the most overreaching regulations and mandates on the american peoplement this motion to recommit seeks only to distract from the urgent need to reform our regulatory system and reduce unnecessary burdens on the public. when health care reform regulations are adopted, they should be adopted with approval of this body. i urge all of my colleagues to support this bill, reject this motion to recommit, and show america that congress can act for the good of job creators and all americans who desperately want and need jobs. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia yields back. 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. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. ms. murphy: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested.

those faring a recorded vote will rise. a sufficient number having a recorded vote is a recorded ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, this five-minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a five-minute vote on passage of the bill if ordered. this is a 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 presentatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 190, the nays are 235. the motion is not agreed to. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the bill is passed -- >> mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote has been requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will stand. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 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 yeas are 237 and the nays are 187 and without objection, the motion is laid upon the table. >> i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at noon tomorrow and further, when the house adjourns on that day, it adjourns to meet on monday january 9, 2017 and convene at noon for morning hour debate and

2:00 for legislative business. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. . for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. crowley: by direction of the emocratic caucus i ask for a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 25, the following member be elected to the house of representatives

committee on ethics, ms. sanchez. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair will now entertain

requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman s recognized for one minute. >> today, four people were charged with violent crime after a facebook video. this barely covers the experience of an 18-year-old boy who was forced to cower in a corner by people he thought were his friends. his mouth was duct taped shut. his hands an feet were tie. they cut his clothes, hair, and scalp with a knife. he was humiliated and berated. this was not just bullying, it was violent torture perpetrated by young adults. mr. murphy: the psychological trauma will haunt him for years.

children with disabilities are four times more likely to be assaulted than the general population. we enacted health care reforms weeks ago, but we cannot legislate morality for perpetrators who have no sense of shame. today as a nation we should bull be ashamed and recommit to teach our children there is never any excuse to harm a disabled person, never. i pray for the victim and his family. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, as co-chair of the community care caucus, i rise on behalf of mothers and babies who will suffer if republicans repeel the affordable care act. it is undisputable that with prenatal care, babies are born healthier. before the a.c.a., approximately

10% of childbearing women had no insurance and the plans of 60% of childbearing women had no maternity coverage. as a result of the a.c.a. more than half of the women uninsured became eligible for maternity kay. ms. roybal-allard: in addition, it requires health plans to cover maternity care and pre-existing conditions. women will also lose coverage for lactation counseling and verage for breast pumps, i urge my republican colleagues to consider the negative impact of repealing obama care will have on our nation's mothers and babies. we must protect the future health of our chern by ensuring all moms have access to maternity care and breastfeeding support. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to

address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize the life and achievement of leroy baldwin a true american original. leroy baldwin was born and raised in ocala, florida, in 1952. not coming from a family with a rich ag background, he bought his first calf when he was 6 years of age from the money he earned delivering newspapers. he served honorably in the u.s. army from 1952 to 1955 in the koreaian war. after that her pursued his life hongprgt, the baldwin angus ranch. it now covers 61 acres and has taken florida's angus breed all over the world. he blessed god every day for the blessings his business enjoyed. god, family, and country are words he lived by. we have lost a true giant, mr.

baldwin, may god bless you, your family and thank you for what up done for florida and our ation's agriculture. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? without objection the gentlelady s recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: today in the senate, the other body, unfortunately, joined the pathway of destruction for most americans and voted to repeal the affordable care act. these are not my words. the pathway of destruction. this is evidenced by what will happen to millions and millions of americans. by repealing by repealing without a replacement, which does not exist, insurance will be taken away from nearly 30 million, 82%, in working families. now some four million uninsured children will have no insurance.

let it be very clear that many of these individuals do not have college degrees. many of them, the voters of those who now will take the rein of government. health care pleem yums will increase by 50% for millions of americans. hundreds of billions of dollars will go to tax breaks for insurance companies while eliminating the tax credits and subsidies for millions of working families. it will take health care coverage away from millions of low and moderate income americans by cutting medicaid and will close rural hospitals and public hospitals that provide a lifeline for many americans. cut off federal funds for health care for women through planned parenthood. and yes, elimb nate and have cuts in medicare and medicaid. mr. speaker, this is a pathway of disaster. we should not repeal the affordable care act.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address though house -- address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i'm proud that in my first week as a representative of michigan's 10th congressional district, we have passed two important pieces of legislation to stem the avalanche of federal regulation. the top concern i hear from employers of all sizes across my district is that regulation from washington is making it harder for them to do business. i spent my career in business. acquired first -- i have firsthand knowledge of the damage caused by excessive federal regulation. the midnight rules act and the reins act which i proudly co-sponsored will provide much-needed relief to families an ms.s alike. it will make unelected bureaucrats accountable to congress. the american dream is achieveable and as the son of a federal motors lineworker, my life is proof of it.

but it is only possible when people are given the freedom to be successful in our economy. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? are there further one-minute equests? under the sneaker's announced policy of january 3, 2017, the gentleman from south carolina, mr. sanford is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. sanford: i thank the gentleman. i rise this evening to talk about a bill that myself and jim mcgovern of massachusetts have

that we will be offering tomorrow. i think it's an important bill from the standpoint of advancing an perpetuating this american notion called freedom. it's a bill that had 130 sponsors in the last congress. it's a bill that i'm joined on by tom emmer and mr. poe and mr. amash and others as original co-sponsors as we drop the bill tomorrow. it's quite simply entitled the freedom to travel to cuba bill. and what it does is what the name suggests, which is to lift the current restrictions in encumbering an american's act to travel to cuba. the question is, why is that important? i think it's important for a number of different reasons. first of which is tied to the basic, fundamental notion of american liberty. american liberty is built of many different things, you know, the supreme court has actually determined that as real as what you choose to wear or what you choose to eat or what you choose

to read is this basic fundamental right to travel. that in the american system, we can travel as we see fit. i think i'll go here. i think i'll go there. i'm going to visit my grandmother in des moines, i'm going to visit my cousin in chicago. we choose without government control and government edict where we come and where we go. it's a far cry from what we saw in the forger soviet union where you had to have your papers to determine where you could travel. and so, you know, what i think is interesting, i have a map of the globe here. and did you know that you or i could travel to any country on this globe except for one. you or i could travel to north korea. you or i could travel to syria. you or i could travel to iran. you or i could travel to iraq. it may not work out well for you. may not be the best of trips. but you or i could travel without government prohibition to any spot on this globe except for one. and that one is cuba.

and that may have made sense in 1960. for security reasons, at the time of the cold war, it may have made a lot of sense to have that prohibition in place. but the question is, does it make sense today. and i don't think that it does for a whole variety of reasons. so this is about the basic fundamental american right of travel as we see fit, not as government sees fit. two, this is about the american liberty and this fragile notion of, you know if we don't protect it, government tends to grow. jefferson talked about this theme a long time ago. we said the normal course of things was for government to gain ground and liberty to yield. so if we don't push back, this is what the reins act was all about if we don't push back against regulations or government edict or laws that have outgrown their usefulness, then what we're doing is allowing government to encroach on this fragile notion of

liberty. so you know, fundamental to, i guess, the notion of common sense is, if you tried something for 50 years and it's not working, might we not try something different? i was here in the 1990's. i actually signed on to helms-burton. but it didn't work. so i said, why don't we try something different? what ronald reagan proposed at the time that there was the iron curtain is for americans, kids with backpacks to travel on the other side of that curtain and that personal diplomacy that one-on-one diplomacy would be key to bringing down that wall. and it was part. that notion of engagement. so i think this is about saying, you know, american policy has been the excuse that the castros have used for 50 years. we have almost the longest serving dictatorship in the history of the globe there with the castro brothers. and what was often times the case was that they would blame

the blockade, the embargo, americans' inability to travel, whatever it was, for what was going wrong in their country rather than addressing the relationship. the problem was communism and the way it encumbers people and their dreams and their hopes. but we gave them an excuse. this is about pulling back the excuse and trying something different. it's about pushing back on a regulation that has not served its purpose. this is about engaging because that is part and parcel to american liberty. i don't like some of the things that are going on in russia. i don't like some of the things going on in china. i don't like some of the things that are going on in vietnam or you can pick your country. but what we've chosen as an american policy is this notion of engagement. we're all ultimately going to be able to solve more by engaging with other countries. that's why ronald reagan embraced it with countries of the former soviet union in helptology bring down that wall.

this is about perpetuating the notion of engagement. it's about government regulation. we have just passed the reins act which is all about say, you know if something doesn't make sense, let's peel it back. let's not have the fourth branch of government going out and perpetuating all kinds of regulations without them going through congress. yet what we have with regard to cuba to travel, you have to sign an affidavit of why you're going there. you have to keep receipts for up to five years proving where you did or didn't spend money. if you fill out a form wrong you could be subject to a $250,000 fine. is that kind of regulation consistent with, again, free travel that we all should enjoy as americans? and finally, i think that this bill is about bringing about change to cuba. my interest is not primarily about cuba. any interest is about american liberty and the need to

perpetuate american liberty. one of the offshoots, one of the benefits that would come would be bringing about change to cuba. even the worst detractor of the bill, we're all about the same thing which is how do you bring about more in the way of human freedom to that country and the 11 million people who make up that country. i think that allowing americans to go there and to, again, tell folks about, no, what you're hearing from the -- from your state-run radio station or television station is not the truth, here's what's really going on, is part and parcel to bringing about a change in cuba. it's part and parcel to eliminate egg the excuses used by the communist regime there. it's part and parcel to continuing a theme of engagement we've employed for more than a hundred years and most of all it's part and parcel to maintaining the fragile notion of american liberty which always needs to be protected. if something has encroached on american liberty that's not about a tangible result in the

here and now it needs to be pushed back. fundamentally, this bill is about those five things. so i would ask that viewers talk to their house or senate member and ask them to sign on to this bill. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and thank the ntleman. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy f january 3, 2017, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, for 30 minutes. mr. gohmert: mr. speaker, today, we took up what was intended to house ry noble action on resolution 11, to reign in the

so of-of-control actions of any despots who occupy positions in the united nations. the united nations, whether you go back to libya being in charge of human rights -- you have u.n. troops molesting so many females, there are all kinds of problems that have been wrought and the u.n. has the gall to continually show how big on thed is how anti-jewish, anti--israeli that it is. it's easy to find, if anyone bothers to check, that the nited nations never asked once to pony uper country

land, and much less demand that other countries like jordan, who is a good friend of the united states, but the u.n. never said, look, you are occupying this land that they call palestine, so you ought to give it up. never did. until it was controlled by the israeli people. thus making clear, this is -- y a big on thed move bigotted move by the u.n. to slam the nation of israel. also, one wants to conduct another test to check to see how bigotted the u.n. is. and you can check on the condemnations by the u.n. for

activities of israel, compare ose acts of those activities in self-defense efforts by israel and compare them to acts f other nations, the genocide, for example, that even secretary kerry, as tough as it was for him to finally admit that there was a genocide of christians going on in the middle east. and is there any outrage by the u.n.? no. in fact, the u.n., head of refugees who is the u.n. general secretary made clear about a that the half ago, reason they weren't helping christians to the extent they were helping muslim refugees is

because of the historic importance that christians have in staying where they were. that means where they are being murdered and having their throats slashed, being crucified, tortured, raped, incinerated, the u.n. general secretary thought it was very important to leave christians in the middle east so they could be murdered in some of the most heinous egregious fashions imaginable. so it was just improper, to we w from history, that condemn the united nations' an lution, 2334, as being obstacle to peace in the israel.

palestinians have made clear they don't want peace were israel. they want it eliminated from the map. they name holidays and squares and all kinds of things for people who go out and kill innocent jewish children and thers just for being jewish. and they reward their families of those who go and blow themselves up, killing in atrocious fashions, innocent israeli people. and united nations turns a blind eye to it. since the u.n. has become so racist, so bigotted, so

the most l, anti--terrorist country in all of the middle east, including north africa, although egypt is doing great help and there are those in libya, but president obama turned libya into anarchy having s, then egypt is problems coming from libya. what has the u.n. had to say? not really anything. if the muslim brotherhood supports it, then so does the n. and so has the baum administration. that's why i guess israel got the lecture from secretary john

kerry. secretary kerry, even in the days when he talked about the khan, never of mentioned the plight of the poor palestinians before 1967 when of the under control most non-israeli people you could imagine. there has been no discussion about that. bigotted ing really allegations at israel. so we have house resolution 11 today and it meant that i was going to come to the floor and vote to condemn the u.n. passage of u.n.'s security council resolution 2334.

unfortunately, as some of my friends here in congress have pointed out, i'm a bit anal at times and i'm going to read the things we are going to vote on. i got my copy of house resolution 11, immediately oting that in the very first whereas, it says the united states has long supported a two-state solution. it does say sustainable two-state solution. and it says whereas since 1993, the united states has facilitated direct bilateral negotiations between both parties in achieving a two-state solution. well, it is true that president clinton twisted the arm of the israeli prime minister and onvinced him to basically give

arafat almost everything he wanted. now if you believe what scripture says about moses going and pleading to pharao to let the children of israel go, we e told that god hardened pharao's heart so he could make a big demonstration of his power and glory down the road and although there was suffering that came, great suffering, ultimately, incredible miracles were performed as a result of his hardened heart. arafat it's likely when got almost everything he wanted n the offer from israel, i

thank god that arafat turned him down. for anybody who has been in the military and goes to israel, you can see ready if arafat had accepted what the prime minister of israel had been willing to offer, it would have made israel indefensible, unless they were using nuclear weapons or the threat of nuclear weapons. israel needs to be able to defend itself. and since king david was ruling rom hevron in the year of 1020 b.c. to around 1012 b.c. and then he moved and he was ruling over israel and what's now called the west bank was actually called israel. it was part of the nation of israel.

solomon had control, but he did so from up the city of david, because that's where up to jerusalem that david had moved where ital from hevron abraham is buried and i visited the tomb of david's father, jesse, there in hevron. d to be told, oh, no, this needs to be palestinian lands. and the reason some of us think judea should be palestinian lands because 1,600 ars after david ruled, muhammad came along, some say it was a vision, some say a dream, some say he actually, during one

night, was taken by winged horse or donkey and flown to jerusalem and some say he got there back to bed for morning, whatever the case, 1,600 years before that happened, david was ruling over that whole country. there is no one alive today, descended from the occupants of , descended israel from people who lived in that and predating king david king saul before him and king solomon after him, nobody. nobody alive today has a prior claim. there is nobody, no country from

whom the united nations has demanded a cessation of land back to people that attacked that country and the land was taken back in a defensive mode in protection from the attack. our u.s. three of house resolution 11, it points is that the u.n. resolution a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution. nd at the bottom of page five, says a durable and sustainable peace agreement between israel and the palestinians will come only through direct bilateral negotiations between the parties

resulting in a jewish democratic ate living side-by-side next to a demilitarized state in peace and security. there cannot be peace and security in the middle east when people who are allowed to occupy an area and those people continue with the encouragement with the united nations with john kerry and this president to on ct intensive terrorism the people of israel and we ontinue to condemn the victims of that terrorism. you can't have peace in a land where the most powerful nation, possibly the most powerful nation up to now -- we were up to one time -- our navy is down

to pre-world war 1 standards, but at one time we were the most powerful nation. we are the near most powerful nation is taking up for the victims and encouraging that the victims give away more of the land that they've already given so much of to those who are inflicting terror upon them. i mean, it's like my friends on the far left constantly complaining about bullies who never had been bulleyed like i was as a small child, because i was very small in elementary school and i got beat up a lot and i defended myself. and when you are taking on people who are a foot taller than you are and flunked two

grades. my fifth grade teacher took me up in front of the class, my nose is still bleeding, i want everybody to see what happens hen the little boys try to big oys and stuck up for the bulleys and that is what the united nations is doing, taking up for the terrorist bulleys. i'm amazed that israel has held back all hell breaking loose on the gaza strip because the assaults, day after day, sending rocket into israel, israel spending millions of dollars to protect themselves against the constant attack from the gaza strip, and what happens? they try to protect themselves with a legitimate blockade to

make sure nobody is taking rockets in, and the u.n. and world opinion goes nuts over that. page 6 of our resolution we volted on today goes on to say that the house of representatives calls for united nations security council 2334 to be repealed or fundamentally altered so that no longer one-sided and anti-israel. and here's my problem, again, b, it allows all final status issues toward a two-state solution be resolved and have direct negotiations between the parties. nobody at the u.n., if we're part of it, and nobody in a united states administration should even mention the little phrase two-state solution.

this body should not even mention in a resolution that we're in any way endorsing a two-state solution. i know there are a lot of christians that aren't as familiar with the bible perhaps my ey will be one day but friend joel rosenberg pointed book ofrous time in the joel, chapter 3rks it says, at that time i will return the exiles to judah and jerusalem. i will gather all the nations, bring them down to the valley of jehosephat, i will bring them to judgment concerning my people israel who are may people who they scattered among the nations. then it lists the number one gry advance that the god of the bible, the god i believe in, had

against those nations, going to rain down judgment on, the number one grievance is, they partitioned my land. they divided my land. the promised land. when the united states congress braces demand that israel be divided into separate states intead of being able to live peacefully the land that was occupied and promised over 3,000 making a i think we're big mistake and that's why i had to vote no on the resolution. now just as our leadership rushed this resolution to the floor, i am hopeful they will

resolution 311 to the floor. i filed it today, this afternoon, and house resolution 311 is very basic. it says to withhold united states assessed and voluntary contributions to the united nations and for other purposes. be it enacted by the senate and house of representatives of the united states of america and congress -- in congress assembled, section 1, short title, this act may be cited as the refusing to assist paying for the united nations actions against israel. -- against israel act. the united states assessed and voluntary contributions to the united nations, section 2, and the operative wording says, no funds are authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available for assessed or the ary contributions of

united states to the united nations or to any organ, specialized agency, commission, treaty, or treaty body or other affiliated body of the united nations. and it goes on, until such time as the united nations security council resolution 2334 regarding israel's settlements in the west bank and east jerusalem is repealed in its entirety. then section 3 says no funds are authorized to be appropriated or otherwise made available to pay interest on assessed or voluntary contributions that are withheld under this act. and so the purpose of that is i'm hoping and praying that this body will not just pay lip service to a u.n. resolution and actually embrace, as john kerry was saying today, not that much

difference between aipac's position supporting this resolution , he may not have mentioned there was support for the resolution, but the aipac position and john kerry's position and if you look at what's in the resolution, he may have something there. but this would actually put some teeth into it. this is something that would send a message to the united nations and the nations around the world that if you're going to continue to be so anti-israel, so bigotted, so racist so anti-jewish, then the united states is not going to continue to fund your outrageous, bigotted activities. .our lush, lavish lifestyle and i would think if the united nations were to delay if we could pass this, the united

nations delayed in withdrawing that resolution, or rescinding it, then that should ultimately ead to our denial of any visas to diplomats of the united nations and then once that curs, apparently under the deed to the united nations, it as only for such time as the headquarters in new york is the main headquarters of the united nations and so if they can't get diplomats there, they'll have to move the headquarters elsewhere and that land would be ceded back to the foundation. so hopefully this, we will go ahead and to something that has teeth in it and not embrace language that will be fatal to

the nation of israel, we can make a difference. that could bring peace in the world. because terrorists only understand power. and sometimes power is conveyed in the way of money. we should not be funding a united nations that is so bigotted and so hateful to the nation of israel. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? mr. gohmert: i move that we do now hereby adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the house stands adjourned until noon