offered in the house oversight committee today. it was disturbing that so many members of this chamber treated her with such condescension and disrespect. at some point, madam speaker, the republican party will need to end this war on women and recognize that the question of whether women have a right to make their own health care decisions is a matter of settled law. and threatening to shut down the government unless we agree to deny millions of women access to high quality health care is reckless and irresponsible. ms. degette: i'm now pleased to yield to the distinguished ntlelady from the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. jackson lee: this is not a debate on people's conscience and what you believe in. it is a debate and question of the law. first of all, the legislation --

the underlying legislation we have before us is likely to be ruled unconstitutional and it's likely to do so because it meets the very four corners of what the supreme court ruled the texas law to be unconstitutional and i'd venture to say that this bill was a copy of the texas law. in 2014 and 2015, the texas legislators tried to stop reproductive health care clinics by requiring them to have a hospital style surgery center building and staffing requirements, leaving only seven clinics to provide health care. the same thing where they threatened the same kind of thing which would only leave 10 health care providers. guess what, madam speaker? in 2014 and 2015, the supreme court of the united states ruled it unconstitutional and stopped the legislature in their tracks. that's what's going to happen to this legislation as well. let me be very clear planned

parenthood does not engage in selling body parts. yes, as under the lay, they do deal with fetal issue research which has saved millions of lives. under the 1993 n.i.h. revitally sargse act, it is unlawful for any person to knowingly receive any human fetal transfer if the transfer affects interstate commerce. they do not do this. the reason i know that, there's been no department of justice investigation no, health and human services investigation, and in actuality, mr. delayeden, who is not the f.b.i., has engaged in a deleterious, dastardly, deceitful investigation, stealing the inch d. of one of his fellow high school students. so i'm against this bill and i'm against it for the good things that planned parenthood does. for example, in my state, there are 38 clinics, 150,000 young women are being served.

108,000 are contraceptive, others are s.t.i. let me fin herb by saying mammograms are not done in your doctor's office you get a referral and go to a place where you can get a mammogram with a radiologist. if we would only discuss from that, we would know the underlying bill should be opposed. i oppose it and ask my colleagues to oppose it. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expire thsmed echair recognizes the gentlelady from colorado. ms. degette: i'm pleased to recognize the gentleman from california, mr. farr, for 1.5 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 1.5 minutes. mr. farr: thank you very much for yielding. there's been a lot of talk here about a bill that's only two pages long. and you've heard a lot of talk about -- and a lot of misstatements of fact about plan parenthood. but guess what? this bill is really about giving the state's ability to hurt

women and never even mentioned planned parenthood. it never mentioned any of the procedures you've heard about here on the floor. it gives the states the ability to wipe out clinics that serve women. so it isn't about abortion procedures. it isn't about planned parenthood. it's about taking away access to health care. this bill gives the authority to states to cut off all those services if they specialize in health care for women. when is this war on women going to stop? your party ought to be ashamed of its reputation in this country now that is taking on women on all issues. so on behalf of my wife, my daughter, and my granddaughter, who will need access to women's services, hopefully not abortion, but if necessary, maybe, i would hope that this

war on women would stop and that all of us would vote against it. oppose this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: we're prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from colorado is recognized. ms. deget: thank you, madam speaker. we have heard a lot of emotion today, madam speaker and a lot of ideas and ugly things being thrown around but as a lawyer with legal training, i did something radical. ms. degette: i actually read this bill because as mr. farr pointed out, it's only two pages long. i want to talk about what this bill would do. this bill would do far, far more than its proponents claim it would do. let me say first of all, there is no federal money that is

spent on abortion in most cases in the united states. this has been the law of the land for a long time. i disagree with that law because i think it limits full reproductive health for women who can least afford it. but that's the law of the land. so what are we talking about here? what we're talking about is states being able to deny money to anybody who is directly or indirectly involved with abortion services with nongovernmental money. with private money from women and their family with insurance money, with nongovernmental money. so here's how this bill would work. a state could decide that if a hospital provided abortions with nongovernment money, it simply wasn't going to authorize state money or medicaid money to that state. it could -- to that hospital. and i don't mean just medicaid services for women's services.

i mean all medicaid money or state money. all money for services. this bill could say that an ob/gyn who has co-privileges at a hospital that provides abortion could now not serve any medicaid patients. this bill would say that a doctor who provides services at a neighborhood health care clinic who has privileges at a hospital that provides abortions could now be banned from taking medicaid patients. that's how broad this bill is written. what this would do is it would allow states to terminate all government funds to any entity that directly or indirectly provides abortions with nongovernment dollars. so what would this do? well, 72 million people in this country are on medicaid right now. these people are men, these people are women, these people

are children. these people are people who take women's medical services and those who don't need them. these 2 million americans risk the loss of all of their health care services under medicaid because of this radical bill. now, ok, let's say that won't really happen. let's say that's just an overbroad interpretation of the bill. so then our colleagues on the other side say, well, let's just limit ourselves to community health centers. if we use this bill to deny funding for planned parenthood, everyone will go to community health centers. let's see how that would work. right now, we have 24 million patients in this country in community health centers. the community health centers themselves tell us for every one of those 24 million patients they're taking, right now, they're turning away seven people. so we have 4.2 million planned parenthood patients. let's say those 7.2 million

planned parenthood -- i'm sorry, those 4.2 million planned parenthood patients decide to go to the community health clinics, that's not going to work. they tried this in louisiana. in louisiana, a federal judge found there would be 29 providers for 5,000 women to do health care services. that's untenable. that's unacceptable. and it puts the jeopardy of our nation's women's health at risk. since we've been debating this bill today, we're one hour closer to a government shutdown. and we have done nothing to make sure we're not going to do that. i would suggest that we refocus our efforts, that we stop beating up planned parenthood that we stop beating up women's health, that we get together collectively and we say, how are we going to keep this government open? how are we going to work together to make sure every man and woman in this country has a good job, a good health insurance, and that they can provide for their families.

that's what we're elected to do and that's what i commit myself to do on behalf of this body. i yield back, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> madam speaker, we've heard lots of arguments here on the floor. mr. pitts: we've heard about abortion being a health care issue. abortion is not a health care issue. abortion is the most violent form of death known to mankind. death by dismemberment. decapitation. it's horrific. and these video clips that we've seen show the graphic nature of what they're doing to these little unborn -- unborn babies in planned parenthood clinics and harvesting their body parts, and you call that humane? it's horrific. it's barbaric. why is this bill necessary?

currently, c.m.s. is bullying states, telling them they must include providers of elective abortions in their medicaid programs. with ll empowers states the needed flexibility to design their medicaid programs in a manner that's consistent with pro-life values in a state. the gentleman talked about patients. well, a lot of unborn babies are treated as patients in their mother's womb. one lady talked about, what about individual rights? what about the rights of these little patients in the womb? this bill merely gives states the flexibility to choose to establish criteria regarding the participation in its medicaid program of entities or persons who perform or participate in

the performance of elective abortions. under this bill, low income women and men will still have access to more than 13,000 federally qualified health centers and rural health center sites. in addition at least 1,200 private and free charitable clinics. in contrast, planned parenthood has some 665 clinics. they can find health care near them. because these federally qualified and rural health centers are 20 over the one planned parenthood clinic. we have the list of the member here's. some of the members who have spoken. they have one planned parenthood clinic. they may have 56, 44, the list varies, community health centers who would get that redistributed money and provide real health

care as doctor harris said. this bill gives states the flexibility to design their medicaid programs in a manner they choose. to serve their medicaid patients. so i strongly urge support for h.r. 3495, the women's public and madam safety act, chair, in conclusion, i ask unanimous consent that the question of adopting a motion to recommit on h.r. 3495 may be subject to postponement as though under clause 8 of rule 20. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection? ms. degette: i object -- i withdraw. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. does the gentleman yield back in mr. pitts: i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house rule -- house resolution 444, the previous question is ordered on the bill as amended. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. third reading. the clerk: a bill to amend title 19 of the social security act to allow for greater state flexibility with respect to excluding providers who are involved in abortions. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from arizona seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentlewoman opposed? >> i am opposed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: ms. sinema of arizona moves to recommit the bill -- mr. pitts: i reserve a point of order against the motion to

recommit. the speaker pro tempore: a point of order is reserved. the clerk will read. the clerk: ms. sinema of arizona moves to recommit the bill h.r. 3495 to the committee of energy and commerce, with instructions to report the same back forthwith with the following amendment. at the end of the bill, add the following. section 3, rule of construction. nothing in the amendments made by this act shall be construed as prohibiting health care services provided to a woman by an entity, agency or person so long as such services are provided to protect the health of the woman. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from arizona is recognized for five minutes in support of her motion. ms. sinema: madam speaker, this motion to recommit is the final amendment to the bill it. will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. if this amendment is adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage as amended. this motion is straightforward and commonsense.

the motion ensures that nothing in this bill prohibits a woman's access to health care services. this amendment protects the health of american women. i believe a woman's personal health care decision should be decided by the woman, her family and her doctor. women and their families should be able to make these decisions free from government interference. despite our political differences, protecting the health, safety and independence of american women is something that most of us in this chamber can readily support. it's what the american people want and believe. the american people and people in my home state of arizona want congress to put aside partisanship and focus on solving our country's great challenges. they want congress to focus on growing our economy, creating opportunity for hardworking families, making college affordable, reforming the v.a. and strengthening our military and national security. the list goes on and on. it's no surprise that republicans and democrats alike think that congress is a mess. but congress doesn't have to be

a mess. congress can produce results when it puts partisanship aside and works for the american people. earlier this year we worked together to find a real solution to the long term challenge of reimbursing doctors through medicare. we replaced the s.g.r. and protected seniors' access to health care. that's the kind of success we can achieve for the american people if we work together. we also work together to help prevent veteran suicide and improve access to mental health care for veterans. the clay hunt save act, which passed with the support of every member of congress, is an important step towards ending the epidemic of veteran suicide in our country. that's the kind of work we can do for our veterans when we work together. we work together to pass the 21st century cures act, to encourage biomedical innovation and the development of life-saving treatments and curious. this creative, bipartisan approach cuts through red tape, allowing innovators to focus on life-saving discoveries rather than government bureaucracy. these are the solutions we can

create when we work together. last night we passed an act which allows employees to keep their health insurance plans. this is the kind of bipartisan work we can accomplish. if we work together, we can get things done for the american people. we can find a long term, sustainable solution to funding our highways and infrastructure. we can pass a budget that creates jobs and opportunity. grows our economy and improves our national security. and we can reform our broken tax code so it provides certainty, encourages job growth, enables us to compete on a global scale. instead i've watched congress fight once again in a partisan way without a bipartisan solution on the horizon. this is not what arizonans want. it's not what the american people want. i offer this motion today to stand for something we all agree on, protecting the health of women. and i ask my colleagues to support this reasonable motion. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the

balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. pitts: i withdraw my point of order and claim the time in opposition to the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the reservation is withdrawn. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. pitts: thank you, madam speaker. i rise to oppose the motion to recommit, today under the obama administration's interpretation of federal statute, states are forced to include in their medicaid program providers who perform elective abortions. whether they like that or not. the women's public health and safety act is a commonsense measure that would allow a state to choose to establish criteria regarding the participation in its medicaid program of ebtities or persons who -- entities or persons who perform or participate in the performance of elective abortions. unlike what some members on the

other side of the aisle have said, this bill will not harm women's access to health care. rather, this gives states more tools to design a medicaid program that fully serves low-income women and men. the women's public health and safety act would put states back in the driver's seat and let each state design their medicaid program in a manner that best meets the needs and respects the choices and values of the people within their states. this bill should be supported by every member who believe the states should be strong, full partners in the operation of the medicaid program. if state taxpayers do not want to include abortion providers in their medicaid program, they should not be forced to include them. i urge the members strongly to vote no on the motion to

recommit and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the noes -- the motion is not agreed to. ms. sinema: madam speaker, i call for the yeas and nays. ask, call. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to the order of the house of today, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess subject

open, we're here to do the people's work. there's a lot on our plate this week. in addition to that, the idea that the president should lift sanctions on iran and provide iran with about $100 billion of their assets locked up in western banks without first paying the victims of iranian terrorism, and there's about $43 billion against iran for u.s. citizens slaughtered by iranians. i'm sure mr. meehan will tell you all about his bill. mr. meehan: there's a lot of

excitement and chatter about this week. 've -- >> today we will have duffy's bill on the floor. gives people it choices where to spend money. meehan has his bill, i want him to be able to talk about it but it's a fundamentally changing bill. when you talk about the funding going to fund terrorism and the justice of those who have been murdered, this can change the direction of where we go. and when we will have the c.r. on this -- on the floor this week as well. >> i want to talk first about sean duffy's bill, states like my state, louisiana, would like the opportunity to cancel contracts with abortion providers. mr. scalise: and shift those dollars to health care providing

facilities that don't provide abortions. every state that wants to have that opportunity should be able to cancel those contracts and redirect the money. the duffy bill allows that to happen. i think it's an important bill when you talk about the health care and also stopping taxpayer funding of abortion. and then as far as pat meehan's bill, i think it's critically important that we put american victims of iranian terror first when it comes to the dollars that the president is considering turning over to iran, over $100 billion of money that's frozen, shouldn't the american victims of iranian terror have the first opportunity to get that money that they rightfully have won in court settlements before the president turns that money over to the largest state sponsor of error? >> we've had a fedes now to

process speaker boehner's resignation and for me i want to say it's been a privilege to work alongside him and he's been the right man at the right time to -- to be leading this conference. when you look at his tenure as speaker of the house, he's led us to have the large etc. majority in over eight years. we've cut spend big over $2 trillion. enacted the first major entitlement reform in 20 years and protected 99% of americans from a permanent tax increase. now since the difficult announcement on friday, we have all had time just to search our hearts and i am confident that we're going to come out even more united and more effective in this cause that has caused us to want to serve in congress and it's an honor to do so. certainly, people all across this country want to see congress getting things done. they want to see us focus on issues that are going to make their lives better.

mrs. mcmorris rodgers: we met this morning and we'll be meeting again this afternoon as republicans to discuss our priorities and how we're going to proceed. america's future depends on us offering positive solutions, working together, so that america's future will be strong. >> good morning, i want to express my deepest appreciation to my colleagues in the conference who have joined together to support the justice for victims of iranian terror act. mr. meehan: this has something to do with the background i had as a prosecutor when i saw how important it was for victims to have a moment in which they see some measure of justice for the suffering they experienced. there are some $43.5 billion in judgments rendered under

american law for victims of acts of iranian terror. there's more than 80 lawsuits that have been successfully prosecuted through the courts. despite this, not one cent has been paid by iran toward these victims. this is an opportunity to change that dynamic. what will happen if we continue on the course that's currently under matter, more than $100 billion will be returned to iran and that will be the very corpus that could be able to be used by those victims to see some resolution. i must also say there's a matter of precedent here that ought not be underestimated. when libya was resolved within the situation in which sanctions were released, more than a decade ago, at that time as well, the victims of lockerbie and others were compen stated -- compensated before those dollars that were under sanctions were returned to libya. in this particular case that

opportunity was never pursued. so very simply, what this legislation will do would require that the judgments that have been legally rendered be paid to iran before any sanctions relief money is returned to iran which they can use for a number of purposes including in the minds of many of us, fomenting further terror around the world. there's at least 80 sponsors of this bill and almost unanimous consent among my colleagues on this side of the aisle. i suspect that it will be introduced in the next day or two on the senate side as well and i hope that we will receive strong support for the bill. thank you. mr. boehner: i just can't wait. >> mr. speaker, if there are some things you'd like to clear away for your successor? mr. boehner: we'll have to see. there's a number of issues we'll

try to deal with over the coming months but i'm not going to change my decision making process in any way. it's just a matter of, if there's a way to get some things done so i don't burden my successor i'll get them fin herbs. >> you -- conservative groups if you stand with boehner, we're against you, are are you putting mr. scalise or mr. mccarthy in a tough spot? mr. boehner: we're going to take this one day at a time an do what we can on behalf of the american people. i'm not going to change my process at all. i've spent my life trying to do the right thingers in right reasons, i'm not going to change now. >> are you concerned that that

sets a precedent for a final bill? mr. boehner: not at all. this is a bipartisan agreement and we'll take care of it today. >> any thoughts, mr. speaker, on the time offering the leadership election? and if not, any broad considerations within the conference about when that would be held? mr. boehner: i told members this morning i have not decided when leadership elections will occur. i asked for their input and got a few pieces of advice but i would hope to make an announcement in the next day or wo about that. >> would you like it to be sooner? what's your -- you don't care? mr. boehner: it's loik any decision i make, i listen to my colleagues and i'm listening to them, and i would hope to make a decision soon. >> mr. mccarthy some skeptics are concerned that you as speaker wouldn't be much

different than mr. boehner. how would you be different as speaker than mr. boehner? mr. mccarthy: i won't be as tan. john is a very good and decent man. this is a man that came into this office and if you looked at those that maybe want to fight, how did the house bank get shut down? john bayner is the last one standing. he fought to get into the majority. went into leadership, left, became a committee chairman. left. came back and fought for another majority rm but everybody is different. there's a generational difference about us as well. [laughter] i'm a little younger. no, no. i know what's going on across the country. and i'm concerned about what we hear. a lot of people in washington

concerned about power and institutions. i'm concerned about making a difference in everybody's lives. we want to make sure we're closer to the people. that they feel this is their government, they're in charge, and we serve them. now that's not easy and won't change overnight but that's our mission. mr. boehner: thanks, everybody. >> house republicans this morning. the house is in recess subject to the call of the chair. we just got the 15-minute warning. live coverage when they return here on c-span at about 3:45 eastern with votes on planned parenthood coming up. remarks now from house democrats on their agenda after a leadership meeting this morning. >> ok?

mr. becerra: javier becerra, joined by vice chairman crowley, chairman of the congressional democratic campaign committee, congressman from new mexico, ben ray lujan and our colleague from kale who has been a champion on so many issues, but certain he issues relating to health care and women's rights, jackie speier. glad she's with us as well. we had a caucus meeting where the principal focus of discussion was making sure we don't experience what we saw two years ago in 2013 when republicans decided to shut the fwoth down for reasons unrelated to the government itself and the budget that needs to be in place for the government services that we pay for with our taxes can keep on moving forward. two years ago, we saw that as a result of the republican vernment shutdown, that some 120,000 jobs were lost. we saw as well that the economy lost some $24 billion. and while $1 billion may not

seem like a lot to some politicians in washington, d.c. a fraction of that would help a lot of people help pay for their college education for their kids, the mortgage on their home, or just making sure they're getting ready for retirement. so it adds up. and certainly i don't believe most americans would like to see our republican colleagues take the same tactic used two years ago in trying to force issues on heir social agenda through a halt to our government operations, whether it's social security, veterans services, food safety inspections, or the research that's being done right now at the national institutes of health to help us solve the problems of cancer and alzheimer's disease and so forth. and so we're hoping that we're going to watch our republican colleagues move forward. we're prepared to do what it takes to keep our government operating efficiently, smartly, the one thing that is becoming very troubling is that the

stopgap measures are becoming the rule rather than the exception when it comes to our budgets. and just as no small business on main street would operate on stopgap budgets and wait until the very end of the cliff to decide what to do, neither should the largest economy in the world operate that way. so we're hoping that our republican colleagues will decide not to go that same course of shutting down the government and that we'll have a long-term budget that really does meet the needs of the american people. so we're hoping that having expressed that very clearly, that the message goes out that democrats are ready to work with our republican colleagues, whoever becomes the republican leadership in the house of representatives, we're ready to work with them because we think that with the economy churning, moving forward, jobs being created, this is the last time we need to have a goth shutdown by our republican colleagues. with that, let me turn it over to our vice chairman, joe

crowley. mr. crowley: thank you, mr. chairman. what a week last week was. to be in the presence of the holy father, pope francis, and more importantly the message he had for america. and leaving, i believe, an indelible mark on all of us, catholic or non-catholic, believer or not. it was an incredible week. i'm wearing green, i have to switch later today to pink, but i'm wearing green this morning because the pope said green is the color of hope he told that to speaker boehner. i want to thank the speaker for inviting the pope here, i want thank leader pelosi, my colleagues acted remarkably responsibly in the chamber. but listening to the pope's message to congress, whether on climate change, death penalty, a number of issue he is mentioned, what i think was really clear is that he emphasized the need for

us to do as representatives what's in the best interest of our country, to govern. and that includes i think a message to our republican colleagues to stop governing by crisis. there's enough crises in the world, enge you've heard me say this over and over again, there are natural disasters happening around the world and here in the united states, we have drought, we have forest fires, we have -- we know we'll have tornadoes at some point. we'll have hurricanes, hopefully not in new york. we'll have them somewhere, hopefully not anywhere. there's enough of that going on, the american public doesn't need additional crises. a manmade fiscal cliff creates more and more anxiety, it hurts the markets, we've seen what's been going on. frankly, my republican colleagues are contributing to that. even the mere suggestion that once again we won't pay our nation's debt. that does not send the right message that we espouse as

america. not only to ourselves but to the rest of the world. and the notion or idea, we may have gotten past the shutdown for this week, that remains to be seen, we're hopeful, we're hopeful again that we will get through this week, but we know that in december, we'll be facing the same manmade crises again. right now, the issue they've chosen is women's health. they decided that this is a good issue to go after. go after women's health. the war on women continues. whether it's planned parenthood or some other entity, there would have been another issue that they would have chosen to shut down government. they did it two years ago, they almost did it a year ago, and they want to do it again. it's in their blood. republicans for some reason need to do this. i don't get it. the american people don't get it. they know that it will cost us billions and billions of dollars that that it will mean job loss

for americans. job loss for americans that is not a way to grow our economy. that is not a way to govern. stop governing from crisis to crisis. with that, i want to turn it over to my colleague from new mexico, the chairman of the dccc, mr. ben ray lujan. mr. lujan: good morning, everyone. i think what we're seeing yet again as our chairman and vice chairman remind us about the responsibility of governing is how house republicans have demonstrated all year that they cannot govern responsibly on behalf of hardworking everyday americans, putting infighting over governing and reckless positions over progress. the republican party is broken and speaker boehner's resignation is the starkest and most high profile example of that dysfunction and chaos. it's disturbing that speaker boehner was somehow not conservative enough for many of our republican colleagues. but let's be clear. this is not a speaker boehner problem. it's a republican problem.

this is a republican conference problem. and the next speaker will face the same stark choice as boehner. go along with the extreme base or get run over by them the right wing is emboldened right now and that will only continue to grow as we approach big, upcoming deadlines. raising the debt ceil, extenders, highway trust fund, extending the export-import bank. but the american people are watching and they know that this fight within the republican conference that is on full display with all this function, it matters to them. it impacts their lives. there's no doubt that voters are paying attention to the broken republican controlled congress and no, that is not functioning at all, let alone functioning to make their lives better. it's clear, republicans will be held accountable for this dysfunction and -- in moderate and swing districts across america. with that, i recognize our colleague from california, the very honorable jackie speier.

ms. speier: thank you, mr. chairman. the republican game of brinksmanship must end. because it's a game that is being played out by stepping on the lives of women. there are at planned parenthood some 800,000 exams given every year. breast cancer exams, contraception, and s.t.d. testing. what does that mean? 800,000 is the size of the state of wyoming. or the state of vermont. or south dakota. or north dakota. we're talking about a lot of people. now i want to draw your one woman, who was 26 years old, in between jobs, she went to planned parenthood for health care. it was discovered she had stage 2 breast cancer.

stage 2 breast cancer. and it was because she went to plan parenthood and got the health care she needed that she is alive today. it's not just women that get health care at planned parenthood. some 300,000 men seek services at planned parenthood as well. so the time for the republican majority in this house to stop the brinksmanship, stop their absolute focus on trying to shut down planned parenthood must stop because by doing that, they're shutting down health care for women. and it's time for all of that to end. thank you. mr. becerra: with that, we'll take any questions. >> you mentioned turmoil on the other side. it sounds leek you're not optimistic. a couple of you are from california. what do you make of leader mccarthy who seem to be the

favorite right now? mr. becerra: kevin mccarthy is someone who has been in leadership, not just in the house, but when he served in the state legislature, he was in leadership there. he understands legislators and the legislative process. my sense and our hope would be if he becomes speaker that he would use that knowledge to help us move legislation forward to try to get things done. perhaps he'll have more success in corralling his own team so that we can get things done. but at the same time, the concern is that as the vice chairman just said, will he work with them? the chairman of the dccc said this, will he work with his colleagues on the republican side or will he get run over by them? our hope is not only can he work with them but he'll reach across the aisle to work with us so we can get things done rather than doing things at the last moment through these fiscal cliff kind of deals. ackie, i know that you're from

california. ms. speier: kevin mccarthy is an amiable man, he's served here in congress and developed great leadership skills but you have a rough caucus in the republican party right now that is turning into a cancer. they want their pound of flesh. if they don't get their pound of flesh, they will shut down this government. and kevin mccarthy will be faced with the same challenges that speaker boehner has been faced with. trying to assuage them and never assuaging them enough. >> following up on that how do you account for that and prevent a shutdown from the minority? focus on the senate? focus on mccarthy who will be pressured from the right? or can you try to sit down with house republicans ancon vince them not to listen to their right wing? mr. crowley: thinking about whoever the republican

leadership will be in the house, it may not be as important as how they get along with us as how they get along with themselves, frankly. i do think there may be a learning curve, a time in which, i can't say a honeymoon because there's no time for a honeymoon but the hope that maybe it's mitch mcconnell, maybe it's some others within government from their side of the aisle who will be able to temper some of the high strung folks they have in their caucus. that may also get alleviated by the election of some of the far right wing to their leadership. i don't know what that will be. that's going to be their decision to make. what i know we are concerned about is ending governing by crisis and getting them to focus on ending government by crisis and doing the long-term visionary things for the country. what they have consistently lacked is a vision for growth in the united states. it hasn't happened under john

boehner, we hope it happened under the next speaker that they empower. but the bottom line is, they have done nothing, when they have control -- >> we'll leave this here, the house gaveled back in for a couple of votes related to defunding planned parenthood. the airport and airway extension act of 2015. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of the rule 20 and the order of the house of today, proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order. the motion to recommit on h.r. 3495 and passage of h.r. 3495, if ordered. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be cunthed as five-minute votes -- conducted as five-minute

votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of -- to recommit on h.r. 3495 offered by the gentlewoman from arizona, ms. sinema. on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will redesignate the motion. the clerk: motion to recommit on h.r. 3495 offered by ms. sinema of arizona. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to recommit. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 184. nd the nays are 242. the motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of he bill. those in favor say aye. hose opposed, please say no. the gentlewoman from colorado. ms. degette: on that i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those favoring a recorded vote will rise.

a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 236. nd the nays are 193.

he bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition. >> pursuant to clause 7 of rule 22, i present a privileged report. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany h.r. 1735, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2016 for military activities of the department of defense and for military construction, to prescribe military personnel strength for such fiscal year and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: ordered printed. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches . for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> permission to revise and

extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. paulsen: the house is not in order. mr. paulsen: the gaddafi regime regime, today, iran, a state sponsor of terror owes more than 43 brillion of victims of victims of terrorism. and not one cent has been paid by iran and the president is moving forward to lift economic sanctions giving iran $100 billion wind fall without compensation. we should make sure that american victims of iranian terror receive their judgments before any economic sanctions are lifted. we need to pass the act to

ensure that iran will not see any sanctions relief until it first pays the money they owe to the families of americans killed as a result of iranian-sponsored terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise in support of the underlying bill. i'll cut to the chase. we are aware of the boondoggle, the denver, colorado, construction project. the veterans' hospital project has tripled in cost projections and more than $1 billion over budget. a gross disservice to our veterans during a time of scares resources. section 502 inserts basic requirements like those i

learned of a management consultant. like the denver facility. sadly, project costs and scheduled overruns aren't unique to the v.a. but they exist throughout the federal government. i have introduced the act. this legislation would instill basic project management principles throughout all levels of the federal government ensuring taxpayers save money. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker, as our eyes turn toward new york, both in terms of the pope's visit last week and his call for us to address

humanitarian needs of refugees around the world, the last 24 hours we heard from the president of russia and our president on syria. i think it's important for this congress to begin to look again at a man by the name of assad who is not only poisoning his own people, but bombing hospitals and creating a situation of devastation. i think the president is correct that assad must go and must be a reconciliation as to how that proceeds. to mr. putin, who has a stake in this area, you have to come with the world family and begin to think of those who are suffering. we can work together, but assad cannot stay. we must find a way for people of syria to return to justice, peace and equality. the united nations must take a stand and we must come together in this congress working with the president and working with world leaders to restore tranquility and peace to this

region with assad gone and isil done away with to provide stability in the area. i yield back. the gentlelady's time has expired. any other member seek recognition for one minute? under the speaker's announced policy january 6, 2015, the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko is recognized as the designee of the minority leader. mr. tonko: undenbly, the issue that we hear the most in our districts across america is to create a climate that grows jobs, to allow the dignity of work to be realized by our constituents and to enable them o earn a sound paycheck. the speaker pro tempore: the house is not in order.

please take your conversations off the floor. mr. tonko: thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. tonko: we can ill afford to play games with the job agenda. we need to do everything within our power to be able to provide for those resources and develop those policies that will create that climate that grows private sector jobs and enables public sector jobs to administer the services that we require as a nation. for years, i have been coming to this floor speaking with great fervor about the make it in america agenda, making certain that we take great pride in that funt that we as a nation have always embraced, the pioneer spirit, the innovation that

challengeses us today. that has many, many needs. i have spoken to the need for implementing sound manufacturing policy, retrofitting our centers of employment, our manufacturing centers, so they can compete with cutting edge technology on their side. i have advanced the concern and the issue of funding research, making certain that we do things smarter, which will enable us to be more competitive in the economic stakes on an international scale. and i have focused on stem education making certain in this economy we have those scientists, technology-driven types, math majors that can take us forward with the sort of skills and talent that we require. i was talking about improving our infrastructure to make certain that congress' demand for sound infrastructure will be met so they can ship their products and transport their

products. i have talked about the need to grow our exports as a nation. well, i believe this can be boiled down to a simple message. the idea is to make more, use less and sell it everywhere. in other words, promote domestic manufacturing, enhance our efficiency, energy efficiency and across the board, all types of efficiency, and then enable us to then export american-made goods. well, this trio has been hindered as late because of a refusal to re-authorize in this house the export-import bank, which is a great service that allows for loan guarantees and can stand as an insurance policy, a government creditor for contracts when bid upon by our private sector industries and businesses. that damage, that delay has been troublesome.

i have come to this floor many times and joined with my colleagues in press conferences and invoked our leadership to bring the measure to the floor because i think if we do, it passes. i talked also about signing on, i signed on to petitions to discharge to raise the public consciousness to this growing concern of lacking to re-authorize our export-import bank. well, the damage came and hit my district. i would say to america, we, in congress, this house, and its leadership is playing with fire, because now we have a major corporation in this case, ge in my district that will be trangsinging 500 or more jobs to france because of a lack of an export-import bank here. there are some 84, 85 export-import banks around the world. some 60-plus nations have this

concept at their grasp. and so, the french government has authorized the export-import bank to be utilized by ge. now i witnessed hundreds of jobs in my own district that will be transferred over to another set of workers, damaging the american dream of people that i represent. this is unthinkable, unthinkable. avoided.d be all it takes is a simple exercise to bring an issue to the floor, bring to the bill to the floor, of which i'm a co-sponsor and act on it. and i believe in a bipartisan fashion that measure would pass. and so tonight, we are going to use these minutes to advocate for the export-import bank, to have that vote brought to the floor and we'll begin with the gentleman, a friend, a leader in our house, the minority whip,

the gentleman from maryland, representative steny hoyer. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko, has been a leader on our agenda of make it in america. it's a jobs plan which has included re-authorizing the export-import bank helping our businesses and workers compete on a level playing field internationally. since the bank's charter expired future hask's announced jobs being moved overseas. my friend talked br general

electric moving hundreds of jobs from his district and other districts as well. the president, c.e.o. of ge was here, and talked to democrats and republicans and said you are hurting american jobs. yet, we do not have the export-import bank re-authorization on the floor, even though, madam speaker, it enjoys a majority support in this house. we wrote a number of sound arguments why congress ought to pass a multiyear re-authorization of the export-import bank without further delay. one of those, came from the chamber of the commerce. who wrote on september 17 and i wrote, this is the president of the chamber of commerce, he says this every major trading nation has an export credit agency like

ex-im, fail you you are to re-authorize would be unilateral disarmament. he went on to say, american companies are being forced to compete with one hand tied behind their back. governors es from 28 on a bipartisan basis, who sent a letter to us and said this, failure to act, meaning failure to re-authorize, will place american industries at a significant disadvantage in the global marketplace and harm businesses in our states. the governors' -- bipartisan said we strongly urge you, we, the congress, we, the house of representatives, to pass a long-term re-authorization of

the export-import bank. let me add another voice to this discussion as well and that is the voice of speaker boehner, who said in april, there are thousands of jobs on the line that would disappear pretty quickly if the exim bank were to disappear. the speaker also said when he took office that the house ought to work its will. the votes are on the floor of this house to pass the re-authorization. republicans and democrats working together to help create american jobs, retain american jobs, grow our economy and be competitive internationally. it's now time to put the principle into practice of letting the house work its will. 60 republicans of this house have co-sponsored a bill to re-authorize the ex-imbank. and those 60 republicans, you

get to 240, you only need 218. clearly, we have the votes to pass it. i say to the speaker and majority leader, the house's will is clear. the effects of allowing the effects of the shutdown to continue are clear. more and more jobs being sent overseas and our responsibility as the representatives of thousands of businesses and workers is very clear. bring the export bank to the floor for a vote. i want to thank the ranking member, maxine waters, ranking member gwen moore and representative denny heck for their continued leadership on this issue. and i thank my friend, representative tonko, from new york, for leading today's special order on such a critically important issue to an issue that we all speak to, that we all say we're committed to, that we all say we want to work

towards, and that is creating jobs for americans in america. and i yield back to my friend from new york and yield back. . mr. tonko: it is clear that the democrats in this house are staunchly for re-authorization of this concept. you know, when people talk about the tools in the tool kit that are required, growing exports is a very important part of the equation for economic recovery and economic growth. this concept of an export-import bank reduces the deficit by some $675 million at last annual count. grows jobs to the tune of 164,000 in last count. so reduce deficit, grow jobs, isn't that the mantra that we hear time and time again from folks who represent all of america in this house of

representatives? t stands to reason that we bring the bill to the floor for a vote. america should not tolerate this. the business community, the commerce voices of this nation from chambers of commerce across this country, it's resonating to we, the democrats, in this house. we need re-authorization of the export-import bank. what don't we understand? let's go forward and encourage that that vote be taken very, very soon. and one of the people that i get to serve with is a longtime friend. we served in the new york state assembly together. we now serve here in the united states state house of representatives together. we have been very concerned about job growth in new york state and in particular along that manufacturing corridor called the erie canal which gave birth to a number of mill

towns that then became ep centers of -- epicenters of innovation and today they stand as inspiration of how to speak to that pioneer spirit that's within our d.n.a. as a nation, representative slaughter, the gentlewoman from new york, my good friend, thank you for sharing thoughts this evening. thank you for joining us. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. tonko. i'm delighted to be here with you. into tonko, as pointed out, was elected to the new york state legislature on the same day. we were there to better their lot. it's great we are working for all 50 states with new york, again, in mind. the people who sent us here knew that we stood for things like the ex-im bank, knew that we understood that if we didn't have a strong economy we couldn't do much of anything else in our district, provide good education, health care, even the economy was the

backbone of what we're doing. i appreciate you yielding me this time to discuss the importance of the export-import bank. mr. tonko, it's incredible to me, frankly, that we should come to the house floor to call for the ex-im bank's re-authorization. it is an important agency that has worked to ensure a level playing field around the world for the united states exporters for more than 80 years. last year alone, ex-im supported 164,000 united states billion in loans and loan guarantees all the while returning $675 million to taxpayers because it is essentially a revolving fund which is paid for by the user fees. so here we have an agency sponsored by the government costing us basically nothing, putting money back into the treasury which makes companies eligible to be able to sell

their goods throughout the world. you know, my district of rochester, new york, is home to advanced manufacturers on the cutting edge of research and development, and we do need the ex-im bank to help market our products worldwide. the ex-im has supported 685 jobs and $158 million of expours in rochester since 2010. in june, i toured a leading rochester manufacturing firm that ex-im has helped support the sales and precision instrument gauges to customers in 14 countries. now, unfortunately, since june 30, manufacturers like this in rochester and across the country have lost a valuable tool and many nights' sleep because a handful of members of the house majority are blocking the ex-im's re-authorization r reasons we can't understand. as mr. tonko pointed out, we

have governors, chambers of commerce, as well as corporations telling us this won't do, but we are now starting to see the effects of this mis-guided policy. as stated before, general electric announced that it was shipping 500 jobs abroad because other countries are willing to provide the financial help that we no longer will. boeing has lost two major satellite contracts to foreign competitors because of the ex-im bank. those are two of our largest employers. but i'm even more concerned with the hundreds of small manufacturers and the thousands of employees whose jobs are now at risk without the ex-im bank's support and for no reason that we can come up with. i call on the house leadership to bring a re-authorization bill to the floor. it would pass without question, and we would allow this ex-im bank to get back to the important work of helping to create quality american jobs. and i yield back the balance of

my time and i thank you so much, mr. tonko, not only for putting this together but for the extraordinary work you have done here and in albany to better the life of the people we serve. thank you. mr. tonko: you're most welcome and i thank the gentlelady from new york for lending her voice to this discussion. as was made mentioned by the gentlewoman from new york, small businesses, startups, innovative types, entrepreneurs , medium-sized businesses, many utilize the export-import bank. this is not just a tool for large industry. and when we look at someone like -- something like g.e., when people say, well, doesn't a large business, an industry like that set upon enough funds to make this happen, to make this contract work? they require, for this contract which they bid, to have a government creditor to back up this bid. that means the export-import

bank. there are certain elements of this concept that are utilized for different contracts, and in this case, the government creditor status of export-import bank made the deal possible for g.e. and so with that we now move to a good friend, a very vigorous voice for his constituents in minnesota and a very aggressive voice for job creation across this country, representative nolan, thank you for joining us for this special order. mr. nolan: well, thank you, mr. tonko. and i want to commend you. here is no more powerful and articulate advocate for good jobs, protecting good jobs, creating new jobs in this congress than you yourself, mr. tonko. in that regard, i would be remiss if i didn't commend representative heck for his leadership, important leadership on this important issue, and mr. hoyer for his buy america initiatives.

you know -- excuse me -- mr. tonko, as you and perhaps others know, i spent 32 years of my life in business as an owner and operator of a saw mill, a palette factory and an export trading company. and in the process, you know, you learn a few things. one, i learned you expand an economy and you create new wealth and you create new jobs in three important ways. one is through innovation and discovery, developing new products, putting them out into the marketplace. another is by providing financial incentives for people to invest in new products and new business. and thirdly, you do it by exporting those products to the rest of the world. that's one of the ways you bring some of your wealth back into your country. and that's one of the reasons why it's so vital and that it's so important. and that's what the export bank, the import-export bank is

all about. as you pointed out, especially for small and medium-sized companies. the fact is the big companies, the big multinationals that are based here in the united states, they got offices all over the world. they got relationships with all the international banking institutions. they got all the resources that they need to qualify a buyer or to provide the financing for the production of their -- and the sale of their product. but the small and the medium-sized companies don't have those kind of resources. they don't have the same kind of advantages, and yet, you know, they may be small and medium size by american standards but by world standards they're still good, big companies and they got good products the rest of the world wants, the rest of the world needs, things that can improve the life of people all around the world. but to succeed in exporting, again, as you pointed out, they need some help and they need

some support identifying and qualifying customers. they don't have those offices around the world. their local banks don't have those kind of offices around the world. so it makes it more difficult for them to secure the financing, to qualify the buyers and to expand their sales into that export market. and that's where the ex-im bank comes in. the export bank provides all of those essential services, and that's why the banking community supports a re-authorization. that's why the national manufacturers association supports re-authorization. that's why the national chamber of commerce supports this re-authorization. anybody that knows anything about business and creating jobs supports the re-authorization of the ex-im bank. and, again, as you pointed out, there's bipartisan support for this here. if the speaker would just allow us to have a vote on it, because the american export bank helps american businesses

expand their export operations, increase their profits and create all kinds of good-paying jobs. last year alone, ex-im was responsible for supporting 164,000 jobs. that's a remarkable, remarkable letter -- accomplishment. in my own district, there's at least a dozen companies that are using the export bank to support their export sales, creating hundreds of good jobs. and they export some of the world's finest products. in fact, sears aircraft manufacturers in duluth, minnesota, one of our nation's premiere aircraft manufacturers, exports more than 30% of their products and they rely on the ex-im bank. and remember, remember, as you pointed out, just as importantly, the export bank doesn't cost the taxpayers a penny. the companies, the local bankers, all the parties to

these transactions pay a fee for their services. and those fees pay for the bank's operations. it's an incredible operation. over the last two decades, the ex-im bank has contributed over $7 billion to deficit reduction from the profits they made through this. we should have more government entities that can do this. however fortunate we are, mr. speaker, to have a banking service like this and enjoy such broad support from both those who were concerned about reducing the exports -- reducing the deficit and from those that are concerned about expanding export sales, expanding business opportunities and creating jobs. and that's what the export import -- export-import bank does, it creates jobs, it expands opportunities, it reduces the deficit. and yet for reasons that truly defy explanation, there are elements in this congress that

oppose re-authorizing the export-import bank and all it does for business and reducing benefits. so i applaud you and i call on my colleagues to come to their good bipartisan senses and do what needs to be done here. let's get this export bank up and running again, growing our economy, creating good jobs, supporting our entrepreneurs and bringing down the deficit. mr. tonko, thank you so much for this special order and all the work you're doing to help bring this about and make it happen. mr. tonko: well, thank you. i thank the gentleman from minnesota. we have very little time left. so we're going to reach to the gentleman from illinois and the gentlewoman from ohio to offer close here and we'll thank representative lipinski for joining us this evening on a very important topic. thank you for your strong voice on this matter. mr. lipinski: thank you very much, mr. tonko. i'll just take a short time here to add my voice in strong support of re-authorization the export-import bank. it's been three months since

the bank's charter ended and america's companies and workers are suffering. mr. tonko, you mentioned what g.e. has recently done. we see manufacturing jobs being shipped overseas due to the inability of corporations and small businesses to access vital guarantees and financing. every major trading nation in the world, other than the u.s. right now, offers export financing. . without it our manufacturers d workers are at a competitive disadvantage. something we cannot afford. in 2014 alone, the ex-im bank financed over $27 billion of exports, supported 164,000 jobs in the u.s. $675 ile generating a million surplus. a surplus when we're looking for money. the ex-im bank generated a large surplus. the ban