the Democrats are so concerned, why have we not had round-the-
clock meetings to discuss the bill that we intend to fund at $25 
billion which is being proposed?
  We have been out of session for 17 percent of the time since March 
15. Why haven't we been called back in to discuss this?
  If you do the math, on $25 billion, and we have got 70 days left, 
that is roughly $325 million per day.
  You tell the American taxpayer where you are spending that money. You 
tell the American taxpayer how we are going to come up with it. You 
tell the American taxpayer this is like dropping money from a 
helicopter.
  If the Democrats are so concerned about the post office, why are we 
having to vote today when the Postmaster General is appearing at the 
hearing on Monday? This is just like determining the score of a 
football game and then playing the game on Monday. It makes no sense.

                              {time}  1430

  The Democrats have no interest in hearing the testimony of Mr. DeJoy. 
The only thing they want to do is berate and not give the Postmaster 
General the opportunity to answer, just like they did Attorney General 
Barr, which was a disgrace to this country. The taxpayers deserve 
better.
  The Democrats will have no discussion on the spying of the President 
since 2016.
  The Democrats have no explanation of a failed Mueller Report.
  The Democrats have no explanation for the impeachment of the 
President.
  The post office will fail as well.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
correct for the Record that the Committee on Oversight and Reform had a 
briefing on postal on April 9, 2020--right after the COVID crisis 
struck us--with the Postmaster General.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. 
Kelly), who is another great member of the committee.
  Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I stand with my colleagues today 
shocked and dismayed by the actions of this administration.
  For the past few years, the Oversight and Reform Committee has worked 
in a bipartisan fashion to modernize the Postal Service with former 
Representative Mark Meadows leading the charge.
  Now, like too many things over the past 3\1/2\ years, mail has become 
a partisan issue. The Postal Service is a pillar of our democracy. It 
is essential for providing critical services such as: lifesaving 
prescriptions, Social Security

[[Page H4278]]

benefits, paychecks, tax returns, letters home from military families, 
and absentee ballots to millions of Americans.
  The VA delivers prescriptions to 80 percent of our veterans via the 
mail. This intentional and ridiculous slowdown means vets are skipping 
doses while checking empty mailboxes.
  While I was back home, one of my businesses told me they hadn't 
received mail for 10 days. Another person told me they received mail 
every other day.
  This cannot go on, and we cannot trust the word of a Postmaster 
General who is unqualified and whose sweeping operational changes 
degrade the Postal Service, delay the mail, and threaten our upcoming 
election. We must pass the Delivering for America Act so we can return 
the United States post office to normal and ensure we have a safe 
election where everyone is counted.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Chair, I have to comment on what the chairwoman said 
about the briefings. A briefing is not a committee hearing. With a 
briefing, there are no notice requirements. Oftentimes in the beginning 
we weren't allowed to have witnesses, and there are no transcripts. So 
there is a big difference between a briefing and a committee hearing.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Keller), who is another member of the Oversight and Reform 
Committee.
  Mr. KELLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the need for 
meaningful, long-term reform for the United States Postal Service.
  The USPS provides an essential service to every community in the 
Nation, yet this agency has lost $78 billion in the last 13 years. In 
2009 the Government Accountability Office published a report placing 
USPS on the high-risk list, doubting the self-sustaining financial 
viability of this agency. The financial state of the USPS has 
progressively worsened due to declining mail volume, liabilities, and 
debt. Proposals to give the USPS $25 billion in cash without serious 
reforms will not address the fundamental issues that the agency faces.
  The proposals before us today only delay real reform and throw 
taxpayer dollars at a problem with no clear vision forward. Rather than 
politicizing the mail, we should be working to give the USPS longevity 
through comprehensive reforms. Rather than trying to fix a problem by 
simply spending more taxpayer money, we should be enacting reforms to 
equip our Nation's outstanding postal workers with the tools they need 
and deserve to continue delivering the mail. This is the only way we 
will ensure that Americans continue to receive this vital service 
without interruption.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands (Ms. Plaskett), who is 
another outstanding member of the committee.
  Ms. PLASKETT. Mr. Speaker, today we vote on a bill that would block 
an attack on the U.S. Postal Service. By doing so we are blocking an 
attack on an American institution, on our American way of life, and on 
democracy. By responding to the unanimous requests of the Trump-
appointed Board of Governors of the Postal Service for a funding of $25 
billion and restoring operations to January 1 levels, we will literally 
be saving lives.
  The necessity of this vote and the necessity of this legislation 
shows the peril to our democracy that this administration has placed us 
all in, our elders, our veterans, our businesses, and our vote.
  We will go further than just voting, and we will have that hearing on 
Monday on the Oversight and Reform Committee led by Chairwoman Maloney 
to speak with the Postmaster General to examine some of his, shall we 
say, creative decisions.
  We want to examine the operational and organizational changes at the 
Postal Service that have resulted in delivery delays across the 
country, including the delays of goods and services for small 
businesses and families, as well as critical medicines.
  In my district of the Virgin Islands we are hostage to the U.S. 
Postal Service. We cannot drive to big-box stores, never mind medicines 
for our elders or our veterans.
  We will review the impact of these changes on the rights of eligible 
Americans to cast their vote through the mail in the November 
elections, but we will also have a few closing questions for Mr. DeJoy.
  Is Mr. DeJoy thinking about that senior who won't receive their 
medicine on time due to his policies?

  Has he thought about the veteran who served our Nation and can't get 
their prescriptions to heal?
  Has he considered rural Americans who have to drive 20 miles to the 
nearest post office?
  Has he thought about any of these people?
  Or is he, like the President, only concerned about his own self-
interest?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President.
  Mr. COMER. That ship has sailed.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota 
(Mr. Armstrong) who is another valuable member.
  Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Speaker, if there is a bill that more accurately 
reflects the failure of Democratic leadership for my first 2 years in 
Congress, I don't know what it is.
  I know that because I came to Congress knowing of the problems with 
the Postal Service. I am the only Republican on the Oversight and 
Reform Committee who cosponsored the Democrats' bill to remove the 
prefunding of their pensions. I have been working on this, been curious 
about it, and have cared about it for a very long time.
  I supported former Chairman Cummings' and Mark Meadows' bipartisan 
solution for the Postal Service because I represent a rural State, and 
privatization is bad for my constituents.
  But do you know how important this has been to the Oversight and 
Reform Committee?
  Our last hearing on the Postal Service was in April of 2019. But 
somehow, we have decided that because the previous Postmaster General 
who was appointed in 2015 and didn't resign until June and did 
something unique in this town--made sure just about everybody hated 
her.
  But now we are saying this all blew up last week. But it didn't. I 
know it didn't because you can Google postal problems in any 
jurisdiction from one end of this country to the other and you know 
they have existed before.
  But instead we will come to the floor, debate a bill offered and 
sponsored by the chair of the committee of jurisdiction, we will vote 
on it today, and then we will have a hearing on Monday about the bill. 
So before we even talk about the fact that we are giving $25 billion to 
an organization that already has $25 billion cash on hand, and 
regardless of how you feel about this, $25 billion does not deliver 
votes, and we have no ability to do this.
  We are doing this in a way that is completely and utterly political 
theater because anybody who has been paying attention knows that the 
post office problems are chronic, they are not acute. They have lost 
$70 billion since 2007, and they lost $9 billion in 2019.
  So my question is: Why haven't we been having hearings on this in the 
Committee on Oversight and Reform for the 2 years I have been here?
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
respond to the gentleman's statement that the money is not needed. The 
Postal Service sought the $25 billion from Congress to provide this 
critical relief, and that request was supported unanimously by a vote 
by the Board of Governors who were all appointed by President Trump.
  Yesterday we received the report from the nonpartisan Congressional 
Budget Office, and that report estimates that the vast majority of this 
funding would, in fact, be needed within fiscal year 2021 to provide 
services to the American people.
  This should be a nonpartisan issue.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California 
(Ms. Waters). My good friend is the distinguished chairwoman of the 
Committee on Financial Services.
  Ms. WATERS. Mr. Speaker, I ran to the floor when I heard that our 
Members on the Republican side of the aisle are trying to use as an 
excuse we have not had a hearing. Oh, yes. You have had a hearing. You 
have had a hearing from the American people who are shocked that the 
President and DeJoy are out there dismantling and destroying our Postal 
Service.

[[Page H4279]]

  For 3 years I warned the American people and my colleagues that this 
President was a threat to our democracy. Yet, here we are today voting 
on a measure to save the Postal Service because it is being sabotaged 
by a desperate President in order to cheat in the 2020 elections.
  Since our country's founding, the people have relied on the Postal 
Service for everything from delivery of letters to our seniors wanting 
their medicines delivered on time. Veterans want their disability 
checks on time. Social Security recipients want and need their money.
  So I want to say to the Members on the opposite side of the aisle: 
You had better get some courage. If you are afraid of the President, 
you had better step up to the plate on this. We will not allow the 
United States Postal Service to be destroyed by you.
  And another message to the President: Stop removing our blue 
mailboxes from our neighborhoods.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President and to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, Ms. Waters forgets that President Obama 
removed 12,000 of those blue boxes that she just asked that they quit 
removing.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. 
Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of frontline, 
essential rural mail carriers and postal workers across my district and 
America who have continued to go to work and do their jobs during the 
pandemic. This is in sharp contrast to many of my colleagues across the 
aisle who draw a paycheck but don't show up to vote or do their jobs.
  Mr. Speaker, I also stand in opposition to H.R. 8015 because it is a 
sham bill that has no future. It doesn't belong on this floor. It 
belongs in the archives at the election hoax of the month club.
  How do the Democrats keep a straight face while proposing a $25 
billion bailout disguised as election integrity when it would equal 
about $200 per ballot if every voter voted by mail?
  That is preposterous.
  With its current over $14 billion cash on hand and access to $10 
billion from the CARES Act, do we even have to keep explaining that the 
United States Postal Service is in a more than adequate financial 
position to remain fully functional well beyond the election?
  No. The American people are smarter than Democrats give us credit. I 
believe most see past the smoke and mirrors. The post office is 
important. It is not going anywhere, and this bill has nothing to do 
with a fair election.
  The ranking member and I participated in a youth organization, and at 
the beginning of each meeting the leader would ask: Why are we here?
  Many of us are asking that question today: Why are we here?
  The answer is because this House is adrift. This House is a ship 
without a rudder. It lacks vision, it lacks direction, and, most 
importantly, it lacks leadership. It simply gets tossed to and fro by 
the political wind of the day.
  Mr. Speaker, it didn't just start. It has been that way this whole 
Congress. At a time when America has legitimate needs with a pandemic 
and an economy trying to get back on track, it is really no surprise 
that this is the best the left can do. House Democrats offer no hope. 
We need change.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Why are we here?
  We are here because the President of the United States went on 
national television on Thursday night and said he was going to defund 
the post office. That is why we are here.
  Further, he said he didn't support mail-in voting when we know that 
millions of Americans will want to vote, for health reasons, by mail. 
That is why we are here.
  We are here because we wrote numerous letters to the Postmaster 
General, which he ignored. That is why we are here.
  I applaud the Democratic leadership for calling us in for this 
emergency meeting to make sure that the post office is funded. It was 
funded before we even had a Constitution. It is one of the pillars of 
our democracy. It is enshrined in our Constitution, and it provides 
vital services to Americans who need medication, the ability to conduct 
business, and to stay in touch. It binds us together as a nation. Most 
of us do not like the fact that the President of our country would even 
mention defunding the post office. That is why we are here.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. 
Lawrence), a very distinguished member of the committee who brings 
valuable experience to us as a former member of the Postal Service.

                              {time}  1445

  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for yielding me 
the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 8015. This is 
essential legislation to offset the dangerous actions taken by the 
Postmaster General over the last 2 months.
  We are here today, in addition to that, to fund the Postal Service. 
For more than two centuries, the United States Postal Service has 
delivered mail to every house in America across this country--every 
single home. It is the only Federal organization that touches every 
American every single day, 6 days a week, confirming that it is an 
essential government service.
  Today, the current administration and the new Postmaster General seem 
to struggle to understand that the Postal Service is an essential 
government service authorized by the Constitution. It is not a business 
to fund the bottom line.
  In just the first 2 months of his tenure, without having any postal 
experience, this Postmaster General has threatened and has taken 
actions to undermine decades of precedence within the Postal Service.
  Today, Congress must act. As my chairwoman said, that is why we are 
here. We must act. The Delivering for America Act does just that. Along 
with providing the Postal Service with a desperately needed $25 billion 
to offset revenue that has been forgone due to COVID-19, it also--and 
this is something that is very important--this legislation prohibits 
the Postmaster General from making any operational changes that will 
undermine the Postal Service's ability to fulfill its mission.
  Its mission is to deliver the mail. Rain, sleet, snow, gloom of 
night, the Postal Service will deliver the mail.
  Mr. Speaker, we have a Postmaster General who has come inside and 
tried to rip it apart from the inside. We will say: Cease and desist.
  In addition to us having the goal of the Postal Service to deliver 
the mail, our democracy is hinging upon them doing that basic job.
  Mr. Speaker, I stand here today to say that the money was asked for 
by the Board of Governors--which, by the way, is appointed by the 
President, and which, by the way, are all Republicans who asked for 
that money to be appropriated. The Postmaster General approved and said 
he needed that money as well.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the Speaker for bringing this critical 
legislation to the floor. I thank the chairwoman for including the 
language that will prohibit the enactment of any rule or standard or 
policy with the intent to delay the mail from our government.
  We have a real responsibility here today. There is not a Member on 
either side of the aisle who has not received a letter from our 
constituents. Let's do our job.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I have the most respect for my friend, the 
chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, but I believe she 
misspoke.
  She said the President wanted to defund the Postal Service. That is 
not what the President wants to do. The only time I have heard the word 
``defund'' lately was by the liberal progressive wing of the majority 
party that wants to defund the police.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Palmer).
  Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, we are here today because my Democratic 
colleagues have created a conspiratorial crisis out of thin air in 
another attempt to dupe Americans with an election hoax. Only this 
time, instead of Russia, it is the United States Postal Service.
  Democrats are intentionally misleading people to believe that the 
operational changes at the Postal Service,

[[Page H4280]]

including the removal of mailboxes and antiquated processing equipment, 
just started. That is a lie. Nonetheless, Postal Service officials have 
confirmed that these operational changes, some of which were agreed to 
by Democrat Members, have already been halted until after the election.
  In regard to the delay and delivery of mail over the last few weeks, 
the national number cited may well reflect delays in cities that have 
been under siege by anarchists. I will direct my colleagues and the 
American people's attention to these photos of the burned-out post 
office in Minneapolis. There is no way to know how many letters to 
loved ones were lost, or birthday cards or gifts or family heirlooms or 
that decoder ring that that kid had been waiting for were destroyed and 
will never be delivered.
  I am certain because of the lawlessness that the Democrats are 
dangerously silent about, the delivery of mail in Portland, Seattle, 
Chicago, New York, and Minneapolis, and other cities have been delayed.
  You want to talk defunding? Instead of Democrat mayors defunding the 
police, I would submit that we need to make sure that law enforcement 
in every American city is well funded so that they can protect not just 
the post office facilities that handle our mail, but also the people 
who deliver our mail so that those cards, letters, gifts, and election 
ballots can be delivered.
  Instead of pushing a conspiracy farce, we should be here making sure 
that law enforcement has the resources needed to protect the property 
and lives of American families in these cities that are under siege. 
That will help make sure the mail is delivered on time, and people will 
feel safe in getting it from the mailbox or the post office.
  In that regard, the silence of the Democrats in this Chamber is 
deadly.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal), the distinguished 
chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Maloney for her good work 
on this very issue, and I rise to condemn Postmaster General DeJoy's 
assault on the U.S. Postal Service.

  The organizational and operational changes he has been implementing 
are a betrayal at this moment of the American people. They are turning 
their backs on seniors and veterans in Pittsfield, North Adams, 
Springfield, and Southbridge who rely upon the Postal Service for their 
medications and other essential services.
  The Postmaster General is dismantling a lifeline for people in every 
community across the Commonwealth, but his actions particularly harm 
those who live in some of the most rural areas in western 
Massachusetts. These mail delays and disruptions will be harmful at any 
time, but they are downright deadly during this pandemic. Families and 
small businesses are desperately trying to stay safe and stay afloat as 
the crisis rages on, and the Postal Service plays a critical role in 
their survival.
  Who else suffers due to the Postmaster General's actions? The 
hardworking men and women who process and deliver our mail, essential 
workers. He is compromising jobs for generations that have been a 
pathway to the middle class, particularly in marginalized communities.
  Our Nation's economy and the people's health rely upon the Postal 
Service. So, too, does American democracy.
  Millions will use this indispensable tool to cast their ballots this 
year. They should not be discouraged. They should be encouraged by the 
Postmaster General. The Postmaster General is directly attacking the 
fundamental rights and well-being of all Americans.
  I call upon him to step down now. His removal is urgently needed, as 
are all the provisions in the Delivering for America Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this legislation and call on my 
colleagues to do the same. A reminder: His support right now is 
urgently needed to reverse what he has been doing and saying.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Jordan).
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, the Democrats talked about a slight delay in mail 
delivery the last several weeks. Well, of course. Would you want to 
deliver mail in Portland today, cities that have been under siege for 
90-some days? I bet there are delays in Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, 
Chicago, and New York. I bet that is where the delays are.
  In fact, how do you deliver mail to a CHOP zone, to a CHAZ zone? How 
do you do that? They won't let them in. I mean, come on. We know the 
facts here. The facts are the post office has more money today than 
they had this time last year.
  They got a $14 billion cash reserve. They got a $10 billion line of 
credit we gave them in the CARES Act. And oh, the Postmaster General is 
moving some sorting machines and removing some mail collection boxes, 
the same thing every Postmaster General has always done. In fact, 
between 2011 and 2016, the Obama-Biden administration removed 12,000 
mail collection boxes. Oh, my goodness. And it is happening again.
  We are moving some boxes, and somehow, that is a reason to give $25 
billion to the Postal Service and create all this ``conspiracy 
theory''--not my words; The Wall Street Journal called it--that the 
Democrats are doing.
  What is really going on here? If you really wanted to focus on some 
concerns the post office has, we have a bipartisan bill that the late 
Chairman Cummings and Mark Meadows worked on. Mark Meadows, I don't 
even think the Democrats--I know the chairwoman hasn't even talked to 
him about this, the expert on this issue on our side. Oh, by the way, 
he happens to have a pretty important job in this town, a pretty 
important job, and you guys didn't even talk to him.
  They had a bipartisan bill. If you really want to work on bipartisan 
concerns and solutions to some problems in the post office, that is 
fine, but that is not what this is about. This is all about politics.
  You don't want to address real issues, too busy defunding the police, 
too busy not denouncing the mob that is running so many of our cities. 
This is all about politics.
  First, it was the Russian collusion. In this committee, it was the 
Michael Cohen hearing. I remember that, when he came, the first big 
hearing of this Congress. The first-announced witness of this committee 
came and lied to us seven times. Then, it was the Mueller report. Then, 
it was the Ukraine fake impeachment. And now, it is the White House is 
putting mailboxes in cages and whatever you are saying now.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people see this for what it is. They see 
this for what it is. If you want real solutions, we could have had 
them. You could have worked with Chief of Staff Meadows. You didn't 
want to do that. You wanted politics.
  This was said earlier: If anyone should know, it should be the 
chairwoman of this committee who had to wait 6 weeks after election day 
to get the results of her election.
  Imagine what the Democrats want to do is throw live ballots out there 
to everyone. That was just one congressional primary election. Imagine 
what they want to do--150 million live ballots. That is what the 
Democrats want. Imagine what that is going to be like. That is where 
these guys want to go.
  Mr. Speaker, we should be working on real solutions instead of this 
charade that the Democrats are putting us through.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from California (Mr. Gomez), the vice chair and an 
outstanding member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.
  Mr. GOMEZ. Mr. Speaker, someone is lying. On one side, you have the 
White House and the Postmaster General. On the other side, you have the 
hardworking men and women of the U.S. Postal Service.
  The President and the Postmaster General say there is nothing to see 
here. Nothing to see. They tell us that their operational changes are 
meant to help the Postal Service.

  The Postal Service workers, whose job it is to deliver the mail day 
in and day out, are saying something different. They are telling us 
that they are falling behind on processing packages because of these 
operational changes. As a result, they are seeing

[[Page H4281]]

bugs and rodents swimming around containers of rotten food and meat and 
animals.
  Now, my Republican colleagues say that this is a conspiracy theory. 
But I say to them: You can't smell a conspiracy theory. There are dying 
animals, rotten food, rotten meat, rats, flies.
  You can't see that in a conspiracy theory. I want them to open their 
eyes because their constituents, my constituents, are suffering because 
of this deliberate attempt to sabotage the U.S. Postal Service. Their 
constituents--seniors and veterans who depend on fast delivery of their 
medicines, the small businesses that depend on the U.S. Postal Service 
to stay afloat, and every American who wants to partake in our 
democracy safely during this pandemic.
  Mr. Speaker, I can tell you which side I believe: the employees of 
the U.S. Postal Service. It is with them in mind that I strongly 
support the passage of H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McCarthy), the Republican leader.
  Mr. McCARTHY. ``I urge everyone to be calm. . . . The Postal Service 
is not incapacitated. It is still fully capable of delivering the 
mail.''
  Those are not my words I speak. Those aren't even words of a 
Republican. They are the words of Ruth Goldway, a Democrat, a former 
Postal Commissioner and Clinton appointee who served for 18 years under 
three Presidents.
  Based on the facts, Goldway says the Postal Service is perfectly 
capable of handling election mail.

                              {time}  1500

  Unfortunately, we have got bad news for her. This majority didn't get 
the message. Instead of listening to the experts or following the 
facts, Democrats are wasting precious time spreading Speaker Pelosi's 
mailbox myths.
  You had an opportunity to have bipartisanship. I have heard words on 
this floor today, Mr. Speaker, ``essential,'' ``critical'' that we are 
here. I applaud the few Democrats on the other side who were willing to 
show.
  I know if you cannot make it today, you have to sign paperwork that 
your health will not allow you to be here. And the Speaker is bringing 
us back on a Saturday because it is so critical to be here right now, 
in this moment, in this time, but one-third on the other side must 
think otherwise.
  Now, let's go through some of the myths versus facts.
  Myth no. 1: The Postal Service is being sabotaged.
  The Postal Service is properly funded for the election and beyond. We 
said it many times here. It is funded completely through August 2021. 
That is according to the Postal Service.
  The Postal Service has long-term challenges, but they predate 
anything about this administration. It isn't being sabotaged.
  Myth no. 2: Removing mailboxes from public places is uncommon and 
cause for alarm.
  This is shocking. We have got country-western stars putting this up 
on Instagram. We need to rush back here on Saturday. But little did we 
know that, during the Obama-Biden years, nearly 12,000 mailboxes were 
removed from communities. Never once did we rush in on a Saturday to 
have a bill that you didn't have marked up and one-third of the 
Democrats would not show.
  The Postal Service is actually constantly moving mailboxes from low- 
to high-volume growth areas, kind of a smart thing to do. In some 
cases, they replace them with more modern versions. I saw a picture 
where they actually had a lock in the front.
  If you have townhall meetings, you will find out a lot of mail gets 
stolen, so they were protecting the packages but still allowing you to 
put the letter in. This isn't voter suppression. It is routine 
maintenance.
  Myth no. 3: The Postal Service doesn't have the capacity to handle 
more absentee ballots.
  The Postal Service delivers 471 million pieces of mail on an average 
day. Little known fact: People mail less every single year. With all of 
the advancements we put in the Postal Service, with the technology of 
our own life, do you know what year equalled 471 million? About exactly 
what we did in 1985.
  But we do it different than 1985. We have more technology. And 
because of that, the Postmaster General actually refuted the capacity 
in no uncertain terms to the Senate yesterday.
  The Postal Service released this: If all Americans vote by mail, 330 
million ballots over the course of this election, it would only be 75 
percent of what they deliver in a single day.
  Now, I don't want to claim, Mr. Speaker, that all the Democrats think 
this is a myth. Maybe that is why one-third didn't show today. I am not 
sure. They said their health was bad. I am not sure if that is the case 
either.
  Even The New York Times isn't buying the House Democrats' obvious 
untruths. As it was reported earlier this month: Experts agree that the 
Postal Service has the raw capacity to absorb the additional ballots, 
even if 150 million people decided to vote by mail.
  Myth no. 4: The Democrats' legislation will make the Postal Service 
fiscally sustainable.
  You are not fixing any of the fundamentals. You are not even taking 
the bill that you spent years on, with a Republican and a Democrat, 
with Elijah Cummings and Mark Meadows, two who would say they come from 
different walks of life, from a philosophy, but found common ground 
when it came to the post office, to really fix the core of what the 
problems are. But that is not why we are here today.
  So, as the Democrats perpetuate this sad political stunt, 
unfortunately, there is serious business that goes unmet. But it shows 
real priority.
  This week, we learned that 71 percent of small businesses have used 
their entire paycheck protection loan--they spent it all--and 46 
percent anticipate that they will need more financial support over the 
next 12 months. But that wasn't critical enough to be here, because 
these are real people with real families. They don't expect miracles 
from us, but they do expect us to at least care. Unfortunately, not one 
piece of legislation in this so-called emergency session is about the 
families or their future.
  Nor are we working to protect vaccine research and support Operation 
Warp Speed. No, House Democrats are doing what they have done for the 
last 2 years: They are putting politics before people.
  Last month, Speaker Pelosi said to us: We can't go home until a 
coronavirus relief package is complete.
  I guess we know that is not true. I wonder if she wants to keep her 
word this time as well, but I guess we will go home this Saturday. But 
good news for one-third of the Democrats: They don't have to go 
anywhere. They are already home. When she did not get her liberal wish 
list, she sent Members home. And I guess good news for some Americans: 
Those who stayed home and voted, they still got paid.
  But those small businesses that are running out, that we are here in 
this body right now that we could do something about, or those who are 
on unemployment we could do something about--you have the majority; we 
don't. We are not allowed to bring it to the floor; you can. But you 
picked a crisis of something that is already funded.
  They can't spend the money you want to give them. Why? Because they 
have got $14 billion sitting in the bank and another $10 billion they 
could pull from. But the small businesses don't. The families that 
can't pay their rent, they don't. And what about the vaccine?
  But you did do something this week. You extended the shadow voting 
scheme, granting yourselves permission to vote from home until October 
2.

  Mr. Speaker, I will take a bet. I will make a bet on this floor right 
now, maybe even a prediction. I bet that gets extended again and 
probably goes a few days past the election in November.
  Who would like to take that bet with me? How much do you want to get 
that extended all the way through?
  What does that mean to the American people? Well, it means the 
majority party, the Democrats, have cast over 2,520 votes--and 
counting--from home. That is just unconstitutional. It doesn't matter 
that it is such a big crisis that we are called back. There is plenty 
of room on the floor on the other side.

[[Page H4282]]

  It means a Democrat Member can dial in from his boat to vote. I am 
not making that up. That actually happened.
  It means another Democrat can play hooky to go watch a space shuttle 
launch that isn't even in his own district.
  It means Democrats collect a paycheck while the hardworking taxpayers 
have to pay for their vacation.
  And today, it means that 68 Democrats--one-third of their Caucus--
didn't even care enough to show up for this so-called emergency 
session.
  It is critical. I have heard you say it. We cannot wait. We cannot 
wait one day. We need to be here and now. Now, I believe that is true, 
but not about the post office; about those millions of Americans who 
need us to act.
  Every time we brought legislation to this floor dealing with the 
COVID situation, it seems to me the Speaker has been able to hold it 
up. I don't know. Maybe you want to try to hold it up past the 
election. It seems to me that would be playing politics. It seems to me 
that would be a dereliction of duty. It is not how you empower the 
people's voice in Washington; it is how you dilute it. This is 
leadership malpractice. This is shameful and this is embarrassing.
  Mr. Speaker, our first Postmaster General, whom I have heard people 
speak of, Ben Franklin, could have been talking about this majority 
when he said: ``Lost time is never found again.''
  As a majority, Democrats have been more focused on distractions than 
solutions for the American people, from the weakest, most partisan 
impeachment in American history to politicizing the pandemic and 
stopping relief for workers and families and, now, spreading a debunked 
conspiracy theory about the Postal Service.
  Mr. Speaker, Democrats have failed the American public. They have 
failed the laid-off workers, the families, the students who are waiting 
for help; the small businesses, the doctors, the nurses, they are 
waiting for help; the researchers, the scientists who are developing a 
vaccine, they are waiting for help. But this majority said no.
  They did, however, say yes to China. On this floor, just a few weeks 
ago, there was a bill to sanction anyone who would hack into our 
companies, into our institutions that are working on a vaccine faster 
than ever before--that would only slow it down--to save lives.
  We had an opportunity to tell those countries: Work with us; don't 
steal from us. But your voice was heard loud and clear, all the 
Democrats who showed up that day. More than two-thirds of you voted 
``no'' on the same day that it was reported that two Chinese were 
hacking into our vaccine. That is what you said.
  I heard the majority leader say it was an MTR. Yes, it was.
  Why was it an MTR? Because you don't give us an amendment.
  Why was it an MTR? Because at the moment in time, it was essential, 
it was critical. It was reported on that day. You could act that day. 
The country needed us to act, but you said no. You stood up for the 
Chinese that day.
  I do not know what the Chinese Communist Party has on the Democrats, 
Mr. Speaker, but it must be powerful. It must be so powerful.
  I know there are bills in the Senate that have passed that would hold 
them accountable, but they can't come to the floor.
  I have read the reports from the FBI that they are playing in this 
campaign, that they do have a person they want to win, to put a new 
person in office, but that is not critical to you.
  It is critical that we come today to provide $25 billion to an 
organization that Republicans and Democrats, that are the 
commissioners, say they do not need.
  Why do they not need it? Because they looked at their own bank 
account and realized they have $14 billion. They do not need it 
because, in the CARES Act, we gave them another $10 billion to sit 
there. They do not need it because they said they could deliver every 
piece of mail, that it would be only 75 percent of what they do in a 
single day.

  Mr. Speaker, I do not want to say all the Democrats feel that way, 
because one-third of them didn't show up for work today even though 
their own leader, the Speaker, said they needed to come, even though, 
when we passed on this floor something different than we haven't done 
in more than 230 years, to let somebody stay home, be on a boat, call 
in, and still get paid, you said you could not do that. You could only 
do it if your health was at need. I am not quite sure a hospital is on 
a boat in a lake, but to Democrats it must be.
  They won't vote on a bill that I propose to sanction Chinese-
affiliated hackers who attack our vaccine research. I am not sure that 
is partisan. I thought that was pure American.
  They won't help working Americans. They won't help protect our 
vaccines. But, yes, they stood that day proudly supporting of the 
Chinese Communist Party.
  I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. America's too great for a vision so small 
with our challenges before us.
  We showed up. But you know why we showed up? We showed up for the 
small businesses. We showed up for those who are unemployed. We showed 
up for those school districts that want to find a way to open safely. 
We showed up for the doctors and the nurses.
  I know, when I look up on the board, there will be a lot of Democrat 
votes. I don't know where those one-third are. Maybe they are on the 
boat. Maybe they are watching a spaceship. I am not sure. Maybe some 
are watching Oprah.
  But one thing I do know, it is essential that we are here. But we 
should be here for other reasons. We should be here for the reasons 
that the American public expect us to.
  Mr. Speaker, we can do so much better. This country needs us. We 
should rise to the occasion, not fall for a vision so small as what I 
see today.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.

                              {time}  1515

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished majority 
leader.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I had not necessarily intended to speak after 
the minority leader, but I cannot help but respond to some of what the 
minority leader had to say.
  First of all, he practices the President's favorite tactic. Distract. 
Speak about that which is not relevant. All the Democrats are voting. 
They may be voting at that machine. They may be voting at that machine 
over there. They may be voting at that machine, or they may be voting 
at that machine back there. They may be voting by proxy, which you 
didn't like. The minority leader sued, and the Court said it is up to 
the House to decide its own rules.
  Now, when we passed the HEROES Act 100 days ago tomorrow, what did 
the minority leader say? Let's wait and see what happens. And what has 
happened since then? Thousands, tens of thousands of people have gotten 
sick, and thousands and thousands of people have died in those days. 
Let's wait and see.
  And what did the majority leader, who can put a bill on the floor, 
what did he say? Let the States go bankrupt.
  Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot of talk on the floor about bring 
this bill or that bill or the other bill. The Senate is controlled by 
your party, I tell my minority friends in the House. They haven't 
passed a single bill in 70 days, in 100 days, not a single bill. Why? 
Because they would have to compromise.
  And you say we need to bring things to the floor. The minority 
leader, of course, had a man named Garland, from February to January 
when Obama was the President of the United States, and refused to 
consider it. Do you think there is a Founding Father who thought that 
advice and consent meant that they could simply ignore the President's 
nominations? I think not.
  Some people talk about, Oh, there are some very, very important 
things to do. One of them, the gentlewoman from North Carolina--now, 
let me, 84,631 deaths since HEROES passed. Let's wait. We passed 
HEROES. No action in the Republican-controlled and led United States 
Senate. So don't whine to me about what you want on the floor. Don't 
whine to me about we could have done this, we could have done that, we 
could have done the other.

[[Page H4283]]

  Mr. Speaker, I was just talking to the chief of staff of the White 
House, and I kidded him, I said, You know, when you were here in the 
House and we had Republican leadership and they offered solutions, you 
undermined them.
  Who says so? John Boehner says so. You had the opportunity to make a 
deal.
  Now we control the House, and very frankly, the majority leader 
cannot pass a bill because 20 of your Members in the United States 
Senate want to do nothing, and just tell the people who are suffering, 
who are on unemployment, who don't have childcare, you are on your own.
  Now, I have heard all this talk about what we could have done. Do it. 
Do it. Nancy Pelosi and Secretary Mnuchin got four deals done. Most of 
you voted for them, and they passed overwhelmingly in a bipartisan 
fashion. But you made a decision, nope, no more.
  Now we have it speculated that if we don't take action and have a 
much more robust--and a plan for dealing with COVID-19, which we don't 
have and haven't had, because this President called it a hoax. You 
don't have to respond to hoaxes. That is what he called it, a hoax. 
And, of course, if it is a hoax you don't respond, and he didn't.
  And over 175,000--86,000 since we passed HEROES--175,000, and CDC 
says it may be up to 200,000 by the end of this year. Still, you have 
passed no bill in the United States.
  We sent a bill over there. You don't like it, that is fine, pass your 
own. You control the Senate. Pass your own, and then we will go to 
conference. We will see which bill is better, or maybe we will put them 
together. But what has the Senate majority leader done? He has reduced 
the $1 trillion offer down to $500 billion, which the governor of my 
State says is only sufficient to help the States because they are 
hemorrhaging revenue, and they are on the front lines of responding to 
this crisis.
  Now, others of you have said all of this is a feign, this is not 
real.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask Madam Chair, has she spoken about the report from 
the Postmaster General?
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Yes, I have.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, let me repeat it, notwithstanding that.
  It says, ``The new documents being released by the committee today 
are part of the PMG briefing.''
  Now, I hope the Postmaster General, unlike the President of the 
United States, reads his briefings.
  The President says he doesn't read his briefings, so he didn't know 
about the Russian payments to kill American soldiers and has not 
responded to this date on that assertion.
  The new documents being released by the committee today are part of 
the PMG briefing, a presentation prepared directly for the Postmaster 
General last week on August 12, 10 days ago. They provide a detailed 
assessment of service performance trends over the past year.
  My friend from Ohio says, Oh, this is a fraud. There is no problem. 
Not a big deal. Maybe he didn't read the PMG advisory either.
  According to these documents, there has been a significant drop in 
service standards across the board beginning in July, including first-
class, marketing, periodicals, and priority mail.
  The Postmaster General, of course, has never admitted to the sweeping 
delays and reductions in service caused by the actions. Instead, here 
is what he said: ``We all feel bad about what the dip in the level 
of service has been.''

  So he knows there was a dip in service right after he made these 
changes.
  Now, what do we know?
  A, we know he is a big supporter of the President, gave a lot of 
money to the President.
  Secondly, we know he was appointed by the President. Essentially, 
yes, elected by the Board of Governors--all thanks to the membership 
appointed by President Trump--who, by the way, unanimously asked for 
the $25 billion we are talking about.
  We know the President of the United States wants to suppress the 
vote.
  Why?
  He says so. He says so.
  The first meeting I had with the President of the United States with 
Republican leaders and Democratic leaders just shortly after he was 
inaugurated President, the first thing he said was, I got a majority of 
the votes.
  If it hadn't been fraud, if it hadn't been all those people that 
voted illegally, I would have gotten the majority of votes. He only got 
62 million. 70 million voted for somebody else. And 65 million people, 
the majority of the people of the United States voting for President of 
the United States, voted for Hillary Clinton.
  I challenge one of you to name me two members of the electoral 
college in 2016. You can't do it. The American people voted for Hillary 
Clinton.
  The President of the United States wants to send, maybe with no name 
tags and just sort of brown suits on, troops to the polls of America. 
Never in my life--and I have run probably for office more times than 
anybody here but   Don Young--never have I seen armed troops there at 
the polls to intimidate people.
  My State checks for fraud. And, by the way, all those fraudulent 
votes that Donald Trump said had been cast, not a conviction. He 
controls the Justice Department. He controls, presumably, the FBI.
  Going back to what I said about this crisis that was occurring that 
you say doesn't exist in the post office.
  On January 15, 2013, we voted for a crisis, 50 million Americans 
living in the northeast had been savaged by Superstorm Sandy. About 230 
of you Republicans were here, you were in charge. Only 49 of you, not 
Mr. Meadows, not Ms. Foxx, 49 voted for that bill, and 178 of you voted 
no. No crisis. 50 million Americans. Superstorm Sandy. People being 
flooded out of their businesses and homes. No crisis.
  My suggestion is, wherever you are, you came here and that's great, 
you are here, you can vote in person. Isn't that wonderful. I think 
your vote would count just as much if you had voted--but your 
leadership has told you, no, don't worry about the 86,000 people who 
have died. The minority leader said, well, the crisis is gone. I don't 
know where he thinks it went. It is certainly visiting the 
neighborhoods in my State and the neighborhoods in your State.
  So the report says the mail has substantially gone down since the 
Postmaster General--aiding and abetting, in my opinion, the President 
of the United States who wishes to suppress the vote--acted.
  Now, I don't know how many of you read 18 U.S. Code 1703, but it 
says, ``Whoever being a Postal Service officer or employee''--and says 
some other things about secrets, destroys, detains, opens, et cetera--
``whoever delays mail, which was intended to be conveyed by mail, shall 
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or 
both.''
  Now, I had a press conference with Senator Warner, Senator Van 
Hollen, and six other Members, including Eleanor Holmes Norton, one of 
the senior members of the Chair's committee. Five minutes before we 
held that press conference, the Postmaster General issued his statement 
that he was going to stop doing what he was doing. I guess it was 
because he thought, Well, what I am doing is great, everybody will 
support what I am doing. Or, did he think, I got my hand caught in the 
cookie jar and I better stop? Which do you think is the more rational 
determination as to why 5 minutes before he had that press conference 
he issued his release? That he thought it was fine? He could defend it? 
It was the right thing to do?
  If he thought all of those, why in heaven's name did he change his 
mind?
  I will tell you why. He knew what he did was wrong. He probably read 
that briefing that service had plummeted since he took that action, and 
that he was putting the mail, prescription drugs, Social Security 
checks, veterans' checks, at risk.
  That seems to me to be the logical conclusion. And as the law says, 
if you act and you delay the mail, you commit a crime, subject to 5 
years in jail, and a substantial fine.

                              {time}  1530

  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her leadership.
  The Postmaster General appeared to back down from his attempt to set 
the Postal Service up for failure just moments before a number of us, 
as I have said, from the House and Senate were about to speak in front 
of the Postal Service headquarters right down the street.

[[Page H4284]]

  In his testimony yesterday, the Postmaster General indicated that he 
and President Trump are simply hitting pause. They don't care about the 
diminution of service that the Postmaster General's report said, 
apparently. They just hit pause. Why? Because they are hoping it will 
go away, the wrongdoing that they are perpetrating, not what was done 
in the past by, yes: Should we make service efficient and effective? We 
should. But that is not why this was done.
  All you have to do is look at the President's statement about wanting 
to suppress the vote, particularly of minorities. He said that if more 
Blacks had voted in the last election, I would have lost. That is what 
he said.
  In his statement on Tuesday, the Postmaster General indicated that no 
additional changes would be implemented. In other words, he is not 
going to back up, even though his report says it is diminishing 
service. Why? He can pledge all he wants, but if you don't give the 
post office department and its employees the tools with which to do the 
job, no matter what he says about voting--I am glad that we make sure 
that first-class mail treatment--as a matter of fact, there ought to be 
super-first class.
  Voting for the President of the United States has got to be the most 
important thing a citizen does in this election year, and it ought to 
be treated as such by the postal department.
  Even after 3 months, President Trump and Senate Republicans continue 
to refuse to take action on the HEROES Act. I talked about that. That 
is why Congress needs to take action now that will ensure our Postal 
Service can continue to deliver for America through this pandemic, just 
as it always has reliably delivered for our people. That is why this 
legislation is necessary.
  Millions depend on the Postal Service to obtain medications, receive 
paychecks, and access vital services. For rural communities, in 
particular, the Postal Service--that is the irony. For rural 
communities, the Postal Service is probably even more important.
  This year, in particular, it will play a crucial role, the Postal 
Service, in helping tens of millions of Americans stay safe from COVID-
19. 86,000 Americans have died since we passed the HEROES Act. The 
minority leader seems to think: Well, people not coming to Congress, 
not wanting to get on an airplane, not wanting to come to Washington 
and then go home and have to sequester themselves for 14 days, oh, they 
are just playing games.
  If you doubt the validity of their vote, say so. But whether I cast 
it far over there or near here, it is the same vote. It is my vote, and 
it is my people's voice.
  It was so angering for Americans across the political spectrum that 
President Trump and Postmaster General DeJoy openly sabotaged the 
Postal Service in order to prevent people from casting votes through 
the mail. I know you can discount the fact that the President wants to 
suppress the vote. He said so. I am not making it up. He said so. Oh, 
we have all the fraud.
  By the way, he votes by mail, of course. You all understand that. I 
don't know that he sends an ID card down when he votes. Well, maybe we 
ought to check on that. You are so interested in ID cards, let's see if 
the President of the United States sends an ID card down to Florida.
  They employed tactics such as eliminating overtime pay, cutting 
routes short, reassigning experienced managers, et cetera.
  Maybe you guys and gals don't have a constituent office open. But 
every one of my Members tells me they are hearing from thousands of 
their people.
  Congress, therefore, must take action to prevent them from simply 
changing their minds and causing massive postal delays in the weeks 
ahead. Remember, he said he has just delayed his changes, which caused 
the fall in service.
  Delivering for America Act, that is what the postal department has 
done since before the Constitution was adopted. I am not going to go 
through what it will require. You know what it will require. But it 
would particularly require, and I am so pleased, Madam Chair, that you 
included in your bill first-class treatment because voting is first-
class priority in America.
  Now, I am going to close with this because so many of you said: This 
bill is not going to pass. You are wasting your time. You shouldn't 
send it over there.
  If we did that, we wouldn't do anything unless the President said you 
can do it. Then, we would salute and say: ``Yes, sir. We will do it. 
But if you don't want it, sir, if you don't want FISA--126 of us voted 
for FISA, but if you don't want it, we will change our minds in 24 
hours,'' which is what you did.
  But then again, we wouldn't have sent campaign finance reform over 
there because McConnell hasn't considered it. We wouldn't have sent 
investment and infrastructure and jobs, which McConnell has not put on 
the floor. We wouldn't have sent restoring voting rights or ensuring 
LGBT equality or protecting Dreamers or ensuring equal pay for women 
because McConnell hasn't put equal pay for women on the floor.
  Requiring background checks for safer communities, only 90 percent of 
Americans are for that, so I can understand why McConnell said: Look, 
there is 10 percent against it. I am not going to put it on the floor 
for consideration.
  You say you haven't gotten notice, and you haven't been included in 
the committee, et cetera. McConnell doesn't allow anybody to vote, your 
leader.
  Meeting the challenge of climate change, well, of course, many of you 
don't believe climate change is real. I understand that.

  Providing for justice in policing, did we send it over there? Yes. 
Why? Because we want a fair, more just, more equal, more racially 
conscious Nation. And I say racially conscious in the sense that we 
don't judge people on the color of their skin.
  We strengthened and expanded the ACA, which in a pandemic may well 
have been very helpful. It hasn't been put on the floor.
  Protecting workers' rights to organize and receive their pensions, it 
hasn't been put on the floor.
  So, if you tell me this can't pass, it can't pass perhaps because the 
President of the United States tells you that he is not for it, and so 
it doesn't pass.
  In closing--and I know many of you have said thank God--in closing, 
let me say that you ought to vote for this bill. Not for Democrats. You 
ought to vote for it for your people, for the people in your rural 
neighborhoods who are counting on the postal department to bring that 
prescription drug, which is critical to maintain their health or save 
their lives. You ought to vote for it for the over 1 million people 
getting Social Security checks in the mail.
  That is why you ought to vote for it, not for us.
  You ought to vote for it because you want everybody to vote; you want 
everybody to participate in this democracy; you want an election that 
has, like so many other countries, 80 percent of our people 
participating, who don't want to be the 86,001 who die because they 
went someplace and aggregated together and got COVID-19.
  That is what this is about, making our people able to participate 
safely in their democracy.
  Vote for this bill. It is not a partisan bill. It is a bill that says 
Republicans ought to be safe in voting. Democrats ought to be safe in 
voting. Independents ought to be safe in voting, if that is what they 
choose to do.
  This is a good bill. It is a bill for America's democracy. It is a 
bill for making sure that our people are connected through the mail.
  I thank the chair for bringing this bill to the floor. Vote ``yes.'' 
I urge a ``yes'' vote for all Members.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from 
engaging in personalities toward the President and to direct their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time is 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has 25 minutes. 
The gentlewoman from New York has 24 minutes.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio, 
Mr. Latta.
  Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the ranking member, for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this bill, which has not gone 
through regular order and was put together in

[[Page H4285]]

response to misinformation and conspiracies online.
  Since the closure of the Toledo, Ohio, processing plant in 2012, mail 
in northwest Ohio has been sent to the Metroplex Processing Facility in 
Michigan. As my constituents can attest, this new arrangement has not 
worked. We have experienced countless delays and destroyed and lost 
mail for years, including more than 1,000 absentee ballots in the 2016 
general election.
  That is why I have continuously engaged with the USPS to fix these 
problems and get our mail sorted in Ohio. They have committed to 
working with me and officials in Ohio to implement procedures for 
election materials.
  Unfortunately, under H.R. 8015, the USPS would be prohibited from 
making any changes to their operation if it is determined that the 
changes would impede prompt, reliable, and efficient services.
  It doesn't specifically say who will be making this determination, so 
it is safe to assume it will be the unelected bureaucrats, individuals 
who have told me for years that the preferred way to sort mail would be 
through the Metroplex. Now, this bill could legally prohibit absentee 
ballots from being processed in Ohio-based sorting facilities.
  I cannot in good conscience support this new Democratic political 
sideshow because it threatens the rights of my constituents to have 
their voices heard in November.
  Madam Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on this legislation.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes 
to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the distinguished 
majority whip.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 8015, the Delivering 
for America Act. This legislation is vital to protecting the United 
States Postal Service.
  I maintain that the post office is the thread that holds the fabric 
of our great country together. The Postal Service existed before our 
Nation's Constitution as the lifeline that connected far-flung 
communities. The Founders believed so strongly in the importance of the 
post office that they enshrined it in our Constitution.

  The post office provides a critical public service that we cannot 
allow to become a potential political pawn of a dysfunctional, 
destructive, and, I dare say, disastrous administration. This 
administration has demonstrated time and again why government should 
not be run like a business. Businesses exist to make profits. The post 
office and the whole of our government exist to provide services. That 
is why it is called a Postal Service, not the postal corporation.
  Today, we are acting to reinforce our Postal Service system, which 
provides vital services like delivering medications, Social Security 
benefits, income and tax payments, veterans benefits, Census forms, and 
absentee ballots to all American communities, however remote they may 
be.
  Americans' dependence on the Postal Service has dramatically 
increased during this pandemic as we have watched the on-time delivery 
of mail decrease significantly. This legislation provides the $25 
billion in emergency COVID funding to the Postal Service that was 
unanimously requested by the bipartisan Board of Governors.
  It also prohibits and even rolls back changes made by the post office 
since January 1 of this year. That prohibition lasts through January 
2021 or until the end of the pandemic, whichever is later.
  That means no post office can be closed, consolidated, or reduce 
hours; no prohibition or restriction of overtime pay; no changes that 
will delay mail delivery or increase the volume of undelivered mail; 
and no removal of post office infrastructure, like sorting machines or 
mailboxes.
  This legislation protects the integrity of our democracy by requiring 
that all election mail be treated as first class, which means ballots 
must be postmarked, processed, and cleared on the same day that they 
are received.

                              {time}  1545

  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
  Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Comer for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I include in the Record two articles from periodicals.

               [From the Washington Tmes, Aug. 18, 2020]

  Democrats Fuel Post Office panic With Lies To Win Upcoming Election

                            (By Andy Biggs)

       There are two almost immutable laws of operation that form 
     the basis of America's political left. The first is that 
     Democrats and leftists foment fear in order to obtain and 
     maintain political power. The other is that they always 
     accuse everyone else, conservatives and Republicans, of acts, 
     words and ideas in which the left is engaged.
       If that means that the truth must be adulterated in order 
     to craft a narrative that gins up panic and hysteria, they 
     will shade the truth. Lies beget panic, panic calls for a 
     solution--usually a big spending solution--and the Democrats 
     try to exploit that panic to get more power.
       The Democrats are engaged in a disinformation campaign 
     regarding the upcoming election and mail-in ballots that is 
     deceptive and reflective of their goal of winning the 
     election by hook or crook.
       Democrats and their left-wing publicists in the media claim 
     that President Trump is going to dismantle the United States 
     Postal Service (USPS). This absurdity typifies both of the 
     Democratic strategies: It is a lie to engender panic, and the 
     stealing of the election is their objective, not the 
     president's.
       They claim that Mr. Trump is going to fiscally starve the 
     behemoth USPS in order to prevent all mailed ballots from 
     being counted. Of course, neither claim is true.
       The president signed a bill that provided an additional $10 
     billion to the USPS just a few weeks ago. At the time, 
     Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said, ``While the USPS is 
     able to fund its operating expenses without additional 
     borrowing at this time, we are pleased to have reached an 
     agreement on the material terms and conditions of a loan, 
     should the need arise.''
       And, White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows also confirmed 
     on CNN that the White House offered the additional $10 
     billion in funding to the Postal Service. Refreshing the 
     left's collective memory about the availability of massive 
     amounts of funding to the USPS ought to have put this phony 
     claim to bed.
       But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is insisting that the House 
     of Representatives return to vote on additional funding for 
     the USPS, which illustrates the Democrats' overarching theme: 
     Just send money; it will always solve the problem, whatever 
     the problem is, even if there is no real problem.
       The second deception that the Democrats are using to try 
     and steal the upcoming election is by conflating the long-
     established practice of absentee balloting with the election-
     fraud-producing scam that the left is selling of universal 
     mail-in ballots. By consolidating the two, very different 
     voting procedures, they are trying to scare Americans into 
     believing that Mr. Trump is going to cheat in the upcoming 
     election.
       This is consistent with Democrats' operating strategy and 
     the methodology that they will accuse you of what they are 
     actually trying to accomplish. In this case, the Democrats 
     are trying to steal the election by sending ballots out to 
     every name on every voter roll. But they are fighting against 
     cleaning up the voter rolls.
       Your uncle is dead but still on the voter roll? A ballot 
     comes to his last address in his name. Your cat is somehow on 
     the roll? Fluffy gets a ballot.
       Democrats know that their demands will incentivize and 
     produce fraudulent ballots by sending out ballots to those 
     who haven't requested them. They are OK with that because 
     they think they can win the dead voter and pet cat 
     demographics.
       They accuse Mr. Trump of defunding the USPS--when the left 
     really wants to defund the police--and their accusation is a 
     lie. They know that the president supports the long-standing 
     practice of absentee voting, but claim he is against that. 
     Another lie.
       House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is so concerned that she is 
     bringing the House back into session to vote on legislation 
     that means nothing. Oh yeah, it's urgent alright, but only 
     after the Democratic convention is completed. Oh, and it's 
     only to give Democrats the opportunity to further the panic-
     driven narrative, because the Senate isn't going to hear the 
     speaker's deceptive bill.
       Never forget that the Democrats and left always accuse you 
     of what they are actually doing and that they will 
     prevaricate to further that claim. The left will try and 
     stoke panic in the country, then attempt to spend any amount 
     of money to quell that panic in order to arrogate power.
       The deception surrounding the USPS ``crisis'' is just 
     another great example of Marxian-Democrat duplicity.
                                  ____


                    [From the Blaze, Aug. 21, 2020]

Postmaster General Promises Timely Delivery of Election Mail, Says USPS 
                       Doesn't Need Bailout Money

                            (By Aaron Colen)

       Postmaster General Louis DeJoy denied accusations that the 
     United States Postal Service wouldn't be able to handle 
     increased volumes of election mail in November, and told the 
     Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee 
     on Friday that the USPS was ``fully capable'' of getting the 
     job done, CBS News reported.

[[Page H4286]]

       DeJoy has been a target of Democrats who believe the Trump 
     donor and logistics expert is handicapping the Postal Service 
     at the president's urging in order to discourage or limit 
     mail-in voting.
       ``As we head into the election season, I want to assure 
     this committee, and the American public, that the Postal 
     Service is fully capable of delivering the nation's election 
     mail securely and on time,'' DeJoy testified.
       DeJoy said even mail-in ballots sent one week before 
     Election Day would be counted, because USPS workers will 
     ``scour every plant each night leading up to Election Day'' 
     to make sure no ballot is left behind.
       Rather than being opposed to mail-in voting, as President 
     Donald Trump is, DeJoy told the committee ``I think the 
     American public should be able to vote by mail, and the 
     Postal Service will support it.''
       DeJoy clarified that the potential issue with mail-in 
     ballots is related to state deadlines that are too close to 
     Election Day, which is why 46 states were notified of that 
     issue in a letter late last month. DeJoy said Americans 
     should vote early, if they can.
       The U.S. Postal Service plans to ``send a letter to every 
     American'' explaining ``what our process is'' for mail-in 
     voting, DeJoy said Friday.
       DeJoy, who has been in his role since June, said he has 
     never spoken to Trump or White House advisers about making 
     changes to service.
       The USPS has long been in bad financial shape, and DeJoy 
     was hired as a logistics expert from the private sector to 
     address issues of cost and efficiency. Some of the changes 
     that have reportedly been made, such as the limiting of 
     overtime and the removal of some mail sorting machines and 
     collection boxes, have led to some delays in mail delivery in 
     some areas. Those operational changes were suspended by DeJoy 
     this week to avoid the appearance of tampering with the Nov. 
     3 election.
       Some recent primary elections were disrupted by issues with 
     mail-in ballots. A New York congressional election was 
     delayed by six weeks due to a dispute over some ballots that 
     were not postmarked or that were received after the deadline. 
     Tens of thousands of votes that were mailed in weren't 
     counted for various reasons.
       Democrats are pushing for billions of dollars in additional 
     funding for the USPS, partially to help with the election. On 
     Friday, DeJoy told Congress the USPS did not need a federal 
     bailout, but did advocate for reimbursement for service 
     provided during the pandemic even while revenues were down.

  Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, ``The Postal Service is fully capable of 
delivering the Nation's election mail securely and on time.'' That was 
the testimony of the Postmaster General.
  But they don't trust the Postmaster General.
  The post office has taken care of over 400 million pieces of mail 
every day.
  But they don't trust the Postmaster General.
  That is intriguing to me, because they are going to give the 
Postmaster General an additional $25 billion. They don't trust him, yet 
they are going to give him $25 billion when he already has $15 billion 
cash on hand and a $10 billion line of credit. We don't trust this guy, 
but we are going to give him $25 billion extra.
  But moreover, this is a crisis. We want reforms. We want changes. We 
don't trust the current Postmaster General, so what we are going to do 
is we are going to proscribe any kind of efforts to make the post 
office, Postal Service, work better. We are going to stop that. Not 
only are we going to stop that, we are going to give a new cause of 
action to trial lawyers against the USPS.
  That is what is going on in this bill, and I find that intriguing. It 
reminds me of a Eugene Ionesco play, Luigi Pirandello. We are talking 
theater of the absurd here. That is what we are talking about.
  Democrats call the failures of USPS a crisis, but they are going to 
prohibit reforms or changes. Think of the irony of that.
  I would suggest that this illustrates the Democrats' overarching 
theme: If you just send money, it will always solve the problem, 
whatever the problem is, even if there is no real problem.
  This is not a money issue. This is not an acute issue. This is a 
long-term problem that has been there for multiple administrations.
  Now, to come in at the last minute--and here is part of the 
absurdity.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Wild). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs).
  Mr. BIGGS. Madam Speaker, the richest part of this irony, this 
absurdity, is: Here we are today. We are going to vote on this bill 
today, and we are going to have the hearing on Monday in the committee. 
That is the richest part of an absurdity that is going to cost us $25 
billion.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, just as a point 
of clarification, there is no cause of action in this bill, and it does 
not in any way hinder any efficiency that would speed up the mail. It 
merely stops any action that slows down the mail until the end of this 
pandemic.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Massachusetts (Ms. Pressley), an extremely valuable member of the 
committee.
  Ms. PRESSLEY. Madam Speaker, I rise today to say: Enough. In a 
blatant attempt to suppress the vote, the occupant has continued to 
attack the legitimacy of our elections, denouncing the very method of 
voting he and his family have repeatedly used: mail-in ballots.
  Hypocrisy: It should look familiar to my colleagues across the aisle.
  How dare you refer to this as a sham bill. The only sham here is the 
patriotism that you allege to espouse while you stand idly by and are 
complicit in the dismantling of the United States Postal Service, which 
is impacting the lives of all of our constituents, disrupting services.
  Patriotism: They hire more veterans than anyone else. Veterans rely 
on them to receive lifesaving medication. The only sham here is the 
patriotism which you espouse.
  Enough of the criminal and corrupt mismanagement of the Postmaster 
General. The changes he has brought to our Postal Service during this 
pandemic are brazen acts of sabotage intended to slow down operations 
and to delay mail delivery.
  This is a hell of a way to repay 600,000 dedicated letter carriers 
and postal workers who have put themselves in harm's way in the midst 
of this pandemic, who find dignity in their work and are worried about 
the impact on services and fear for their very livelihoods and 
retribution for the calls that they have made to all of our offices.
  How dare you.
  While the Trump administration and its allies continue to gaslight 
the American people, we actually listen to our constituents and their 
lived experiences and how this has disrupted their lives, what you are 
referring to as fakes news, constituents like Cassandra, a freelancer 
from Somerville who waited for 2 weeks for a check from a client to 
arrive.
  ``Freelancing is already unstable,'' she told me, ``and post office 
delays mean I have even less assurance that the money I have worked for 
will reach me in a timely fashion.''
  Or Brendan in Charlestown, who requested an absentee ballot more than 
3 weeks ago so he and his pregnant wife could vote without risking 
their health but has yet to receive it because, in the Massachusetts 
Seventh Congressional District, nine mail sorting machines have been 
removed.
  There must be accountability. It is time to pass the Delivering for 
America Act.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Williams).
  Mr. WILLIAMS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 8015 
and the manufactured crisis my Democratic colleagues have created 
regarding the U.S. Postal Service.
  For the past week, the American people have been told they cannot 
trust the Postal Service to do their job and that Republicans, along 
with President Trump, are trying to undermine the agency.
  That could not be further from the truth. The Postal Service has more 
than enough funding to operate for the next calendar year and has not 
even acted upon the $10 billion loan the Treasury offered back in July.

  The sad truth is that the Postal Service has been financially 
unsustainable and without reform for over a decade, and the bill we are 
voting on today will do nothing, absolutely nothing, to improve the 
shortfalls with this agency.
  We should, instead, be working together to address certain problems 
we have while being conscious of the taxpayer dollars that have been 
used for bailouts over the years.
  Madam Speaker, I have a rural district in Texas, District 25. We rely

[[Page H4287]]

upon the Postal Service to fulfill services that my constituents would 
otherwise go without. I am an advocate for improving this agency, and 
we should dedicate time to do just that, but there is an actual crisis 
among us that should demand our immediate attention.
  In the car business, you can't charge the sticker price if you don't 
have a vehicle to deliver, and you don't sell used cars that won't 
start. We are not delivering results today. The immediate crisis we 
need to address is caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
  Main Street America and families across Texas are wanting results, 
but my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would rather ignore 
this truth and, instead, politicize a conspiracy theory. If my 
colleagues are serious about postal reform, then let's get to work, but 
the legislation before us today isn't the answer. It is, frankly, a 
waste of time.
  I should be home with my family. I should be home with my 
grandchildren. As we say in Texas, ``This dog won't hunt.'' Well, let 
me tell you, this dog won't hunt.
  And, P.S., let's make the Postal Service run like a business.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes 
to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib), another great member of 
the committee.
  Ms. TLAIB. Madam Speaker, do you hear that? That is our democracy 
crumbling.
  I want all of my neighbors, I want all of America to know why the 
people's House is here for an emergency vote on Saturday while Senate 
Majority Leader McConnell went on vacation: We are experiencing a 
global pandemic, and now our U.S. Postal Service is under attack.
  Let it be clear: This administration is waging an authoritarian 
campaign to sabotage this election by manipulating the Postal Service 
to suppress our votes, and they are threatening the livelihood of our 
postal workers, our seniors, our veterans, and so many more in the 
process.
  This is not a conspiracy theory. This is fascism. We will not stand 
for this now or ever.
  In Michigan right now, machines capable of sorting 35,000 pieces of 
mail per hour have disappeared from postal facilities.
  Brave workers are blowing the whistle and saying that they have never 
seen anything like this, Madam Speaker.
  We must put an end to it.
  Madam Speaker, I say to the White House: Hands off the United States 
Postal Service.
  Let's make it clear through this law to fund our Postal Service and 
undo these harmful attacks and restore normal operations.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Bishop).
  Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman 
for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, our presence today, this unserious legislation, even 
all the yelling across the aisle and the straying off topic, they all 
underscore a contrast: Democrats whip up hysteria; Republicans show up 
to work.
  They call a Saturday session, supposedly because of an emergency. 
Republicans are here, but about 70 Democrats don't show up. And that 
has been the pattern all summer: Republicans come to work; Democrats 
dial it in, sometimes from the fishing boat.
  They say the virus keeps them from congregating to work, but they 
encourage the throng outside the Postmaster General's personal 
residence.
  Or consider Representative Grijalva: not at work today, but joined a 
postal union protest 4 days ago. They can congregate to whip up 
hysteria, just not to work.
  Now, Louis DeJoy is showing up to work. Testifying yesterday, he 
calmly debunked apocryphal tales about blue collection boxes and 
sorting machines.
  Monday, he testifies before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, 
but Democrats fan hysteria today without waiting for facts, even though 
they don't show up.
  Let's drop the hysteria. Let's all show up to work. Americans need 
our help.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ 
minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Sarbanes), an outstanding 
member of the committee.
  Mr. SARBANES. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman of the committee 
for yielding.
  I support this bill strongly.
  I want to speak a little bit to what the Postmaster General 
acknowledged--admitted--yesterday. He called it a dip in service. He 
finally admitted that after being pressed extensively on it.
  I want to tell you what the dip looks like in my district.
  So, in all of 2019, our constituent service folks opened 11 cases to 
deal with delays and service problems with the mail--11 cases in 2019. 
So far this year, there have been 106.
  Now, I am not talking about people who are just calling in and 
complaining because the mail is late and then they hang up the phone 
and so forth. This is where they have got real concerns about what is 
happening and they ask us to open a case. There have been 106 this year 
compared with 11 last year, and 103 of those in the last 4 weeks.
  That is not a dip in service. That is a collapse of service, and it 
tracks exactly to the time that Louis DeJoy has been on the job.
  Here is what is so terrible: When you attack the Postal Service from 
within, which is what he is doing, it has the effect of trying to 
separate the postal workers from the public that trusts them.

  Over 90 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the Postal 
Service. We have to restore that bond. That is what this legislation 
does.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. Madam Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Comer for 
yielding.
  Madam Speaker, I stand today with the hardworking letter carriers and 
postal workers of the United States Postal Service.
  The USPS must be fully funded so that my constituents and millions 
across our Nation can receive the high-quality and timely service that 
the post office has always provided us.
  Madam Speaker, today I will vote in favor of the Delivering for 
America Act.
  Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, must come together and 
address the serious challenges that USPS has been facing for quite some 
time now. I look forward to continuing to work with our colleagues on 
bipartisan solutions to move all of our heroes forward and support our 
heroes at the U.S. Postal Service.

                              {time}  1600

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ 
minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. 
Clark), who is the vice chair of our caucus.
  Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Speaker, 99 days ago House 
Democrats passed the HEROES Act to provide much-needed relief to the 
American people suffering from this pandemic.
  What was the reaction from the GOP?
  A shrug.
  Funding for State and local governments to protect jobs of first 
responders and teachers?
  Mitch McConnell said: Let them go bankrupt.
  Feeding hungry children and families?
  They said: Let's hit the pause button.
  Funding for testing, treatment, and hospitals as death tolls soared 
over 175,000?
  Donald Trump said: It is what it is.
  Unemployment benefits and eviction protection?
  Not right now.
  In May, we also funded the post office, a critical service enshrined 
in our Constitution, a lifeline to seniors and veterans, like John, who 
called me yesterday from my hometown who had to wait an extra week to 
get his medication.
  It is a pillar of our democracy allowing people to vote safely from 
home this fall. We are here today to defend this institution from slow 
deliveries and removal of critical mail infrastructure. Twelve mail 
sorting machines in my home State have been removed.
  When Mr. DeJoy was asked about this, he said: They are not needed.

[[Page H4288]]

  Donald Trump said he didn't want those ridiculous ballots delivered.
  We will not stand by while the Postal Service is dismantled and good 
jobs are lost. We will fight so that every vote is counted.
  Vote ``yes'' for the Postal Service. Vote ``yes'' for the people. 
Vote ``yes'' for democracy.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Utah (Mr. Curtis).
  Mr. CURTIS. Madam Speaker, like many of my constituents, I have 
followed the allegations circling around the Postal Service. These are 
serious allegations. To get to the heart of the problem, I spoke 
directly to Utah's postal leadership.
  As I asked questions and waded through the rumors, I learned four 
important facts:
  First, it is clear that the Postal Service needs additional funding. 
How much and under what circumstances is a worthy debate. But let me be 
clear: the funding solution has no bearing on their ability to handle 
the upcoming mail-in ballots. The United States Postal Service has 
enough cash on hand to operate well into 2021.
  Second, the increased demand of mail-in ballots does not stretch 
their capacity. Mail-in ballots will increase the demand on the system 
by a little over 1.5 percent. In the words of Utah's district director, 
not even a bump in volume. The day I spoke with him Utah's mail 
delivery system was 500,000 letters under capacity.
  Third, the accusation that they are removing boxes and cutting 
overtime to thwart mail-in ballots is just plain not true. Boxes have 
always been moved to adjust to volume. To calm fears, the Postal 
Service has put a 90-day moratorium on moving boxes.
  Likewise, rumors that overtime is being cut so mail-in ballots will 
be delayed is false. I confirmed this with Utah's district director. In 
his words: Never in my career have we left mail undelivered because of 
overtime.
  Fourth, the concerns with mail-in balloting have everything to do 
with the State's preparedness, not the Postal Service. States who have 
allowed ballots to be requested just 4 days before election are 
irresponsible and should be accountable for mail-in ballot problems, 
not the United States Postal Service. Further, mail-in ballots take 
longer to count and delays can be expected, but not because of the 
Postal Service.
  Madam Speaker, if you are not sure whom to believe, ask your mail 
carrier. Ask them if there is anything less than 100 percent effort 
given by them to deliver mail-in ballots and all mail, and then make 
sure to thank them. I am so grateful for the many men and women who 
work so hard to deliver our mail every day.
  We need a strong and vibrant Postal Service, but this bill thrown 
together in the middle of the night does not deliver.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Eshoo), who is the 
distinguished chair of the Subcommittee on Health on the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
  Ms. ESHOO. Madam Speaker, I am here today to speak on behalf of the 
Postal Service in our country.
  I am here today because I view it as a Democratic institution in our 
country.
  I am here today because the Framers placed it in the Constitution.
  I am here today because my constituents are not receiving their 
prescription drugs, businesses are not receiving their mail, and people 
are not receiving their mail.
  I am here today to speak on their behalf because they are outraged. 
They are outraged about two things that have happened, that the 
President has said and attacked mail-in votes.
  Guess how votes are counted?
  They are carried by the mail service.
  The Postmaster General, instead of building it up, is dismantling it. 
It is over the top to see pictures of postal boxes being unhinged.
  Vote for the Delivering for America Act. The people deserve it.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), who is the Republican whip.
  Mr. SCALISE. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for 
yielding.

  When you think about why we are here on a Saturday, I would think if 
we are being brought here on a Saturday in the middle of a pandemic, it 
is to help those millions of families who are struggling, Madam 
Speaker.
  I would think if we are going to come here on a Saturday, it would be 
to help those millions of small businesses, the restaurants in south 
Louisiana and New Orleans that don't even know if they are going to 
open again because of where we are right now.
  In this pandemic you would think that is what we would be here for.
  But instead, Madam Speaker, why are we here?
  For a fabricated crisis.
  The Wall Street Journal: ``Nancy Pelosi Goes Politically Postal. 
Congress ought to be embarrassed by this evidence-free conspiracy 
theory.''
  The New York Times: ``I Was a Postal Service Regulator for 18 Years. 
Don't Panic. The service is perfectly capable of handling election 
mail.'' That was a Bill Clinton-era appointee.
  Then you look at, again, this fabricated crisis that, oh my gosh, 
there are mailboxes being closed.
  Let's look at the record. During the Obama-Biden years--just 4 
years--11,560 mailboxes removed.
  Where were the hearings for that?
  Where were the Saturday votes to decry that they were closing 
mailboxes?
  It never happened because it is not a real crisis.
  Even the Postmaster General just testified yesterday: ``The Postal 
Service is fully capable and committed to delivering the Nation's 
election mail fully and on time.''
  That is the Postmaster General.
  If you would have listened to him--I know there is a hearing Monday. 
Maybe if you would have waited to see what he actually said Monday in 
this committee, Madam Speaker, you would have known that this is a 
fabricated crisis. But you knew that before.
  Madam Speaker, they knew this was a fabricated crisis.
  In fact, when we talk about the money, oh my gosh, the post office is 
going to run out of money. Well, the problem is the facts decry even 
that. They have got a surplus of over $12 billion sitting in the bank 
today and then they have got--this is the Department of Treasury, Madam 
Speaker, a $10 billion line of credit that they can't even access 
because they have too much money in the bank right now.
  Imagine small businesses watching on a Saturday because they can't 
open. They are not even sure if they are going to be in business next 
week because they have no money in the bank, and they are hearing about 
this crisis. Congress is coming in on a Saturday.
  Then they find out the post office has over $12 billion in the bank 
and they have access to a line of credit of $10 billion from Treasury 
that they can't get to today because they have got too much money in 
the bank.
  Right now, it is here. This is the letter from Treasury.
  It is so important, Madam Speaker, that 68 Democrats chose not even 
to show up today. Sixty-eight are not even here today because this is a 
fake crisis. It is a fabricated crisis.
  It is a shame that instead of helping small businesses and families, 
they are trying to scare the American people when everybody knows there 
is enough money to carry out the mail. Barack Obama and Joe Biden took 
out over 11,000 mailboxes, and it was never even a problem.
  We have got to vote against this.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ 
minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Krishnamoorthi), who is the chair of the Subcommittee on Economic and 
Consumer Policy on the Oversight and Reform Committee.
  Mr. KRISHNAMOORTHI. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New 
York for her leadership.
  Madam Speaker, I rise as a proud cosponsor of H.R. 8015, the 
Delivering for America Act.
  Madam Speaker, the USPS is under attack. In the last month, 
Postmaster General DeJoy has made irreversible changes causing mail 
delivery backlogs as long as 3 weeks. But don't just take my word for 
it; 1,612 constituents of mine have contacted us about delayed mail.
  Denise Winchar contacted us saying: I run a small business and rely 
on the

[[Page H4289]]

post office to receive payment for my clients. Without payment, I have 
no income. Any delay in getting paid is a big hardship for me. In the 
past month, I have had to wait several weeks for payment.
  Take Vanesa Deben's word for it. She says: My insurance forces us to 
get our prescription delivered by mail, I have diabetes and I need to 
take my meds or risk health problems. The USPS is a service that we all 
pay for with our taxes and as a paying customer we need to demand that 
we get our service back now.
  The Delivering for America Act includes three important provisions, 
Madam Speaker.
  It reverses the dangerous operational changes implemented by 
Postmaster DeJoy.
  It includes $25 billion in relief to the USPS.
  It requires the USPS to treat all official election mail as first-
class mail.
  Madam Speaker, I strongly urge my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Nunes).
  Mr. NUNES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time.
  Since the election of President Trump, the most absurd conspiracy 
theories have been proclaimed as gospel by the entire Democratic Party 
and their media mouthpieces.
  Let's begin with the Russian collusion hoax; the theory that Trump 
was a secret Russian agent who colluded with Putin to steal the 2016 
election from Hillary Clinton. The theory comprised many preposterous 
sub-conspiracies, including several wild tales.
  For example, secret computer servers communicated with Russians.
  Secret meetings with Russians occurred in Prague, and secret Russian 
money laundering from the Trump campaign.
  Best of all, Putin had a secret stash of nude pictures of Trump and 
the now infamous pee tapes that the Democrats and their puppets in the 
media spent several years searching all over Europe for.
  The Russia hoax ultimately imploded. But, Madam Speaker, you have to 
almost admire the Democrats' amazing ability to jump from one debunked 
conspiracy theory to another without a hint of shame, embarrassment, or 
self-reflection.
  The Democrats supposedly convened us here today to protect Americans 
from Trump's latest nefarious plot--his alleged attempt to sabotage the 
Postal Service to steal the election. In the grand scheme of Democratic 
conspiracy theories, this one really is scraping the bottom of the 
barrel.
  I suppose we can grant the Democrats that the post office actually 
does exist, and it does deliver mail. But watching them vent outrage on 
social media about missing mailboxes and anti-mail theft devices is 
rather sad.
  Good conspiracy theories have rich, false details that tell a story, 
like Area 51 for example. But the Democrats have grown a little lazy to 
develop the necessary back story.
  The Postal Service hoax is more akin to theories that the Earth is 
flat, NASA faked Moon landings, that Elvis is alive, and that Paul 
McCartney is dead. Even the Loch Ness Monster, Big Foot, and the 
Chupacabra at least yielded photographic evidence.
  In closing, I want to thank my Democratic colleagues for inviting us 
here for a Saturday afternoon matinee in August. I urge them next time 
to put more effort into their future conspiracy theories. If you no 
longer have time to properly craft your fake news narratives, you can 
also have the Democratic National Committee launder money to hire a 
British spy to go to your Russian friends and develop another set of 
fake dossiers.
  Madam Speaker, have a good afternoon. I urge a ``no'' vote.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their 
remarks to the Chair.

                              {time}  1615

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Keating), a distinguished 
Member of Congress.
  Mr. KEATING. Madam Speaker, for several years, I was a letter 
carrier, working my way through college and grad school, working 
overtime as mail volume necessitated--and, yes, necessitated. It was 
understood then that it was a necessity.
  I worked with dedicated postal workers, many of whom were veterans 
who persevered through emergencies--hurricane, blizzards, floods. As 
the motto says, ``gloom of night.''
  Now, our country faces new emergencies, a pandemic that threatens 
lives and encumbers our basic rights, like the right to vote safely and 
in an economic crisis, where 600,000 Postal Service workers battle 
back, providing economic stimulus and $1.6 trillion in sales revenues.
  The Postal Service is an economic and healthcare lifeline, a lifeline 
that Donald Trump is trying to sever, all to sabotage mail-in voting he 
thinks will dampen his chances to cling to power.
  He is the gloom of night, and it is our job, our duty, to throw some 
sunlight his way and to stop him.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time each side has 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has 8 minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from New York has 10 minutes remaining.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time.
  Madam Speaker, I was told in persuasion class many, many years ago 
that if you had a weak argument, you shouted all the more. After 
hearing some of the leadership on the other side of the aisle, I guess 
they learned the same approach--a weak argument that isn't holding up.
  When I heard the majority leader talk about ``this is for the 
people,'' this is for ``your people,'' I don't believe that at all 
because Jeanie, my rural mail carrier, is working today; 68 Democrats 
are not working today. Yet, this is supposed to be something of 
importance.
  Last week, we heard the convention start this postal deal going on. 
This is just a continuation of the Democrat convention. I want you to 
know that nothing that has been said about supposedly what the 
President is attempting to do in defunding, in deflating, in stopping 
the vote or the mail service is true. My Democrat colleagues know that 
as well. I think that is why 68 chose to stay home today as opposed to 
coming here in a planned event that meant nothing other than politics.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the distinguished gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin).
  Mr. LANGEVIN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, Postmaster General DeJoy's attempts to push forward 
operational changes that delay the mail are simply unacceptable. My 
constituents depend on the U.S. Postal Service. In the past week alone, 
I received over 1,000 constituent letters expressing confusion and 
anger over these changes that he has planned and implemented.
  A senior from Coventry wrote to me, expressing her alarm over what 
might happen if her diabetic husband failed to receive his medications 
on time.
  A constituent from Wakefield, who has not missed an election since 
1956, emailed me to ask if he should vote in person, despite being 85 
years old with health concerns.
  Madam Speaker, no one should have to wait for lifesaving medications 
or risk their health to cast a vote. I urge my colleagues to support 
this bill. Millions of Americans are counting on us, and we cannot let 
them down.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Gohmert).
  Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend from Kentucky for 
yielding.
  Madam Speaker, look, I am pleased that Democrats here are upset about 
what has happened to the post office. My regret is, you didn't get 
upset during the Obama administration when they were shutting down our 
post offices, not just getting rid of 12,000 mailboxes, shutting down 
processing centers. In my district, when they shut down the Overton 
processing center, it meant mail going from Tyler to Longview, or vice 
versa, went to Dallas then to Shreveport and back.
  The Deputy Attorney General came to my office--I had been demanding a 
meeting with the Postmaster General--

[[Page H4290]]

but, oh, no. No time for that. They had no decency. They tried to say 
390 miles would be cheaper and quicker than going 30 miles.
  It is an outrage what the Obama administration did, including their 
Postmaster General, who was in office until June 15 of this year.
  Wake up. Let's complain about the post office during the Obama years.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
  Mr. COHEN. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairwoman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, Mr. DeJoy was before a Senate committee on Friday. He 
was asked if he would put back in the sorters that he had removed, and 
he said no.
  I think that is because he had already done his dirty work. He had 
already slowed down the mail by taking the sorting machines out, and 
the flat sorters as well, which my postal people tell me is causing 
great delays and will cause greater delays.
  He had already done it. He refused to put them back in. Why? Because 
the job was done, and he didn't want to put those sorters back in to 
see that the mail was delivered. He is no Karl Malone. He does not 
deliver. He is not the ``Mailman.''
  These postal sorters need to be there. 39,000 letters an hour go 
through. The flat sorters are necessary for the mail-in ballots. There 
is no reason he wouldn't put them back in. It wouldn't save any money. 
It costs money to take them out. He didn't save money by taking them 
out. He reduced efficiency. He reduced the ability of the Post Office 
to deliver ballots to elect a person safely in America. This is a 
shame, and it is a crime.

  Madam Speaker, I support the bill, and everyone here should.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Arrington), my good friend.
  Mr. ARRINGTON. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the 
Democrat bill entitled Delivering for America Act. What an 
irresponsible and dishonest title.
  Democratic leadership must take the American people as fools. This 
bill attempts to deceive the American people by manufacturing a crisis 
that simply does not exist.
  This bill also distracts this body from actually doing something in 
this Chamber that matters, like condemning violent mobs terrorizing our 
communities, like helping hardworking families across this country in 
this unprecedented time of need.
  Madam Speaker, here are the facts: The United States Postal Service 
is a Blockbuster video in a Netflix world. Everyone knows it is a 
broken business model. It has failed its workers; it has failed its 
retirees; and it has failed the American taxpayers.
  Despite the need for long-term reform, the Postal Service currently 
has $15 billion in cash on hand and $10 billion more from the CARES 
Act.
  The independent Postal Service Board and the independent Postmaster 
General have repeatedly assured the American people that they can 
handle the increased volume in mail-in voting.
  Let's be clear. Today's vote is more political theater. It is another 
scene from the Democrats' one-act play titled Defeat President Trump at 
All Costs, even if it means peddling a deceitful narrative that 
undermines the American people's trust in the very institutions of our 
democratic Republic.
  To say the Postal Service is all of a sudden incapacitated, unable to 
provide a secure, mail-in process, is not intellectually honest. It is 
downright predatory.
  Democrats who falsely call into question the security of our 
elections to justify a $25 billion bailout is a scam and a political 
payoff to their government union bosses.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my Democrat colleagues: Stand up to your 
leadership. Stop this shameful charade. See the grave danger of 
manipulating the American people to score cheap, political points.
  Madam Speaker, let's get back to work.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Judy Chu), the distinguished 
chair of the Asian Pacific American Caucus.
  Ms. JUDY CHU of California. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong 
support of H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act, because I will 
not tolerate sabotage of the U.S. Postal Service.
  This week, I went to my local post office to fight back against the 
attacks on mail delivery that my Republican colleagues now claim never 
happened. But I stand by those who know better than anyone, our 
country's postal workers.
  They talked about how cuts to overtime are forcing mail carriers to 
abandon their routes halfway through, and how deliberate reductions to 
operating capacity mean that they cannot meet their community's needs.
  My constituents also know better. Every day, I have heard from 
seniors whose medications have been delayed, small businesses unable to 
get orders to customers, and workers waiting to receive a check. 
Pharmacies in my district have even needed to tell customers to pick 
their medicine up in person instead of relying on the mail.
  No one should have to risk exposure to COVID-19 just to pick up a 
prescription, especially not so the President can suppress votes in 
November.
  Madam Speaker, vote to save the post office.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 
seconds to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, over the last couple of hours, I have 
heard my friends on the other side of the aisle say this is not 
serious. Do you know why this is serious? Madam Speaker, 176,000 dead 
Americans from COVID-19 and the projection that there may be 300,000 
dead by December 1.
  Madam Speaker, I left and got on a plane from a hotspot--14 to 20 
percent infection. So my constituents who are suffering from stage IV 
cancer need the mail.
  If they want the proof, I read the words of General Counsel and 
Executive Vice President Thomas J. Marshall of the U.S. Postal Service: 
``We are currently unable to balance our costs with available funding 
sources to fulfill both our universal service mission and other legal 
obligations.''
  The post office says they have no money. We need to be able to 
deliver this money to them and vote on this bill.
  Madam Speaker, I support the bill and urge my colleagues to vote for 
it.
  Madam Speaker, I rise to speak in strong support of H.R. 8015, the 
Delivering For America Act.
  I thank Chairwoman Maloney for her leadership in drafting H.R. 8015.
  As a senior member of the House Judiciary Committee and member of the 
House Budget Committee, I am particularly interested in why and how 
this Administration has tampered with the proper functioning of the 
U.S. Postal Service.
  The drafters of the 1789 Constitution of the United States knew the 
vital importance of communication to the nation and its people, so they 
vested authority with the Congress to sustain and maintain a national 
postal service.
  Article I, Section 8, clause 7, in the Constitution of the United 
States provides that the Congress has the power ``To establish Post 
Offices and post Roads . . .''
  The Postal Clause was added to the Constitution to facilitate 
interstate communication as well as to create a source of revenue for 
the early United States.
  The freedoms of the press and of speech are guaranteed in the First 
Amendment to the Constitution and the establishment of a national 
postal system, an authority vested by the Constitution in the Congress, 
are indispensable features of a strong and stable democracy.
  A national postal system to collect and distribute mail efficiently, 
affordably, reliably, and without regard to the sender's or recipient's 
race, creed, color, national origin, religion, region of residence, or 
political affiliation strengthens and fortifies democracy by enabling 
all persons to communicate with any and all other Americans.
  A functioning and effective national postal system strengthens the 
economy by facilitating the efficient delivery of goods and services, 
promotes the public health by facilitating the timely delivery of 
needed medical supplies and prescription drugs to senior citizens and 
veterans, and enriches civil society by facilitating the delivery of 
letters of greetings, sympathy, congratulations, and love, thus 
strengthening the mystic bonds of affection of Americans for each other 
and for the United States.
  Fifty years after the Constitution went into effect the population of 
the United States ballooned at a greater rate than it has ever since.

[[Page H4291]]

  During that period, the population grew from 3,929,214 in 1790, the 
year of the first census, to 17,069,453 in 1840.
  For those who may think mail tampering is fine so long as it is an 
absentee ballot or absentee ballot request--they need to know that 
tampering with the U.S. mail is a federal felony.
  Mail theft carries a penalty of up to five years in federal prison 
and fines of up to $250,000 for each violation.
  It is also a crime to injure, deface, or destroy any mail deposited 
in a mailbox.
  For each act of vandalism, you could be imprisoned for up to three 
years and fined up to $250,000.
  Communication for the purpose of commerce, linking and strengthening 
bonds among family, and friends as well as keeping citizens informed 
was of the utmost importance to the health and wellbeing of the young 
democracy.
  Over the centuries, the arrival of new technology that supported 
communication did not end the need for an affordable and easily 
accessible national postal service.
  The telegraph, telephone nor the Internet ended the need for the 
delivery of letters, cards, packages, and newspapers or magazines.
  The American people are depending on the House and the Senate, just 
like they depend on the Post Office to deliver a secure and voter 
centered November Election that empowers them to cast ballots for the 
candidates of their choice.
  Election Day must not become a victim of COVID-19 through 
manipulation of the postal service or by any other means foreign or 
domestic.
  I will work with my colleagues to ensure that all available means are 
provided to ensure that every voter, no matter their party or 
preference has access to cast a vote that will be counted in the 
November election.
  For over 200 years, the American people have relied upon the National 
Postal Service to be there--no matter what--they have delivered the 
mail during a civil war, pandemics, hurricanes, forest fires, and 
terrorist attacks.
  The Postal Service employs 633,108 of our friends and neighbors, 
including more than 100,000 veterans.
  The Postal Service is one of the leading employers of minorities and 
women, with minorities comprising 39 percent and women comprising 40 
percent of the workforce.
  The Post Office has become a path to good paying jobs that lifts 
people out of poverty.
  Postal workers have been determined to be essential workers during 
the pandemic and they have delivered service without complaint or fail 
during this national crisis.
  As of July 2020, nearly 5,400 USPS employees tested positive for 
COVID-19 among its workforce of 630,000.
  A May a report stated that of the 130 Federal Employees who had died 
due to COVID-19, 60 of them were employed at the U.S. Postal Service.
  In June, a staggering 17,000 workers, or 3 percent of the United 
States Postal Service workforce, had been quarantined since the start 
of the pandemic, according to a recent report by Government Executive 
magazine.
  By the beginning of July, around 70 percent of those quarantined have 
been cleared to go back to work.
  Earlier this summer Postal Service management acknowledged that 2,830 
workers had tested positive for COVID-19, out of a total workforce of 
approximately 630,000.
  However, USPS officials have not made publicly available the number 
of deaths.
  With the urgent need to fix the postal service, we must not forget 
that the Postal Service employees are essential workers in COVID-19, 
and if they are essential it means that their work is essential.
  For 55 cents, anyone can send a first class letter anywhere in the 
United States and there is no private sector mail service that can do 
this at this low price.
  In 2019, the Postal Service:
  Delivered 142.6 billion pieces of mail to 260 million addresses in 
America;
  Delivered 1.2 billion prescriptions, including most of the 
medications ordered by the VA;
  Served 70 percent of businesses with fewer than ten employees; and
  Had a 90 percent favorability rating, making it the most popular 
federal agency.
  The Postal Service:
  Is often the only delivery option for rural America where service is 
not profitable;
  Delivers 48 percent of the world's mail with one of the world's 
largest civilian vehicle fleets; and
  Is a vital service for the more than 18 million seniors who do not 
use the Internet.
  The Postal Service has become a pharmacy of choice for millions of 
Americans who live in pharmacy deserts, which are locations where there 
are no pharmacies to serve communities.
  The Postal Service is an essential component to Veterans' and 
seniors' health because they deliver medicines to our veterans.
  The VA has now confirmed to us that the United States Postal Service 
(USPS), which is responsible for delivering about 90 percent of all VA 
mail order prescriptions, has indeed been delayed in delivering these 
critical medications by an average of almost 25 percent over the past 
year, with many locations experiencing much more significant delays.
  In addition to delivering prescriptions and business mail, they are 
also delivering democracy to millions of voters who will need to cast 
their ballot by mail this election year to reduce their risk of 
contracting COVID-19.
  The U.S. mail service has provided essential mail service for 
absentee voting for well over 100 years by enabling Union troops to 
vote during the Civil War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, 
the Vietnam War, Iraqi Freedom, and to this day.
  Since that time, absentee or not in-person voting has grown in 
popularity across the United States and is now a welcomed and valued 
component for assuring citizen participation in public elections.
  In 2016, 20.9 percent of all votes cast in that federal election were 
done so by absentee ballots and this year that number is expected to be 
much higher due to COVID-19.
  In 2018, there were 153.07 million people registered to vote in the 
United States, which is lower than the peak of 157.6 million registered 
voters in 2016.
  Montana had the highest voter turnout rate with 45.6 percent for the 
2020 presidential primary elections.
  The voter turnout rate in Texas for the 2020 presidential primary 
elections was 21 percent.
  More than 4 million Texans voted in the 2020 presidential primary 
election, with turnout among Democratic voters at 12.81 percent 
compared to 12.39 percent of Republican voters.
  In Texas, there were 16,211,198 registered voters and 4,084,431 votes 
for the 2020 primaries. In comparison, in 2016 there were 14,238,436 
registered voters and 4,272,383 votes.
  The attack on the viability and value of absentee voting should be 
viewed as just one component of many assaults on our elections system 
that may make this a very difficult election year.
  Over the past several weeks, sweeping operational and organization 
changes at the Postal Service have resulted in delays in the mail 
across the country, including in rural communities, among veterans and 
seniors, and in blue and red states alike.
  Some of those changes include curtailing overtime, restricting 
deliveries, eliminating sorting machines, and removing mailboxes.
  Concerns have been raised by both Democratic and Republican officials 
at the federal, state and local levels.
  These changes are being rushed through--in the midst of a global 
pandemic just months before the November elections--without adequate 
consultation with Congress, the Postal Board of Governors, the Postal 
Regulatory Commission, postal employees unions, state election 
officials, business organizations, and other stakeholders.
  The Postmaster General also recently reassigned 23 postal executives 
in an overhaul that experts warn ``deemphasizes decades worth of 
institutional postal knowledge'' and ``centralizes power around 
DeJoy.''
  The restructure also proposed a hiring freeze, early retirements, 
unit realignments, and regional downscaling.
  On August 11, 2020, the Postal Service's General Counsel sent a 
letter to Congress explaining that state election workers had been 
notified that paying Marketing Mail rates instead of First-Class rates 
for election mail ``will result in slower delivery times and will 
increase the risk that voters will not receive their ballots in time to 
return them by mail.''
  This breaks from the Postal Service's long-standing practice of 
prioritizing the delivery of all election mail to meet First-Class 
delivery times.
  The 2011 Canadian RoboCon suppression scandal is the political 
scandal stemming from events during the 2011 Canadian federal election.
  It involved robocalls and real-person calls that were designed to 
result in voter suppression.
  Elections Canada and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police conducted 
investigations into the claims that calls were made to dissuade voters 
from casting ballots by falsely telling them that the location of their 
polling stations had changed.
  Further possible electoral law violations were alleged as the 
evidence unfolded.
  Under the Canada Elections Act, it is an offense to willfully prevent 
or endeavor to prevent an elector from voting in an election.
  On Election Day, May 2, 2011, reports of voter suppression, mostly 
centered on the riding of Guelph, led to the discovery that a computer 
in the Guelph Conservative campaign office may have been used to make 
the calls.
  While the Elections Canada investigation initially focused on calls 
sent into Guelph amidst

[[Page H4292]]

nationwide complaints, the investigation expanded to complaints in 
other ridings across the country.
  Court documents filed in mid-August 2012 by the Commissioner of 
Canada Elections indicated that the elections watchdog had received 
complaints of fraudulent or misleading calls in 247 of Canada's 308 
ridings, recorded in all ten provinces and at least one territory.
  The deciding margin for control for the government was within the 
margin of error created by the fraudulent robocalls, which were 
successful in misdirecting voters resulting in them not being able to 
cast votes in that national election.
  It is my strong view that we must prepare voters from all 
socioeconomic backgrounds and ethnic cultural experiences to be 
prepared to deal effectively with efforts to misinform them about their 
participation in the November Election.
  We must focus on the unsuspecting among the voting population who 
have no idea what is coming their way and prepare them to meet that 
challenge by linking them to the election protection efforts to allow 
them to develop the needed resources so they are prepared to exercise 
the most precious of rights and do the work of citizenship by casting 
their votes for a government that serves We The People and works to 
make our union more perfect.
  This view is shaped by the decades of elections filled with 
disinformation and misinformation tactics designed to suppress or 
repress black, LatinX, and young voters from voting or having their 
votes counted.
  For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in 
support of H.R. 8015.

       USPS Email from Constituent
       Ms. Jennifer
       SUBJECT: USPS concerns MESSAGE: First, thank you for having 
     a ``post office'' category. Neither senator does. Second, 
     this is ridiculous. The postmaster has conflicts of interest. 
     He is dismantling the postal service, which is explicitly 
     required by the constitution. I depend on the USPS as a 
     constituent. My company depends on it for correspondence and 
     service with clients, especially while we work from home due 
     to Covid. My clients depend on it to get services and 
     benefits. Please vote or act to hold the postmaster 
     accountable and to stop these ridiculous changes he is 
     making. They make no business sense for a ``business'', and 
     they are unethical for a government-provided, 
     constitutionally-mandated service.

  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Adams).
  Ms. ADAMS. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Maloney for her 
leadership.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 8015, the 
Delivering for America Act. Our courageous postal workers and letter 
carriers have been essential in keeping our country on track during 
this pandemic. More of us than ever are relying on the U.S. Postal 
Service to safely deliver medication and mail in a timely manner. But 
now, this handpicked Postmaster General is engineering an 
unconstitutional assault against the Postal Service from the inside 
out.
  I saw it myself just yesterday in Charlotte. Mail sorting machines 
have been reassembled and removed. Workers are being prohibited from 
working overtime. Letters and packages are piling up.
  I was proud to help lead the charge of Chairwoman Maloney, Chairman 
Connolly, and Mr. DeFazio earlier this month in a letter we wrote to 
Speaker Pelosi. Now, I am proud to vote in favor of protecting the 
essential institution. The U.S. Postal Service has been delivering for 
us our entire lives. Now it is time that we deliver for them and for 
America.
  Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 8015.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time each side has 
remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Kentucky has 4 minutes 
remaining. The gentlewoman from New York has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse).
  Mr. NEGUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank Chairwoman Maloney for her 
leadership.
  Madam Speaker, I am proud to speak in strong support of the 
Delivering for America Act.
  I have been here on the floor listening to this debate, and I have 
heard several of my Republican colleagues describe this as a 
manufactured crisis. Tell that to my constituents.
  Tell that to Kelsey, a small business owner in Loveland, Colorado, 
who is worried about her ability to get packages delivered on time to 
her customers because of delays at the Postal Service.
  Manufactured crisis? Tell that to Marsha, my constituent in Boulder, 
who depends on mail-order prescriptions, which this month took nearly 2 
weeks to arrive.
  This is not a manufactured crisis. There is a real crisis at the 
Postal Service under this Postmaster General, and we, here in the 
House, strive to fix it.
  That is why I am a strong supporter of the bill that is before the 
House today, ultimately to ensure that the current standards of the 
Postal Service are protected and provide $25 billion in emergency 
funding.
  Let us get this done for the American people.

                              {time}  1630

  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Madam Speaker, it is shameful and sinful that 
history will record that, on the great issues of our time, many of 
them, the Senate failed to act. On issues concerning life and death, 
the Senate of the United States of America refused to act.
  On the great issue of the HEROES Act, which has lifesaving 
implications--some 86,000 have died since it was passed--the Senate has 
failed to act.
  On the issue of delivering lifesaving medications by way of the 
Postal Service, when the Postal Service needs our help, the Senate has 
refused to act.
  And a Senate that refuses to act puts the actions of the House at 
risk, because the truth is this: It takes an act of Congress to help 
these entities; it takes an act of Congress to help the people of the 
United States of America; and you cannot get an act of Congress if the 
Senate refuses to act.
  Mr. COMER. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute 
to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), the chair of the 
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies of 
the Committee on Appropriations.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Madam Speaker, I rise as a former letter carrier in 
support of H.R. 8015, to prevent the dangerous budget and service cuts 
proposed by Postmaster General DeJoy.
  The Postmaster General claims he has not taken any steps to limit 
overtime for postal employees. His statement is hollow, because 
internal Postal Service documents show how policy changes prohibit 
``extra'' or ``late'' trips, which means you finish delivering the mail 
in your bag that day, and they mandate that carriers ``return on 
time,'' which means they can't finish the job.
  In normal times, the Postal Service is crucial, but during a 
pandemic, on-time and efficient mail delivery is a matter of life and 
death.
  Today's legislation will not just protect the Postal Service, but, 
given that people's homes are now polling places, the service protects 
the very essence of our democracy.
  Don't mess with USPS.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds 
to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee).
  Ms. LEE of California. Mr. Speaker, we see across the country the 
dismantling of the Postal Service, which has been a lifeline in 
American life.
  My constituents are terrified, and they are angry because they are 
not receiving their medications on time; delays are hurting our small 
businesses; and they are outraged that their constitutional right to 
vote could be taken away.
  This is not only an attack on our democracy but also on our workforce 
heroes, who, in spite of the pandemic, deliver our mail. Forty percent 
of these heroes are people of color. My grandfather retired as a letter 
carrier after 35 years of service.

[[Page H4293]]

  I urge an ``aye'' vote to support, rather than to destroy, our Postal 
Service.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, despite the passionate arguments made by supporters of 
H.R. 8015, the truth is simple: The new Postmaster General is not 
trying to sabotage the election. He is doing the exact opposite. In 
fact, he is ensuring that States are educated on the reality of the 
Postal Service operations so that enough time is given for American 
citizens to vote by mail if they choose to do so.
  Just yesterday, the Board of Governors announced a bipartisan 
committee to focus on election mail issues. Voting by mail is a crucial 
way that American citizens can exercise their constitutional right to 
vote, and it is important that all ballots be counted.
  The Postal Service will be able to handle an increase in mail volume 
ahead of the election as they have already handled a larger volume of 
Census forms and stimulus checks earlier this year.
  This increase in mail will also bring in revenue, strengthening the 
U.S. Postal Service's fiscal outlook. Let's not forget that the Postal 
Service already has approximately $15 billion in cash on hand, which 
will allow it to be operational through August of 2021. It also has a 
$10 billion line of credit from the CARES Act that it has not drawn 
down.
  The USPS clearly does not need a bailout for the 2020 election 
season. To provide these funds without a concrete business reform plan 
that modernizes the post office for long-term viability would be 
reckless.
  We all want to see an operational, efficient Postal Service that best 
serves every American. My grandmother was a rural mail carrier for 27 
years. As both her grandson and as a Representative elected by rural 
Kentuckians, I know firsthand the importance of a reliable Postal 
Service in helping small businesses thrive, ensuring Americans get 
their medications on time, and allowing folks to share greeting cards 
with loved ones.
  Americans deserve an improved Postal Service, but this bill 
potentially makes things worse.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, delivering the mail 
and medications and ballots, this is a part of our Constitution. It is 
important to our democracy.
  And numbers don't lie. This internal report from the Postal Service 
shows that services are down 10 percent since this Postmaster General 
took charge.

  I want to publicly thank the Speaker of this great body for her 
leadership and for calling this emergency meeting and emergency vote. 
And there was no change in service until she called the meeting and 
vote.
  I thank you for standing up to the American people and fighting for 
their services and their democracy and their vote.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the United States Congress, the 
first woman in history, as we celebrate the 100th anniversary of women 
gaining the right to vote.
  We are so proud of you and your leadership.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her kind words 
of introduction, but I most importantly want to thank her for being the 
champion, the champion in defense of the Postal Service. I rise to join 
her in support of the Delivering for America Act, to protect lives, 
livelihood, and the life of our American democracy during a critical 
moment for our Nation.
  I thank you, Madam Chair, again, for the intellectual resource you 
have been in shaping the legislation, for making us current in terms of 
the reports from the Postal Service, what is at stake, and why this 
legislation, Mr. Speaker, is so important.
  I salute House Democrats for their enthusiasm, energy, and insistence 
on delivering for America. Since day one of the postal crisis, they 
have conveyed the concerns of their communities to Congress, holding 
events, accelerating a drumbeat, and shining light on this crisis.
  I am going to talk about three things, Mr. Speaker and Madam Chair 
and Mr. Ranking Member. This is about the provenance of the postal 
system and how important it has been to America, also what the 
challenges are in delaying service and, therefore, why this legislation 
is so necessary.
  First, let me say that, in the Constitution of the United States, it 
says that Congress shall have the power to establish post offices and 
post roads, Article I, Section 8. So the post office is there in the 
Constitution.
  But even before that, it has been a pillar of American democracy. It 
is an all-American institution, which enjoys the overwhelming support 
of the American people for a reason. Again, enshrined in the 
Constitution, an inseparable part of our national story, helping 
transition America from colonies to country.
  In the early 1770s, our Founders relied on the precursor of the 
Postal Service, the Committees of Correspondence, to educate people 
about the abuses of the British and to build support for independence.
  Even before the Declaration of Independence was signed, the 
Continental Congress had established the Postal Service as one of the 
first and most important offices that would be part of the new 
government.
  Two of our U.S. Presidents, Abraham Lincoln and Harry Truman, would 
proudly hold the title of postmaster. One of our Founders, Benjamin 
Franklin, was the Postmaster General. Actually, he established the 
Postal Service.
  So this goes to the heart of our country and the connection that the 
Postal Service, throughout our history, from the very start, has been 
in tying our country together.
  In the early 19th century, when visiting America to write his great 
book, ``Democracy in America,'' Alexis de Tocqueville praised the 
Postal Service as being the great link between minds, writing that not 
``in the most enlightened rural districts of France there is an 
intellectual movement either so rapid or on such a scale as'' this, as 
the Postal Service.
  So it has been excellent from the start, part of the unity of 
America.
  As we all know, the postal motto states: ``Neither snow nor rain nor 
heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion 
of their appointed rounds.''
  As Members of Congress, we have a responsibility to ensure that those 
courageous couriers are not stayed from their constitutional duty to 
serve the American people.
  I join you, Madam Chair, in saluting the patriotic men and women who 
risk their health and safety to serve the American people every day: 
our postal workers, our letter carriers, and all who may bring us 
together.
  There is a second postal motto inscribed above the original 
Washington, D.C., Post Office, and this is really so clearly what the 
Postal Service has been about:

       Messenger of Sympathy and Love
       Servant of Parted Friends
       Consoler of the Lonely
       Bond of the Scattered Family
       Enlarger of the Common Life
       Carrier of News and Knowledge
       Instrument of Trade and Industry
       Promoter of Mutual Acquaintance
       Of Peace and of Goodwill Among Men and Nations.

  Our Postal Service is the beautiful thread that connects our country, 
delivering sympathy and love, news and knowledge, peace and goodwill. 
And as a grandmother, I will say, we have seen our children and 
grandchildren write their letters to Santa; we have seen messages come 
from the tooth fairy; we have seen photos and drawings of families 
taking joy in each other that no amount of social media can convey.
  So, again, we must honor their service with our full support and 
protection and gratitude for what they mean in our lives.
  Today, the Postal Service--and this is why this is so important that 
we have this legislation--provides critical services for Americans in 
every corner of the country: for our workers, delivering paychecks and 
tax returns; for our seniors, ensuring Social Security benefits; for 
small businesses, providing shipping and essential services; for 
millions of Americans, particularly rural Americans, delivering 1.2 
billion prescriptions, including most of the medications delivered by 
the VA.
  In 2019, 1.2 billion prescriptions were delivered by the Postal 
Service, and that was before the coronavirus hit.

                              {time}  1645

  That was before the coronavirus hit.

[[Page H4294]]

  And for voters: Delivering absentee ballots and election mail, which 
is essential, especially during the coronavirus epidemic. No one should 
be forced to choose between his or her health and the right to vote.
  Across the Nation, though, the Postmaster General is pushing sweeping 
new operational changes that degrade service, delay the mail, and 
threaten to disenfranchise voters, particularly in communities of 
color.
  Now the Postmaster says he will postpone any further changes until 
after the election, that is what he says. But this is about more than 
the election. This legislation is written in a timely fashion to be 
about the coronavirus, and these changes should be there until the end 
of January or the end of the raging epidemic, whichever is later.
  It is in that regard that I rise as Speaker to support the 
legislation. But as a representative of my district where I am not 
called Madam Speaker, I am called Nancy, this is what they have told 
me.
  Michael said, he is a veteran with epilepsy. He reports that 
prescriptions sent by the VA through the mail are taking twice as long 
to arrive.
  Walker says, he is a senior with debilitating health conditions, is 
now struggling to send and receive his mail after his closest mailbox 
was suddenly removed.
  Claire, an 83-year-old with serious chronic illness, who does not 
have a car and is afraid to use public transport during the pandemic, 
is in a panic because she is utterly dependent on USPS for her 
medication and other vital deliveries, and of course, her ballot.
  Another San Franciscan, Charlotte, warns that the Postal Service is 
vital to our country, not only when it comes to mail and voting, but 
also for fundamental needs of Americans.
  And as Mark, another constituent, puts it, not only does what Trump 
is doing put the integrity of the November elections at risk; people 
are suffering every day, and they are not receiving their critical 
medications.
  That is what I am hearing from my constituents, and they are told to 
go to the drug store. Well, they really can't in some cases. It 
endangers them to go to the drugstore, instead of getting it through 
the mail. Go to the drugstore.
  So, again, this is immediate in their lives. We are their 
representatives. That is our job title and our job description. In 
representing my constituents, I wanted to convey some samples of 
concern that we have heard.
  Earlier this week, in response to the activism of the American 
people, people have risen up, I have never seen anything quite like it. 
The Postmaster General announced changes that are wholly insufficient 
and do not reverse damage already wreaked. He said to me, frankly--and 
I have to give him credit for his honesty--he said, I have no intention 
of replacing the sorting machines that were removed from the post 
offices;
  I have no intention of replacing the blue mailboxes that have been 
ripped from our neighborhoods; and
  He has no plans for ensuring adequate overtime, which is critical, 
critical for the timely delivery of the mail.
  He said he has no intention of treating ballots as first-class mail. 
Now, yesterday he said something different, but that is what he told me 
a couple of days ago.
  And I said to him, We will have the provision in the bill that 
requires you treat ballots as first-class mail. And he said, Well, if 
it is in the bill, then I will have to do it. Hence, his change of 
attitude.
  He has not adequately addressed America's concerns about the slowdown 
and the delivery of medicine to veterans. He just didn't even seem to 
know about it. Really?
  Today, Chairwoman Maloney released new internal post office documents 
that expose the severity of the service declines and delivery delays 
caused by the Postmaster General's drastic changes.
  These documents make clear that the Postmaster General has 
deliberately misled Congress and the American people about the extent 
of the damage, brushing them off as a dip in service or as unintended 
consequences. These revelations show that we cannot have confidence 
that the Postmaster General is prioritizing the Postal Service or the 
millions who rely on it.
  Now, the House is moving forward with a, hopefully, bipartisan vote, 
and I think it will be, on Delivering for America Act, which will 
reverse the Trump damage and provided $25 billion to the United States 
Postal Service.
  Sadly, the administration has already threatened to veto this 
legislation, which contains the same amount of funding, the $25 
billion, that was recommended by the United States Postal Service Board 
of Governors. They are bipartisan. They are 100 percent appointed by 
Donald Trump, and they unanimously recommended the $25 billion that is 
contained in this bill.
  So for the sake of every senior who is delayed in getting his or her 
Social Security check, every veteran who is delayed in getting his or 
her medication, every working family who is delayed in getting their 
paycheck, and every voter now facing the prospect of choosing between 
their vote and their health, we need to pass this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, with that, I urge a strong bipartisan vote for H.R. 
8015, the Delivery for America Act. Let's pass this under the 
leadership of distinguished Chairwoman Maloney for the people.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8015.
  This upcoming 2020 general election will be like no other we have 
witnessed. Americans will cast their vote to elect a new government 
amidst a dangerous pandemic that has devastated countless American 
families. To date, over 170,000 Americans have died due to COVID-19 and 
over 5.6 million Americans have been infected. The pandemic has 
disrupted our health, economy and our way of life, including our 
democratic traditions. Americans are rightfully worried about how to 
safely cast their vote this November.
  Public health experts agree that voters will be empowered to protect 
themselves and their families by having safe voting options, which 
includes absentee voting. Having the option to vote by mail ensures 
that voters who cannot vote in person don't have to choose between 
their health and their right to vote.
  The engine of voting by mail is the United States Postal Service. In 
every election, postal workers provide an essential service to our 
democracy by processing and delivering millions of absentee ballots for 
domestic, overseas and military voters. This November, several million 
Americans will depend on the Postal Service to exercise their right to 
vote.
  But in recent months, new leadership at the Postal Service directed 
drastic operational policy changes that disrupted mail processing and 
slowed mail delivery nationwide. The impact of the delays has been 
harmful to Americans, especially senior citizens, veterans and the 
sick, who depend on the Postal Service to receive medications, 
retirement checks and other essentials. Former Postal Service 
executives, election administrators and voter advocacy groups have 
warned that ongoing delays in mail services will likely disenfranchise 
voters that will cast absentee ballots this November.
  The Delivering for America Act will work to restore prompt and 
reliable mail delivery services to the American people. The bill rolls 
back the recent disruptive operational changes at the Postal Service 
and prohibits the Postal Service from implementing any further changes 
that will delay mail and reduce delivery standards.
  The bill also works to protect access to absentee voting and prevent 
voter disenfranchisement caused by delayed mail. It does this by 
ensuring that all election mail, including absentee ballots, will be 
treated as first-class mail, and will receive a postmark, or other 
indicia indicating date of receipt. In addition to protecting the 
absentee voting system, these changes will help maintain trust and 
confidence in the Postal Service.
  And lastly, the bill will appropriate much needed funding support to 
the Postal Service in the amount of $25 billion which will help ensure 
the long-term financial stability of the agency, and was requested by 
the Board of Governors appointed by President Donald Trump.
  As November 3rd nears, and the COVID-19 pandemic continues to 
threaten American life and health, our duty today, as representatives 
of the American people, is to safeguard the American people's right to 
essential mail services and the right to vote. The Delivering for 
America Act, if enacted, will put into the place the necessary measures 
to ensure we fulfill this duty, and so I urge my colleagues to support 
this critical legislation.
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, the Postal Service is a 
lifeline to rural communities. While some Americans have had the 
opportunity to work from home during this

[[Page H4295]]

pandemic, our letter carriers and postmasters do not. They're working 
tirelessly to ensure people in every comer to the country are getting 
their mail and packages, which for our at-risk population, has been 
especially critical.
  I've been supportive of the $25 billion in emergency funding included 
in this legislation and I'm relieved that at the urging of members like 
myself and the postal workers, a dangerous private right of action 
provision, which would have allowed trial lawyers to take advantage of 
the 2020 election, was removed.
  As someone who has worked across the aisle to support the Postal 
Service, I was disappointed when it recently became a political weapon.
  We should not be politicizing the Postal Service and in tum, the 
thousands of hardworking employees that serve each of our districts.
  As Ranking Member of House Administration, I'll tell you that, while 
I'm supportive of this bill, it is not going to solve our election 
administration problems.
  Despite early warnings from the Postal Service, at least eighteen 
states still have ballot request and return policies that are 
incompatible with their delivery standards, which significantly 
increases the risk of disenfranchising voters.
  We saw hundreds of thousands of ballots during recent primaries 
across the country go uncounted for this very issue. NPR estimates 
nearly a half a million were rejected--disproportionately 
disenfranchising minority and younger voters.
  Despite early warnings from the Postal Service, unrealistic ballot 
request and return policies continue to be one of the biggest 
impediments to ensuring every vote is counted.
  A recent poll found 59 percent of Americans still prefer to vote in 
person, yet there's nothing in this bill to help states allow people to 
safely go to the polls.
  So I'm not voting for this bill because I think the post office is 
trying to sabotage our elections, I'm voting for this bill because 
we're in the middle of a pandemic, the Postal Service is vital to our 
society, and they need our help.
  And while I'm glad we're back here for a special session to help the 
Postal Service, I wish we were also voting on a deal to help our 
schools, small businesses, and the millions of people still out of work 
because of the pandemic.
  Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Delivering 
for America Act (H.R. 8015), which would restore normal U.S. Postal 
Service (USPS) operations and prohibit the Trump Administration from 
implementing or approving any changes that would impede service during 
the COVID-19 pandemic. The bill also provides $25 billion in emergency 
funding, matching the level requested by the bipartisan Board of 
Governors, and which the House passed as part of the Heroes Act in May.
  For over two and a half centuries, our nation's Postal Service has 
stood as an independent, neutral entity focused solely on connecting 
Americans and providing essential services. This independence has 
allowed the Postal Service to maintain its status as the country's most 
trusted government agency for decades.
  Over the past several weeks, the Trump Administration has turned the 
Postal Service into an instrument of partisan politics by enabling 
Postmaster General DeJoy to implement harmful and unprecedented 
operational and service changes at the Postal Service, such as reducing 
overtime, restricting deliveries, and eliminating sorting machines and 
mailboxes. These actions have resulted in unacceptable wait times for 
mail across the country, delaying timely delivery of prescription 
medication and other vital mail, and endangering our upcoming election.
  Following heavy criticism, the Postmaster General issued a wholly 
insufficient and misleading pause in operational changes. But it is now 
clear after his testimony before the Senate Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs, that he has no intention of taking 
meaningful action to reverse the damage that the Postmaster General's 
sweeping changes have inflicted. Additionally, the pause does nothing 
to ensure voters that their election ballots will be delivered in time 
if they mail their ballots account to their state's deadlines. Finally, 
the pause is only temporary, and the damaging changes are set to return 
after the election. Two weeks ago, I called for the Postmaster General 
to resign. Today, I repeat that call and stand firm that he must step 
down.
  The Trump Administration's efforts to sabotage the Postal Service 
have endangered the lives and livelihoods of millions who rely on the 
USPS for essential services like delivering life-saving medications, 
medical equipment, Social Security benefits and paychecks. The 
Postmaster General's decision to impose these dangerous changes in the 
middle of an ongoing pandemic has magnified the disruption of many of 
these vital services.
  The use of mail-order prescriptions, for instance, has increased by 
20 percent during the pandemic. Due to the degradation of service, 
mail-order medications are reportedly taking weeks to be delivered, 
forcing patients to skip doses of life-saving medicines. Veterans 
throughout the country have reportedly faced wait times of three weeks 
or more for mail-order medications, which has left the Department of 
Veterans Affairs scrambling to find alternative delivery services.
  Stopping these changes and reversing the damage already done is not 
enough. We must provide the additional funding in this bill to ensure 
services continue uninterrupted through the election and the pandemic. 
But in the President's own words, he opposes any emergency funding 
because he believes that without it, the Postal Service will not be 
able to handle the estimated influx of mail-in ballots in the upcoming 
general election. The President himself has voted by mail in the last 
three elections but continues to attack mail-in voting as rife with 
fraud. In reality, voting fraud of all forms is extremely rare, and 
that's especially true with mail-in voting, whose fraud rates are 
immeasurably small. Oregon, the first state to expand mail-in ballots 
to general elections, has sent out more than 100 million mail-in 
ballots since 2000, and has documented less than a dozen cases of 
fraud.
  With the number of Americans voting by mail for the election expected 
to more than double from the last due to the pandemic, Congress must 
protect the right of every American to vote. If Congress fails to act, 
we risk permanent damage to the integrity of our elections and our 
government institutions; we risk the livelihoods of farmers and workers 
around this country who rely on the USPS; and we risk the health and 
lives of our seniors, veterans, and millions of other patients who rely 
on mail-order medications during a pandemic that has now claimed the 
lives of nearly 175,000 people in the U.S. Finally, we risk the 
disenfranchisement of seniors and other higher-risk individuals whose 
safest option is casting mail-in ballots.
  Protecting the integrity of the Postal Service should never be a 
partisan issue. Congress must pass the Delivering for America Act, and 
work quickly to reverse the substantial damage inflicted by the Trump 
Administration.
  I urge my colleagues to vote Yay and the Senate to take up this bill 
immediately.
  Ms. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, today, at a time when the United 
States Postal Service is needed more than ever before, I am proud to 
stand in support of H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act.
  Ahead of the November elections, we must focus all efforts and 
resources to ensure that voting is safe, fair, and accessible for all. 
That's why I am pleased that the Delivering for America Act includes a 
requirement for election mail to be considered first-class, a ban on 
the removal of mail sorting machines, and a total reversal of any 
policies hindering the delivery of mail.
  Election mail is not the only mail impacted by the recent changes. In 
my district, I have heard stories from my constituents about delays in 
delivery for vital medications, bills, and other important packages 
through the mail. At a time when seniors and those with preexisting 
conditions are unable to go out in public to pharmacies, or when those 
who lost their jobs see the bills piling up, timely deliveries should 
be the least of their worries.
  This past week, I had the opportunity to meet with the Dallas County 
Postal Service and Union leaders to address the role of the federal 
government in protecting the processes, operations, and service 
standards for the USPS. There, I was glad to hear that everything was 
running up to speed thanks to the hardworking men and women--who risk 
their health day in and day out--to guarantee that our mail is 
delivered.
  The USPS boasts one of the most diverse workforces in the country. In 
Texas, African Americans and Latinos make up a significant percentage 
of employees, and more than 50 percent are women. Because minority 
communities are disproportionately affected by COVID-19, proper PPE is 
necessary for their safety--which this bill provides funding for. It 
also prohibits a restriction on the use of overtime pay for USPS 
employees and prevents the institution of a hiring freeze, to ensure 
that they are equitably compensated for their efforts.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this measure and hope 
for its immediate consideration in the Senate.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act. This legislation will put a 
stop to Postmaster General Louis DeJoy's sabotage of the U.S. Postal 
Service and help reverse the damage that has already been done. H.R. 
8015 will prohibit operational or service changes during the COVID 
public health emergency and ensure the level of service that was in 
place on January 1, 2020. The bill also includes $25 billion to help 
shore up postal operations that have been badly impacted by the 
pandemic.

[[Page H4296]]

  I have been deeply disturbed by recent operational and organizational 
changes at USPS designed to sabotage mail delivery service ahead of our 
2020 presidential election. In his brief tenure as Postmaster General, 
Mr. DeJoy--a major contributor to the President's reelection campaign--
has pushed through sweeping changes to mail delivery processes and 
procedures, dismantled vital mail sorting equipment, and undertaken a 
major restructuring intended to sideline career postal officials. This 
nakedly partisan attempt to subvert democracy and undermine confidence 
in the integrity of our election process is unconscionable and 
unacceptable. The Postmaster General should be ashamed of himself.
  The USPS is a vital lifeline to millions of people across our 
country, especially now. Veterans and seniors rely on the mail to get 
prescriptions, people are staying connected with loved ones through 
mail while sheltering at home, and more voters will cast their ballots 
by mail this year than ever before. Fast, reliable postal service is 
critical to providing these essential services. Yet, my office has 
received numerous complaints of late or inconsistent mail service since 
the Postmaster General's changes went into effect. One constituent, a 
senior from Napa, wrote to me afraid her necessary medication would be 
useless by the time it arrived. The medication, which is temperature 
sensitive and usually takes 2-3 days to deliver, hadn't shown up in 
more than 10.
  Our letter carriers are dedicated to providing our communities the 
highest level of service. Since the founding of our Post Office, they 
have lived by the motto: ``Neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of 
night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed 
rounds.'' The Delivering for America Act will help ensure postal 
employees can keep this oath. That's why I am proud to support and to 
be a coauthor of the legislation. I urge a yes vote.
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of our 
Postal Service and in support of its mission to serve our people, in 
support of its role in our democracy, in our elections, in support of 
its role in delivering vital goods and services critical to the health 
and well-being of our people and our economy and in support of the men 
and women of the Postal Service who have added the pandemic to the list 
of barriers they cast aside each day in their daily rounds.
  Mr. Speaker, I note that we do not require that our government 
departments and agencies show a ``profit.'' That is not their purpose. 
We do not defend our country for a ``profit.'' We do not educate our 
children for a ``profit.'' We do not protect our environment for a 
``profit.''
  Mr. Speaker, we long ago rejected the Luddite movement which 
advocated breaking machines in a futile effort to turn back scientific 
and technological progress. Breaking and discarding postal sorting 
machines is sabotage today, just as it was in the 1800s.
  Mr. Speaker, I am deeply troubled by the alarming delays in First-
Class, marketing, and Priority Mail documented by the Postal Service's 
own briefing packet for the Postmaster General from last week. I have 
seen evidence of these delays in the pictures sent and the stories told 
to me by postal employees.
  Mr. Speaker, I proudly cast my vote in support of the request from 
the Postal Board of Governors for $25 billion in aid and in support of 
H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Himes). All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to House Resolution 1092, the previous question is ordered 
on the bill, as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to the bill in its current form.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Comer moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 8015, to the 
     Committee on Appropriations with instructions to report the 
     same back to the House forthwith, with the following 
     amendment:

       Add after section 2(c) the following:
       (d) Penalties for Postal Service Employee Federal Election 
     Tampering.--
       (1) In general.--An employee of the United States Postal 
     Service may be subject to disciplinary action consisting of 
     removal, reduction in grade, debarment from Federal 
     employment for a period not to exceed 5 years, suspension, or 
     reprimand if the employee--
       (A) knowingly and willfully obstructs or retards the 
     passage of election mail products, or any carrier or 
     conveyance carrying election mail products; or
       (B) uses his official authority for the purpose of 
     interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the 
     election of any candidate for Federal office.
       (2) Application.--Paragraph (1) shall apply to any act that 
     would be a violation of such paragraph taken on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       In section 3, add at the end after the period the 
     following: ``Such funds may only be used for operating 
     expenses and may not be used to pay any outstanding debt of 
     the Postal Service: Provided further, That during the COVID-
     19 emergency, the Postal Service shall use a portion of such 
     funds to prioritize the delivery of postal products for 
     ballots related to Federal election mail and medical or 
     pharmaceutical delivery purposes and may establish temporary 
     delivery points, in such form and manner as the Postal 
     Service determines necessary, to protect employees of the 
     Postal Service and individuals receiving deliveries from the 
     Postal Service.''

  Mr. COMER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the Clerk dispense with the reading.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kentucky?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Kentucky is recognized for 5 minutes in support of his motion.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have 
shown immense passion today for both their constituents and the 
integrity of this upcoming national election. There is no doubt that 
voting by mail will be more relied upon than it has been in previous 
elections.
  The Postal Service will be a crucial link in the chain of custody 
between voters and State or local election boards. For the Americans 
who choose to cast their vote via mail, they need to be sure that their 
ballot, their voice, will be safe. We, therefore, need the proper 
measures in place to ensure that integrity is maintained.
  In addition, if we are going to give the Postal Service funding, I 
think my colleagues on both sides of the aisle need assurances that it 
will be spent where Americans need it more. The prioritization of 
medical deliveries and ballots for this election.
  My motion contains reasonable additions to H.R. 8015 that ensure that 
this funding gets to where it needs to go. These provisions ensure that 
funds must only be spent on operating expenses to keep our postal 
workers paid and to keep them safe with personal protective equipment.
  These provisions will also ensure that a portion of these funds go to 
prioritizing pharmaceutical deliveries to get life-saving medicines to 
Americans quicker. Lastly, these provisions ensure that these funds are 
used to prioritize ballots as well as establish penalties for postal 
employees who tamper or interfere with election mail.
  For instance, any postal employee will face penalties if they 
knowingly and willfully slow down the processing of mail or use their 
official authority to interfere with the election of a Federal 
candidate. This upcoming election will put millions, possibly hundreds 
of millions of votes, in the literal hands of Postal Service workers 
who we must trust to deliver ballots safely and on time.
  The election will put our collective faith in our Postal Service like 
we have never seen before, and those who break the trust of the 
Americans need to face the consequences.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this motion to 
recommit, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Speaker, I claim the time in opposition to the 
motion.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from Michigan is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Speaker, obviously, my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle are not aware that fraud is a Federal--voter fraud is 
a crime. We have already established and funded the United States 
Postal Inspection Service.
  Little do they know, whenever an employee is in a postal facility, 
there are internal galleys in every facility where you are observed for 
24 hours a day by postal inspectors. Mr. Speaker, I am very comfortable 
that we will adhere to those laws. We have clerks who have sworn duties 
to protect elections.
  But let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, 3 months ago this House passed the 
HEROES Act, and I ask my colleagues to

[[Page H4297]]

open their mail because we sent them a letter that will protect the 
Postal Service. We sent them a letter saying that we need to send 
funding to the States and local governments so they will not defund the 
police departments.
  If you want to know who is defunding the police department, the lack 
of a movement in the Senate to send that necessary money to cities who 
must balance their budget. And the only way they can balance their 
budget is to cut because they don't have the funding that has been 
taken away from them because of COVID.
  So you have the responsibility, Mr. Speaker, the Republicans have on 
their hands the defunding of our police department. I wanted, too, to 
be very clear that we have heard repeatedly that the Democrats had 
manufactured a crisis at the expense of this President, and that the 
emergency funding is ``an unnecessary bailout plan.''
  We do not need to help the current President to create a crisis. We 
have seen every single day statements from the White House about what 
we are doing and what we should not do with the Postal Service. I want 
everyone here to know that every postal employee takes an oath that 
they will adhere to the Constitution, that they will serve and protect.
  The majority of the postal workers are veterans who have served in 
the military, who continue their service in the Postal Service. I want 
it to be very clear that this election that is being held hostage right 
now by the Postal Service's internal decisions to tear it apart, where 
you have over 600,000 employees reporting to work who want to uphold 
their oath of office.
  I want to say today, Mr. Speaker, that the Postal Service motto is 
neither rain, snow, heat or gloom of night you will not deter these 
carriers from their mission. And we are standing here today saying, no. 
Return to sender this unnecessary MTR. That we, as Democrats, we are 
putting forth this bill to ensure that we are not in that place where 
we are going to try to deter the Postal Service from doing their job.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to wake up, to understand that this 
is not a Democrat or Republican issue, because the ballots that are 
going to be moving through the Postal Service, some of them may even go 
to them, they better protect the Postal Service.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 182, 
nays 223, not voting 25, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 181]

                               YEAS--182

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Bacon
     Baird
     Balderson
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Bishop (UT)
     Bost
     Brady
     Brindisi
     Brooks (AL)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Comer
     Conaway
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Cunningham
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     Davis, Rodney
     DesJarlais
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fortenberry
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garcia (CA)
     Gianforte
     Gohmert
     Golden
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice (GA)
     Hill (AR)
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Hurd (TX)
     Jacobs
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (OH)
     Joyce (PA)
     Katko
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lesko
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McAdams
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Posey
     Reed
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Roby
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose (NY)
     Rose, John W.
     Rouzer
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smucker
     Spanberger
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Steil
     Stivers
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Tipton
     Torres Small (NM)
     Turner
     Upton
     Van Drew
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Young
     Zeldin

                               NAYS--223

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Amash
     Axne
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     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
     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)
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     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)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McBath
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     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
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rouda
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Speier
     Stanton
     Stevens
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Underwood
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--25

     Amodei
     Brooks (IN)
     Collins (GA)
     Cook
     Diaz-Balart
     Flores
     Gabbard
     Gibbs
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Higgins (LA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Marchant
     Meuser
     Olson
     Roy
     Shimkus
     Spano
     Steube
     Stewart
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Walden

                              {time}  1754

  Messrs. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, DEUTCH, JEFFRIES, Ms. 
SCANLON, Mr. CICILLINE, Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, and Miss RICE of New 
York changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. GOSAR changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


   MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 965, 116TH CONGRESS

     Axne (Raskin)
     Barragan (Beyer)
     Bera (Aguilar)
     Blumenauer (Beyer)
     Bonamici (Raskin)
     Brownley (CA) (Clark (MA))
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Case (Cartwright)
     Clay (Davids (KS))
     Costa (Cooper)
     Davis (CA) (Wild)
     DeGette (Blunt Rochester)
     DelBene (Heck)
     DeSaulnier (Matsui)
     Doggett (Raskin)
     Engel (Pallone)
     Escobar (Garcia (TX))
     Foster (Beyer)
     Frankel (Clark (MA))
     Garamendi (Sherman)
     Gonzalez (TX) (Gomez)
     Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
     Hastings (Wasserman Schultz)
     Horsford (Kildee)
     Huffman (Kildee)
     Jayapal (Raskin)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Kennedy (Deutch)
     Khanna (Gomez)
     Kind (Beyer)
     Kirkpatrick (Gallego)
     Kuster (NH) (Clark (MA))
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     Lieu, Ted (Beyer)
     Lipinski (Cooper)
     Lofgren (Jeffries)
     Lowenthal (Beyer)
     Lowey (Tonko)

[[Page H4298]]


     McNerney (Raskin)
     Meng (Clark (MA))
     Moore (Beyer)
     Mucarsel-Powell (Wasserman Schultz)
     Nadler (Jeffries)
     Napolitano (Correa)
     Omar (Pressley)
     Panetta (Kildee)
     Pascrell (Pallone)
     Payne (Wasserman Schultz)
     Peters (Rice (NY))
     Peterson (Vela)
     Pingree (Clark (MA))
     Porter (Wexton)
     Price (NC) (Butterfield)
     Rooney (FL) (Beyer)
     Roybal-Allard (McCollum)
     Ruiz (Aguilar)
     Rush (Underwood)
     Sanchez (Aguilar)
     Schakowsky (Kelly (IL))
     Schneider (Houlahan)
     Serrano (Jeffries)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Speier (Scanlon)
     Thompson (CA) (Kildee)
     Titus (Connolly)
     Visclosky (Raskin)
     Watson Coleman (Pallone)
     Welch (McGovern)
     Wilson (FL) (Hayes)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. COMER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3 of House Resolution 
965, the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 257, 
nays 150, not voting 24, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 182]

                               YEAS--257

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allred
     Axne
     Bacon
     Balderson
     Barragan
     Bass
     Beatty
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Blunt Rochester
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brindisi
     Brown (MD)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     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.
     Davis, Rodney
     Dean
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Delgado
     Demings
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Engel
     Escobar
     Eshoo
     Espaillat
     Evans
     Finkenauer
     Fitzpatrick
     Fletcher
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel
     Fudge
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garcia (IL)
     Garcia (TX)
     Golden
     Gomez
     Gonzalez (TX)
     Gottheimer
     Graves (MO)
     Green, Al (TX)
     Grijalva
     Haaland
     Harder (CA)
     Hastings
     Hayes
     Heck
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins (NY)
     Himes
     Horn, Kendra S.
     Horsford
     Houlahan
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Hurd (TX)
     Jackson Lee
     Jayapal
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (TX)
     Joyce (OH)
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Khanna
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kim
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirkpatrick
     Krishnamoorthi
     Kuster (NH)
     LaMalfa
     Lamb
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lawson (FL)
     Lee (CA)
     Lee (NV)
     Levin (CA)
     Levin (MI)
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Luria
     Lynch
     Malinowski
     Maloney, Carolyn B.
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McAdams
     McBath
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McEachin
     McGovern
     McKinley
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Mfume
     Moore
     Morelle
     Moulton
     Mucarsel-Powell
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neguse
     Norcross
     O'Halleran
     Ocasio-Cortez
     Omar
     Pallone
     Panetta
     Pappas
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Phillips
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Porter
     Pressley
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Raskin
     Reed
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rose (NY)
     Rouda
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan
     Sanchez
     Sarbanes
     Scanlon
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schneider
     Schrader
     Schrier
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Shalala
     Sherman
     Sherrill
     Sires
     Slotkin
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Soto
     Spanberger
     Speier
     Stanton
     Stauber
     Stefanik
     Stevens
     Stivers
     Suozzi
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tlaib
     Tonko
     Torres (CA)
     Torres Small (NM)
     Trahan
     Trone
     Turner
     Underwood
     Upton
     Van Drew
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wexton
     Wild
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth
     Young

                               NAYS--150

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Armstrong
     Arrington
     Babin
     Baird
     Banks
     Barr
     Bergman
     Biggs
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NC)
     Bishop (UT)
     Brady
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Budd
     Burchett
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Cheney
     Cline
     Cloud
     Cole
     Comer
     Conaway
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Curtis
     Davidson (OH)
     DesJarlais
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Emmer
     Estes
     Ferguson
     Fleischmann
     Foxx (NC)
     Fulcher
     Gaetz
     Gallagher
     Garcia (CA)
     Gianforte
     Gohmert
     Gonzalez (OH)
     Gooden
     Gosar
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Green (TN)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guest
     Guthrie
     Hagedorn
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hern, Kevin
     Hice (GA)
     Hill (AR)
     Holding
     Hollingsworth
     Hudson
     Huizenga
     Jacobs
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson (SD)
     Jordan
     Joyce (PA)
     Keller
     Kelly (MS)
     Kinzinger
     Kustoff (TN)
     LaHood
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Lesko
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Marshall
     Massie
     Mast
     McCarthy
     McClintock
     McHenry
     Miller
     Mitchell
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Murphy (NC)
     Newhouse
     Norman
     Nunes
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pence
     Perry
     Posey
     Reschenthaler
     Rice (SC)
     Riggleman
     Roby
     Rodgers (WA)
     Roe, David P.
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Rose, John W.
     Rouzer
     Rutherford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smucker
     Steil
     Taylor
     Thompson (PA)
     Tiffany
     Tipton
     Walberg
     Walker
     Walorski
     Waltz
     Watkins
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Wright
     Yoho
     Zeldin

                             NOT VOTING--24

     Amodei
     Brooks (IN)
     Collins (GA)
     Cook
     Diaz-Balart
     Flores
     Gabbard
     Gibbs
     Granger
     Higgins (LA)
     Johnson (LA)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Marchant
     Meuser
     Olson
     Roy
     Shimkus
     Spano
     Steube
     Stewart
     Thornberry
     Timmons
     Walden

                              {time}  1839

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


                          personal explanation

  Ms. GRANGER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend votes due to 
circumstances beyond my control. Had I been present, I would have voted 
``nay'' on rollcall No. 179, ``nay'' on rollcall No. 180, ``yea'' on 
rollcall No. 181, and ``nay'' on rollcall No. 182.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, due to a longstanding prior commitment, I 
was unable to return for votes on Saturday, August 22. Had I been 
present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 179 (PQ); ``nay'' 
on rollcall No. 180 (Rule); ``yea'' on rollcall No. 181 (MTR); and 
``nay'' on rollcall No. 182 (H.R. 8015).


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. ROY. Mr. Speaker, under the advice of my physician, due to a 
bulging disk in my back, I could not get on a plane to return to 
Washington to vote on H.R. 8015, the Delivering for America Act. Had I 
been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 179, ``nay'' 
on rollcall No. 180, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 181, and ``nay'' on 
rollcall No. 182.


                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION

  Mr. MEUSER. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend today's roll call 
votes. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 
179, ``nay'' on rollcall No. 180, ``yea'' on rollcall No. 181, and 
``nay'' on rollcall No. 182.


                          personal explanation

  Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote on August 22, 
2020 due to not being in DC. Had I been present, I would have voted as 
follows: ``no'' on rollcall No. 179; ``no'' on rollcall No. 180; 
``yes'' on rollcall No. 181; and ``no'' on rollcall No. 182.

   MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 965, 116TH CONGRESS

     Axne (Raskin)
     Barragan (Beyer)
     Bera (Aguilar)
     Blumenauer (Beyer)
     Bonamici (Raskin)
     Brownley (CA) (Clark (MA))
     Cardenas (Gomez)
     Case (Cartwright)
     Clay (Davids (KS))
     Costa (Cooper)
     Davis (CA) (Wild)
     DeGette (Blunt Rochester)
     DelBene (Heck)
     DeSaulnier (Matsui)
     Doggett (Raskin)
     Engel (Pallone)
     Escobar (Garcia (TX))
     Foster (Beyer)
     Frankel (Clark (MA))
     Garamendi (Sherman)
     Gonzalez (TX) (Gomez)
     Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
     Hastings (Wasserman Schultz)
     Horsford (Kildee)
     Huffman (Kildee)
     Jayapal (Raskin)
     Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
     Kennedy (Deutch)
     Khanna (Gomez)
     Kind (Beyer)
     Kirkpatrick (Gallego)
     Kuster (NH) (Clark (MA))
     Lawson (FL) (Evans)
     Lieu, Ted (Beyer)
     Lipinski (Cooper)
     Lofgren (Jeffries)
     Lowenthal (Beyer)
     Lowey (Tonko)
     McNerney (Raskin)
     Meng (Clark (MA))
     Moore (Beyer)
     Mucarsel-Powell (Wasserman Schultz)
     Nadler (Jeffries)
     Napolitano (Correa)
     Omar (Pressley)
     Panetta (Kildee)
     Pascrell (Pallone)
     Payne (Wasserman Schultz)
     Peters (Rice (NY))
     Peterson (Vela)
     Pingree (Clark (MA))
     Porter (Wexton)
     Price (NC) (Butterfield)
     Rooney (FL) (Beyer)
     Roybal-Allard (McCollum)
     Ruiz (Aguilar)
     Rush (Underwood)
     Sanchez (Aguilar)
     Schakowsky (Kelly (IL))
     Schneider (Houlahan)
     Serrano (Jeffries)
     Sires (Pallone)
     Speier (Scanlon)
     Thompson (CA) (Kildee)
     Titus (Connolly)
     Visclosky (Raskin)
     Watson Coleman (Pallone)
     Welch (McGovern)
     Wilson (FL) (Hayes)

[[Page H4299]]


  

                          ____________________