September 23, 2020 - Issue: Vol. 166, No. 165 — Daily Edition116th Congress (2019 - 2020) - 2nd Session
All in House sectionPrev28 of 68Next
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4447, EXPANDING ACCESS TO
SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R.; Congressional Record Vol. 166, No. 165
(House of Representatives - September 23, 2020)
Text available as:
Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Pages H4725-H4732] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] {time} 1115 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4447, EXPANDING ACCESS TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY ACT OF 2019; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 6270, UYGHUR FORCED LABOR DISCLOSURE ACT OF 2020; AND PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 8319, CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2021 AND OTHER EXTENSIONS ACT Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1129 and ask for its immediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1129 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 4447) to establish an energy storage and microgrid grant and technical assistance program. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Energy and Commerce now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-63, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) 90 minutes of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology; (2) the further amendments described in section 2 of this resolution; (3) the amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution; and (4) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. 2. After debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 3. It shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the chair of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or his designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. Sec. 4. All points of order against the further amendments printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived. Sec. 5. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 6270) to amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require issuers to make certain disclosures relating to the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 116-64 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Sec. 6. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House without intervention of any question of consideration the bill (H.R. 8319) making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2021, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. Clause 2(e) of rule XXI shall not apply during consideration of the bill. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Arizona (Mrs. Lesko), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. [[Page H4726]] General Leave Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1129, providing for consideration of three measures. First, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4447, the Clean Economy Jobs and Innovation Act, under a structured rule. The rule provides 90 minutes of debate equally divided among and controlled by the chairs and ranking minority members of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment, makes in order 98 amendments, and provides en bloc authority and one motion to recommit. The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 6270, the Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act of 2020, under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Financial Services, and it provides one motion to recommit. Finally, the rule provides for the consideration of H.R. 8319, the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and Other Extensions Act, under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations and provides one motion to recommit. Mr. Speaker, the bills contained in this rule are about meeting our responsibility here at home and living up to our values abroad. First is H.R. 8319, a continuing resolution to keep our government funded through December 11. Fortunately, we won't need to call this bill up because a compromise passed this House last night by a vote of 359-57. That is quite an accomplishment because sometimes we can't even agree on what to have for lunch here, yet we were able to come together to keep this government open. That is good news for the American people. Second is H.R. 4447, a sweeping energy package that will help our Nation lead the world once more in clean energy. Investing in renewable energy like wind and solar won't just help us combat the threat of climate change; they will help us create jobs here at home that can never be outsourced. It is especially important that we are considering this package right now. There are wildfires raging in places like California, Oregon, and Washington that are leaving a heartbreaking path of destruction. Scientists are unequivocal: These fires are just the latest indication that climate change is real and is happening right now. This is not some long-off threat that we can leave for our kids or grandkids. This is happening today. By addressing it, we won't just protect our environment. We will create jobs at a time when our country badly needs them. Because of the coronavirus, our country is facing the worst economy since the Great Depression. The Labor Department said last week that 12.6 million Americans are collecting unemployment benefits. One year ago, that number stood at just 1.7 million. Renewable energy can and should be part of the equation in rebuilding this economy because, make no mistake, Mr. Speaker, jobs in things like solar energy will be created. The only question is whether they are created here or in other countries like China. I want them made in America. Lastly, the Rules Committee considered two bills on Monday to help defend the human rights of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities who have suffered horrific human rights abuses at the hands of the Chinese Government: H.R. 6210, the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, and H.R. 6270, the Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act. I am proud to have authored H.R. 6210, which passed the House with an overwhelming 406-3 vote yesterday. I also strongly support H.R. 6270, the Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act, authored by my colleague, Representative Jennifer Wexton. It is disappointing that some Republican Members may oppose the Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act that requires disclosures about products made with forced labor from a region where crimes against humanity and perhaps genocide are being committed by the Chinese Government. As many as 1.8 million Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim minorities have been arbitrarily detained in mass internment camps and subjected to forced labor, torture, political indoctrination, and other severe human rights abuses. We know forced labor is widespread and systematic, and audits are simply not possible because workers cannot speak freely and honestly about working conditions given the heavy surveillance and intimidation by the Chinese Government. This legislation is essential to protect American investors and consumers through stronger disclosure requirements alerting them to the presence of Chinese and international companies whose operations enable the mass internment and population surveillance of Uyghurs and other Muslim minorities. Such involvements represent clear and material risks to shared values and the corporate reputations of these companies and U.S. investors and consumers. It seems the only argument against this bill is that it is similar to the Democratic Republic of the Congo conflict minerals provision from years ago, but the comparison simply just doesn't hold water. Free enterprise, as we know it, doesn't exist in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. It should not be compared to Africa in terms of the business climate or access. The Xinjiang economy is tightly controlled and directed by the Chinese Government and Communist Party. It is built on a foundation of forced labor and repression. International observers, the press, and government officials are restricted from even traveling there. Just this week, a number of respected supply chain auditing firms say they will no longer conduct inspections in Xinjiang because of the hostile environment ruled by fear. The argument against this legislation is that the DRC conflict minerals provision was bad because businesses left that region because they didn't want to or could not disclose their supply chains. Well, it is long past time for U.S. and international companies to reassess their supply chains and find alternatives to production in Xinjiang where forced labor is widespread and embedded in the regional economy. We don't think Chinese, U.S., and international companies should be exploiting the Uyghur and other Muslim people in allowing global supply chains to be contaminated with forced labor. So I hope on both sides of the aisle, but I say this to my Republican colleagues, to those who might be considering a ``no'' vote, think long and hard before voting against the bill that would help reveal the extent of how the Chinese Government's system of forced labor has contaminated global supply chains. I am proud to stand in solidarity with the Uyghur people and, indeed, all the people living under the rule of the Chinese Government in their struggle to live freely, practice their religious beliefs freely, and speak their own language freely. I urge all of my colleagues to join with us and give this rule and underlying bills a broad bipartisan vote so we can fulfill our obligations here at home and around the world. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman McGovern for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this rule consists of two bills, including H.R. 4447, the Democrat's energy package. It consists of 38 bills with a total cost of $135 billion. The bill includes burdensome mandates and an incredibly high price tag. Mr. Speaker, let's be clear, Republicans support reducing carbon dioxide emissions in the United States by scaling up clean energy innovation with less regulation. Unfortunately, this bill adds new regulatory hurdles that make the clean energy technology deployment much more difficult to build. Regulations hurt innovations, especially at such a high price tag. [[Page H4727]] The bill fails to put forward policies that will reform the permitting and licensing process required to finance, build, expand, and modernize energy infrastructure. Instead, the bill spends billions of dollars on unfocused research without spending money on investments and infrastructure. Republicans have introduced numerous bills this Congress that will build, expand, and modernize our energy infrastructure. {time} 1130 They remove regulatory barriers to building nuclear, natural gas, and hydropower infrastructure. These are all clean and reliable sources of generation that will power America, protect the environment, and keep our country secure. The mandates contained in the bill will drive up energy and transportation costs for American consumers. For example, one of the mandates in the bill will mandate energy efficiency building codes, which the home building industry says will drive up the cost of housing to consumers without proportional savings in energy costs. H.R. 4447 will lead our country down the wrong path. We don't want to California the Nation with blackouts and high utility costs. Even minority groups are suing California utilities over their high energy costs. And believe it or not, California utilities actually pay Arizona for their renewable energy to take it off of their hands during certain times of the year. That is totally insane. I regularly meet with constituents and companies in Arizona who say they moved from California to Arizona because California's incredibly burdensome regulations stifle growth. California's current energy crisis was predictable and avoidable, but they ignored the scientists and engineers who maintain the electric grid and, instead, mandated their own version of the Green New Deal. In doing so, California forced the retirement of stable baseload power generation without a reliable option in place. The Democrats may claim that H.R. 4447 is a bipartisan bill. While it includes some bipartisan provisions, it is not a bipartisan bill. It was crafted solely by Democrats with no input from Republicans. Many of the provisions amount to billions of dollars of new and overlapping programs that had little to no process or regular order. I sit on the Rules Committee, where my colleagues reminisce regularly about how we used to operate through a committee system with regular order: a legislative hearing, a subcommittee markup, a full complete markup. Apparently, those days are gone. Now the Democrats legislate by posting a one-sided bill one week and putting it on the floor the following week. Public laws do not come out of this process well, only partisan politics and messaging bills. We all know that. Mr. Speaker, this rule also contains H.R. 6270, the Uyghur Forced Labor Disclosure Act. The United States is an honorable and noble country that must not tolerate the gross human rights abuses perpetrated by Chinese leaders. While the bill takes strong action to ensure American businesses are not complicit in China's forced labor programs, there are outstanding concerns in the bill that may harm U.S. businesses. For instance, the bill requires public companies to file disclosures with the SEC if they imported manufactured goods or other materials that originated in or are sourced in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and disclose whether those goods originated in forced labor camps. These entities would also have to disclose the nature and extent of the commercial activity related to each good or material, the gross revenue and net profits attributable, and whether they intend to continue importing the good. China's atrocities against Uyghurs and other Muslim minority groups must come to an end, and we voted on that bill yesterday in a bipartisan fashion. We must ensure that items made with forced labor are not allowed to enter our markets. To do our jobs properly in Congress, we must allow bills to run their course through committees for proper debate, discovery, and amending. Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to diverge from what we are considering today and recognize some of the people here who help us all navigate how legislation is considered. There are staff here that work day in and day out to make this Chamber function smoothly so that we can get things done on behalf of the American people. They aren't Democratic or Republican staff. They serve both sides without fear or favor. That team includes the staff in the Office of the Parliamentarian. Tom Wickham has served in that office for the last 25 years. As House Parliamentarian, he became a master of House procedure. And make no mistake, having an encyclopedic knowledge of how this place operates is no small thing, Mr. Speaker. Tom is now retiring after serving with distinction for many years. I want to recognize him, and I want to thank him for that service here today. Now, I could say a lot about Tom. On a physical level, Tom is usually the tallest person in the room, and a lot of people fit in this room. On a human level, Tom always makes time for everyone, from the most senior Members to the most junior staff. Unless he is in a meeting, the door to his office right across the hall is literally left open all the time. He has perfected the art of dry parliamentary humor. It is incredibly impressive when someone can make germaneness, promptly motions, and Deschler's Precedents funny. Tom is always willing to listen to argument and never too proud to change his mind or say he was wrong about something in the face of new information. To me and my staff, Tom Wickham appears to know everything about the rules and history of this House. But he is quick to say that he knows nothing about the Senate whenever we ask a Senate question; although, we suspect he knows everything about the Senate as well and just doesn't want to offend his friend, Elizabeth, the Senate Parliamentarian. Tom has guided us through some turbulent times. He has advised the presiding officer during times of heated debate, even yelling at times. He has been on that rostrum through impeachment proceedings and opening day sessions, during late nights often followed by all-too-early mornings. He has seen it all, and we are lucky to have had him at our side through it all. He will be missed, but we congratulate him on a well- deserved retirement. Mr. Speaker, I also want to congratulate Jason Smith for being named the new House Parliamentarian. Many of us already know Jason pretty well, having worked with him in his prior role as Deputy Parliamentarian. His know-how made an impression, since he was named to this new role after a bipartisan recommendation, and I think that also is a tribute to his skills. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Ranking Member Cole for working with me on this. I valued his advice and counsel, as I do so often as we serve together on the Rules Committee. His wisdom made this process largely an apolitical one. I could not ask for a better partner at the Rules Committee than the gentleman from Oklahoma, Tom Cole. He and I try to put this institution first, and I know that Jason will, too. It is clear Jason has the confidence of both sides of the aisle, and that is no small thing. I look forward to working with him in his new role. The truth is we are lucky to have such dedicated staff in the Parliamentarian's Office, and that includes Anne Gooch, who works with us day in and day out, whether it is at 7 a.m. or 11 p.m. My staff and I have her on speed dial. Her work also makes our work possible, and we are grateful. So we have a lot of debates on this floor, Mr. Speaker, all to make progress on behalf of the American people, but it is important during moments like this that we also recognize people whose work behind the scenes makes this progress possible. So, Mr. Speaker, I just want to pay this tribute to these incredible people, and I want to say thank you, thank you, thank you. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. [[Page H4728]] Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), my good friend, the ranking member of the Rules Committee. Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, my good friend, for yielding. I want to begin by responding to some of my friend's kind remarks, the chairman. We belong to different parties. We sometimes have our different points of view in the committee itself, which means on occasion we are going to be taking contrasting positions with one another, but I think one of the common traits that we have is that we both revere the institution of the House of Representatives and all of its procedures. I think we also really respect the staff, the personal staff, the committee staff, and, most especially, the professional staff of the House itself. What an extraordinary role they play in allowing us to do our job. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join Chairman McGovern in paying tribute to a dedicated public servant. Tom Wickham, the House Parliamentarian, has served this House with honor and distinction for the past 25 years and will be taking a well- deserved retirement at the end of this month. Tom has expertly advised five Speakers and countless Members and staff throughout his distinguished tenure. His exceptional knowledge and understanding of the rules, procedures, and parliamentary precedent has been invaluable to this institution, and he will be sorely missed. Mr. Speaker, I am also proud to congratulate Jason Smith, the current Deputy Parliamentarian, on his appointment as the sixth Parliamentarian of the House. The Rules Committee has the benefit of working with the Parliamentarian's Office, frankly, more than any other committee, and I have every confidence that Jason will lead the office with the same standard of excellence his predecessors, particularly Mr. Wickham, have set. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a moment to thank Chairman McGovern for seeking my opinion during the process to select our next Parliamentarian. That is not something he was required to do, but it speaks volumes about his respect for this institution and the role that the Parliamentarian plays for the minority, particularly on the Rules Committee, that he was interested in our perspective on this important decision. Let me close with this. My friend, the chairman, said that Mr. Wickham had seen everything. Well, we are hopeful that you don't write about everything that you have seen, and that you remember us as fondly as we remember you. But the sad thing is not very many people get to see your work and what you and your colleagues in the Parliamentarian's Office have done for each and every Member of this institution. Even our own Members quite often don't understand how indispensable your decisions and recommendations are to each side, to facilitate a full and open debate, to make sure that every person has an opportunity to express their opinion in the appropriate way under the procedures and rules of the House. So I just want to personally thank you for the extraordinary job you have done for all of those who have the privilege of being Members and, frankly, for our staffs as well, who work so closely with you and whom you advise so frequently and so professionally. We will really, really, really miss you, but we thank you for making sure that we had an adequate successor in place in Mr. Smith and a superb supporting staff that reflects your leadership. So we thank you for your hard work in a very bipartisan way, your professionalism, your decency, and, frankly, the honorable way in which you have discharged your duties for 25 years. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole) would agree with me that we both learned more from the Parliamentarian's Office than we ever knew was possible as we engaged in trying to get a replacement for Mr. Wickham. Our admiration for the staff there has only increased. I just want to say one final thing here. Normally, under normal circumstances, this Chamber would be filled with Members, which I think we would all have preferred in order to give you a proper sendoff. Obviously, outside events have made that impossible, but we want you to know that everybody in this Chamber appreciates your incredible work. So I ask everybody who is here to give you a round of applause and say thank you. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. {time} 1145 Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider Small Business Committee Ranking Member Steve Chabot's H.R. 8265 to reopen the Paycheck Protection Program to America's 30 million small businesses. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Arizona? There was no objection. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, this amendment would ensure our Nation's smallest and most vulnerable firms get the support they need by allowing an opportunity for a second PPP loan with specific funds set aside for small businesses with 10 or fewer employees, expand the list of eligible covered expenses, simplify the loan forgiveness process, and extend PPP through the end of 2020. I think all of us can agree that this is very vital for our small businesses and their workers in America. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Katko), my good friend. Mr. KATKO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, there are seven legislative days remaining on the House calendar before this Chamber is scheduled to recess for more than a month. As every Member of this body knows, Americans are counting on us to use this time to respond to the sustained impact of the pandemic on our communities. Unfortunately, our constituents are left waiting as partisanship continues to block compromise and political interests continue to stand in the way of efforts to deliver relief to our constituents. For this reason, I support efforts to defeat the previous question and bring up commonsense legislation to support America's small businesses during this unprecedented crisis. The Paycheck Protection Program has been a critical, bipartisan success and an important example of what we can achieve when we work together for the good of the American people. In my district alone, PPP loans have delivered critical assistance to thousands of local businesses and helped save nearly 200,000 jobs. Although these loans played a pivotal role in helping small businesses navigate the immediate impact of the pandemic, many still face a dire economic outlook and uncertain road to recovery. Absent congressional action, entrepreneurs and business owners across this great country will have no choice but to close their doors. If the previous question is defeated, my colleagues will bring up legislation to authorize a second round of PPP loans for America's most vulnerable businesses and extend the program through the end of 2020. Critically, this bill will also set aside funds for our smallest businesses and make necessary simplifications to the loan forgiveness process. These provisions are not only critical to protecting our country's 30 million small businesses and the jobs they create; they represent a commitment to relief measures both parties can agree on. Considering these changes would represent a critical first step in bringing bipartisan relief measures to the floor and delivering comprehensive relief for every American. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote to defeat the previous question. [[Page H4729]] Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to say for the record that if my Republican friends want to know why there is no agreement on another coronavirus relief package including PPP, they should call their friend Mitch McConnell because this House did its job. We passed the HEROES Act more than 125 days ago to help cash-strapped State and local governments, to help businesses on the brink, and to help Americans struggling in the middle of this pandemic. A lot of people are suffering. Hunger has increased in this country. Senate Republicans can't even come to an agreement amongst themselves. They couldn't even get their entire caucus on board, let alone Democrats. The HEROES Act is bipartisan, but even that hasn't been enough to get Mitch McConnell to take it up. Apparently, he couldn't find the time, Mr. Speaker, but he is moving with lightning speed to confirm a new Supreme Court Justice. Are you kidding me? In the middle of a pandemic he can't find the time to provide a vote on a package to help the American people and small businesses? Our restaurants are in deep trouble. Those of us who come from States--like I do in Massachusetts--outdoor dining is going to cease pretty soon because it is getting cold, and they don't know how they are going to get through the winter. And we can't even get the Senate to debate this stuff? More than 200,000 Americans are dead. The President says, Oh, everything is going great. 200,000 people are dead. Compare that to Canada or other countries that actually had a plan to manage this pandemic. Countless millions have been infected. The Senate needs to act. And shame on them for not acting. It should be more than just an assembly line that rubber-stamps conservative judges. There is legislating to do, and none more important than dealing with the impacts of this pandemic. I don't know whether the Senate majority leader has a heart of stone or what, but it is inexcusable. It is unconscionable. It is unbelievable that he hasn't acted, and so I urge my Republican colleagues to pick up the phone and call him and tell him to do something. I reserve the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded not to engage in personalities toward the Senate or its Members. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, wow, that was an impassioned speech by the chairman, but I have to remind the chairman that there were a lot of Democrat liberal wish lists in the relief package that were passed, including releasing prisoners that were 50 years old and older--didn't matter what they were charged with--from prison and giving $1,200 relief payments to illegal immigrants using taxpayer dollars. So maybe if Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats would have actually talked to Republicans before they pushed through a bill, there would have been more bipartisan support to help small businesses and the American people. With this previous question and the amendment, we are trying to do just that. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Bacon), my friend. Mr. BACON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today and ask that we defeat the previous question and move to pass Congressman Chabot's bill. We are now in our sixth month of this pandemic. In our efforts to combat this virus, the backbone of our economy, our small businesses, have suffered greatly. Only now, after months of government-imposed restrictions, is our economy starting to reopen and we are seeing the unemployment drop, in part, but not throughout our economy. Even in my home State of Nebraska, with the lowest unemployment rate in the Nation, some of our small businesses are still struggling. While restaurants and bars are getting back to work, others are still shut down. Our live music venues, our playhouses, our travel and tour companies are still facing some very dark times and may not open for 3 months. Some may never reopen without Congressman Chabot's bill. Congress needs to put our partisan differences aside. Stop playing election-year political games and come together to help the American people. While we may be divided on if we should bail out cities that were struggling financially prior to COVID, we can all agree that certain segments of our economy are struggling in every city. This bill will help our Nation's smallest, most vulnerable businesses in every city. It will expand eligibility and expand the PPP throughout the end of the calendar year to help these businesses in every city. We can agree that this is needed from the East Coast to the West Coast and everywhere in-between. Congress should act now. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question and move to pass the low-hanging fruit of the Chabot bill. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the good news and what is comforting to me is that the American people get this. They understand where the problem is. And I would just say to my friends who don't like everything in the HEROES Act, the way this process is supposed to work is we pass a bill in the House, the Senate passes a bill, and then we have a conference committee and we work out the details. Well, the only negotiating that has been going on is Democrats have been negotiating with themselves. We have actually lowered the request in the original HEROES Act--which I personally think is not the right thing to do, but I get it--to get something done. There is nothing in here that helps communities who are trying to deal with the school situation. In some places schools are opening, in some places they are not but there are all of these new expenses on how to make the classroom safer. When my friends say, Oh, we don't want to give any more money to cities and towns to deal with that, I don't know whether you talk to your superintendents, or your teachers, or your principals, or parents, but this is real and they are looking for some help. I mean, we are in the middle of a pandemic. We haven't seen anything like this since 1918. It has impacted our entire economy and you would never know it. You would never know it based on the inaction and the indifference over in the Senate. I mean, it just takes my breath away when we have leaders there, Republican leaders, who won't even come to the negotiating table. And I just find that appalling. I will just say one other thing. I urge everybody to vote for the previous question because let me just tell you something that some people don't appreciate; if you defeat the previous question, they get to bring up whatever they want to bring up. They can bring up this, they can bring up whatever. They basically take control of the House. And they may say they are going to bring up this, but who knows what they will bring up. And so this is a bad procedural maneuver, but it is designed to give them power. And, again, what I am learning here is that we don't share the same values on a lot of these things. I find that particularly disconcerting during a pandemic. In the past, after 9/11, I was here. George W. Bush was President. I didn't agree with him on a lot of stuff, but he helped bring this country together and get us all reading off the same sheet of music in terms of our response. It is very different now. So I would urge my colleagues again to vote ``yes'' on the previous question, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I can guarantee Chairman McGovern, if we defeat the previous question, my amendment is what will be brought up to help small businesses and their workers. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed). Mr. REED. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I had a speech prepared to give, but I am not going to read that speech because I think the chairman from Massachusetts highlighted the crux of the problem we face in this Chamber today. We don't trust each other any longer in this institution. As he just alluded [[Page H4730]] to, don't give over the floor, don't give over control of this body to the other side because we don't know what the Republicans will bring up. I give my word that what we would bring up is a bill that will provide immediate relief under the Paycheck Protection Program of $138 billion to our small businesses, our families, and individuals who are suffering in America today. We need to start trusting each other again. We don't trust each other in this institution and that is what is causing the American people to suffer. I ask my colleagues: When you vote ``yes'' on this previous question, be on notice. You are turning your back on the American people that need the Paycheck Protection Program assistance today. And when you make that vote, you do it with your eyes wide open. You do it on notice that you will be turning your back on those individuals who cry out for help as we speak here on this floor today. What we are talking about here is that we need to do our job as Congress. Now, I have done everything in my power personally over the last 3 months to work with our Senate colleagues, to work with the White House, to work in a bipartisan fashion to do a bigger package than the Paycheck Protection Program. But I will take what I can get. There should be bipartisan support for this Paycheck Protection Program relief that we are talking about here today. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question, vote ``no,'' and join us and trust us in standing with the American people. {time} 1200 Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for the gentleman from New York, and I appreciate his efforts at trying to find common ground and trying to make this place work better. But I do take exception to a statement he made, that if you vote against this, then you are turning your backs on small businesses. Well, I can make that same argument to all of my Republican friends who voted against the HEROES Act. Not only did they turn their backs on small businesses, they turned their backs on schools and on people who right now are going hungry in this country. I can go right down the list of all the things. They are turning their backs on cities and towns that are not just blue cities and towns. Mr. Speaker, this notion that we have to define everything in terms of red and blue, in terms of whether they get assistance, I find very disconcerting. I never question a vote in favor of disaster relief if a red State was hit by a hurricane or an earthquake or a fire. You try to do the right thing. So spare us the indignation, because the deal is, we passed something here 4 months ago, and there has been no action. We all know that we weren't going to get everything. The Speaker brought it down by $1 trillion, hoping that that would spur a negotiation, and there is nothing yet. By the way, the Senate can't even get its act together amongst its own Republicans, never mind with Democrats. So we need to do something. Hopefully, before we leave here, the Senate majority leader will pick up the phone and work with the Speaker and with the White House, and we can get something here. Quite frankly, all of us, if it is not done, are willing to come back here on a moment's notice. We have all been told by our majority leader to be prepared to come back here in a nanosecond if we can get a deal. But to leave schools behind, to leave hungry people behind, and to leave countless others who have been impacted by this virus behind, this is a big deal. It is a big deal. We need to help our small businesses, and we have to help others as well. Let's hope rationality will prevail, common sense will prevail, and we can come together similar to the way we did on the continuing resolution yesterday. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Boy, I have read some media reports where actually there were members of the Democratic Party in the U.S. House of Representatives in swing districts who pleaded with Speaker Pelosi to have a relief package, and she is the one who said: Oh, no. So I have to respectfully disagree with the gentleman's analogy. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Chabot). Mr. CHABOT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, it has now been over 46 days since the Paycheck Protection Program, also known as PPP, was shut down. This means that small businesses have been prevented from applying for CARES Act funding through the PPP for over a month and a half now. This also means that real people's jobs continue to be in jeopardy through no fault of their own. This is just unacceptable, Mr. Speaker. This is unacceptable because small businesses play an outsized role in our economy. They employ half of all workers in this country. Think about that. Nearly one out of every two workers in this country are employed by small businesses. Not only do small businesses employ millions of people, but they are also this Nation's job creators. They create approximately two out of every three new jobs in this country. Beyond statistics, they are the heartbeat of Main Streets all across America. They are the corner store, the neighborhood coffee shop, and the restaurant in the town or village. They are the fabric of commerce in my home State of Ohio, as they are in Florida, in Texas, in California, and all across this country. Their workers clock in early and often retire after the sun sets. Simply put, they are America's businesses. Unfortunately, COVID-19 continues to challenge their very existence. Now is the time to act. We really should have acted 46 days ago. We have an option before us today, this very day. If we defeat today's previous question, then we can move directly to my legislation to reopen the Paycheck Protection Program to all those small businesses all over the country that are clamoring to get them and that really need them. H.R. 8265 would provide targeted assistance to small businesses that truly need the Federal Government's help. The legislation gives small businesses the opportunity to receive a second PPP if they can demonstrate a significant revenue reduction of 25 percent. Additionally, it adds more flexibility in how PPP dollars can be spent and still be eligible to have those loans forgiven. Many of our Nation's small businesses are still struggling significantly. We need to work quickly to provide a path forward for as many of them as possible. Just as small businesses meet and exceed the expectation of their customers, let's meet the needs of small businesses across the country. Let's defeat the previous question and restart the PPP, the Paycheck Protection Program. Our economy is depending upon America's small businesses, and America's small businesses are depending upon us here today. This vote really does matter. Usually, these things are procedural, but this is an opportunity not just to help those small businesses but, most importantly, those people who work for them and the families they support. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, let me remind all of my colleagues this is a procedural vote, and this is a very common practice of my Republican colleagues on a regular basis to urge a defeat of the previous question so they can bring up whatever they want to bring up. The gentleman just said that we need to move quickly. My question is: Where have you been? Where have you been? Four months ago--4 months ago--we passed a bill that would provide relief to our small businesses and to our cash-strapped communities, many of them forced to lay off first responders. Where have you been? Have you picked up the phone and called Mitch McConnell? Have you lobbied any of your Republican colleagues on the Senate side? Nothing. We are about to recess. I think everybody knows that people back home are not happy with the obstructionism and the Senate doing nothing. So let's toss out a procedural vote, and we can use that as cover. Talk about being cynical. [[Page H4731]] We had an opportunity. We still have an opportunity to come together and do something that will help all Americans. Instead, this is the best we can do, no promises to talk to the Senate, no nothing. It is just frustrating because people are hurting, and it is not enough at the last minute to come up with a procedural vote that doesn't mean anything and all along having been opposed to the HEROES Act. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I can guarantee that if we were in the majority, we would be able to do a relief package that didn't include liberal wish lists that could actually pass the Senate and get signed into law. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Kevin Hern). Mr. KEVIN HERN of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question so that we can immediately move to debate and pass H.R. 8265 and stop playing politics with American businesses and jobs. We all can name at least one favorite establishment that is now an economic casualty of coronavirus. Many small businesses are hurting, and they need our help. We came together in an incredible bipartisan way this spring to create the Paycheck Protection Program, but the fallout of these shutdowns is lasting longer than any of us dared believe, and our communities are now in need of swift action. That is exactly why we need a vote on H.R. 8265, which Democratic leadership is currently preventing. There are over $135 billion still sitting in the funds that are authorized and appropriated. This bill gives small businesses with 25 percent revenue losses and under 300 employees the opportunity for a second cut at the PPP loan. It sets aside $25 billion specifically for mom-and-pop businesses with less than 10 employees, and it simplifies the forgiveness process for loans under $150,000. Do it today. Do it today. We have plenty of time. To make it simple: Passing this bill saves jobs, but doing nothing sends those same people to the unemployment lines. The bills we are voting on today will never become law. Messaging bills can wait; extending this program cannot. I know that many of my colleagues across the aisle are frustrated with the lack of action on this issue. They like this bill and know it would help our communities. I know this because many have told me personally. If half of the Democrats who have privately told me they supported this legislation would vote for it, it would pass overwhelmingly and would be law quickly. So I call on them today to stand up and do what is right. Their communities need them in this moment. America needs us all in this moment. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Democrat leaders to stop playing politics with American businesses and jobs. I urge defeat of the previous question and immediate consideration of H.R. 8265. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, it is unclear to me what this President would or would not sign. I am looking at a headline from CBS News: ``Trump said coronavirus `affects virtually nobody,' as U.S. surpasses 200,000 deaths.'' Talk about clueless here. We passed the HEROES Act to help our schools and our healthcare workers. I would like to think that there is no objection to helping our schools and our healthcare workers. We want to help our first responders. They are the heroes here. Why is that such a controversial thing to do? We wanted to pass the HEROES Act to provide more testing and tracing so we can contain this virus. We are doing that while the President of the United States is hosting superspreader events where people without masks are all bunched together. We passed the HEROES Act to support families who are struggling to pay their rent, and we passed the HEROES Act to help small businesses. It is time for my Republican friends to pick up the phone, call Senator McConnell, and ask him to sit down and negotiate a deal that helps the entirety of this country. I don't see why that is so controversial, yet they won't do it. They won't do it. This is cynical politics, pure and simple. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, again, if the so-called HEROES Act would not have been chock-full of a bunch of liberal wish lists but only concentrated on things that Republicans and Democrats could have actually agreed to and would have passed the Senate and then signed into law, we would have had relief to the American people by now. But I would assume that Chairman McGovern knows that there were certain things in that bill that they knew in advance that the Republicans weren't going to go for, like releasing prisoners into the communities. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Herrera Beutler). Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge Republicans and Democrats to join us on this vote to extend the vital jobs-saving program, the Paycheck Protection Program, which will provide relief to small businesses that desperately need it during this public health crisis. It is not just the small businesses that will benefit. It is actually for the workers who work in those businesses to keep their jobs. With talk that the House Democrat leadership is looking to finish our legislative business and send us home early, we should be doing everything that we can in our power to provide that relief to small businesses that desperately need it. In my district in southwest Washington, almost 9,500 small businesses have accessed critical paycheck protection loans. Surgical Training Institute in Camas was able to keep its 22 employees employed. The little Neptune Theatre in Pacific County also took advantage of this program. Altogether, they have saved 92,000 jobs. That is 92,000 people--individuals, moms, dads, brothers, and sisters--who are able to continue providing for their families by putting food on the table and keeping a roof over their kids' heads. This should not be a political football. Across the Nation, the PPP has helped save millions of jobs, and small businesses have been able to keep their doors open and pay their employees. This is not a partisan issue. Let's stop talking about what was done in the past. Let's look forward and fix the problem. Join with us now and support extending this program. To me, it is a shame that small business relief and relief for workers is a partisan issue. It should not be treated like a political football here in Congress. This is not a hostage we should hold on to to get anybody's wish list passed. We should pass this. The fact of the matter is that the PPP expired on August 8, and we have been in session many days between now and then. With nearly $135 billion still in the program, Congress must act now to free up these funds and get relief to those who need it most. Thousands of businesses across the country are on the brink of collapse and mass layoffs, and they are crying out for help. If we do not act now to extend the PPP, they could all go under. We are talking about our neighborhood mom-and-pop shops that are the backbone of our communities. We don't have any more time to waste. Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question so the House can advance bipartisan relief to small businesses. {time} 1215 Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I understand why the gentlewoman doesn't want to talk about the past, because 4 months ago, she--as well as most Republicans--voted ``no'' on the HEROES Act. They voted to deny help to small businesses. They voted to deny help to our schools, to our healthcare workers, to our first responders. Mr. Speaker, I get it. She and others are going to have to explain to their constituents why they did that, why they voted against the interests of their own constituents. So I get it. But the bottom line is this: If my Republican friends want to help, pick up the phone and call their friend, Mitch McConnell, and ask him to get serious about negotiating a compromise here so we can help small businesses and also help our schools and our first responders and our healthcare workers. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. [[Page H4732]] Mrs. LESKO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, in closing, at a time when many Americans are struggling with the economic fallout from the ongoing pandemic, it is unfortunate that the Democratic majority is not coming up with solutions that can actually be signed into law. We need to negotiate with the Republicans in the Senate and the President and the Democrats together. That is what America wants. Instead, in this rule, we are focusing on a Green New Deal-type of energy package--one that didn't work so well in California, as can be attested to by their rolling blackouts and other energy crises. Mr. Speaker, I would call on us to defeat the previous question so that we can add the amendment to, at least, help the small businesses and their workers. This is something we can do together. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the underlying measure, and I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, my friend just mentioned ``the least'' we can do. Well, this is not the time to do the least of anything. We are faced with a pandemic, haven't seen the likes of this since 1918. This is a big deal. It impacts every part of our economy. And they are talking about ``the least.'' Well, you know what? We have to help our small businesses; we have to help our schools. We have to protect our first responders and our healthcare workers. This impacts everybody. And the notion that they can't muster the political will to pick up the phone and ask the Senate to negotiate with us is really, really sad, and it is a disservice to the people of this country. Mr. Speaker, I get it. Like everything in the HEROES Act--well, that is what a negotiation is for, you go back and forth, and you trade things off. I would argue everything in the HEROES Act is necessary and important. Mr. Speaker, I would urge my colleagues to support the rule. It includes an important energy bill that will help us deal with the climate crisis, which is real--no matter what the President says, we have a climate crisis--and some human rights legislation as well, to stand up for the human rights of the Uyghurs, and make sure that no U.S. or international businesses are utilizing forced labor by the Chinese Government against the Uyghurs. Mr. Speaker, again, we have a job to do here, and that is to provide relief during this pandemic. And it really is frustrating that my Republican friends have done nothing--done nothing--to help get us to a solution. Mr. Speaker, I would urge all my colleagues to join with us in support of the rule and the underlying measure. Please vote ``yes'' on the previous question. The material previously referred to by Mrs. Lesko is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 1129 At the end of the resolution, add the following: Sec. 7. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 8265) to amend the Small Business Act and the CARES Act to establish a program for second draw loans and make other modifications to the paycheck protection program, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Small Business; and (2) one motion to recommit. Sec. 8. Clause l(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 8265. Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question. The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it. Mrs. LESKO. 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. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed. ____________________
All in House sectionPrev28 of 68Next