the law. reviewing his record, i cannot assure the people of connecticut or the country that jeff sessions would be a vigorous champion of these rights and liberties and therefore i stand in opposition to his nomination. thank you, mr. chairman. senator grassley: before senator leahy, we have a vote in 20 minutes, so i'd like to kind of plan for the rest of this committee meeting. number one, i would like to keep the meeting going during so republicans i hope will take turns with me to go vote and chair the meeting. and then so republicans have spoken shorter times than democrats so if senator lee speaks about the usual time of republicans and -- >> you can continue watching the judiciary committee hearing on the attorney general nomination live on c-span3 and also streaming live online.

as we get ready to go to the floor of the u.s. house about to gavel in, members working today on legislation to repeal an obama administration rule on dealing with waste from coal mining and considering 19 homeland security and cybersecurity bills. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of the universe, thank you for giving us another day. it is your nature to hold us in your living presence always. it is our nature to think of you or of others only momentarily or in passing. be with us, each of us that we may be our very best and prove ourselves worthy of your love and your grace.

bless the members of this people's house and their work and deliberations today, that they might merit the trust of the american people and manifest the strength of our republican democracy to the nations of the world. as the new administration finds its footing and settles into its governing principles, may this assembly assist by remaining faithful to its constitutional responsibilities with the help of your grace and wisdom. may all that is done this day be for your greater honor and glory, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from alabama, mr. rogers. mr. rogers: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and

justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina eek recognition? mr. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. serious bodily injury without objection, the gentleman is recognized. -- the speaker: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. wilson: cybervulnerabilities allows hackers to access a vehicle and take control from the driver. vehicle safety is of great importance to me because south carolina is america's leading export of automobiles and tires ith b.m.w., volvo along with michelin, bridgestone, continental and getty of singapore. last week i was grateful to introduce the spy course study act of 2017 with congressman ted lieu of california. this directs the government

partners with private automobile manufacturers to conduct a study on the security and privacy threats to our motor vehicles. in conclusion, god bless our troops and may the president by his actions never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. president donald trump has tted refugees who isil infiltrated to commit crime in france and germany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from vermont seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. thank you, madam speaker. i wish to introduce prump to two syrian -- president trump to two syrian families just a week before he slammed the door. they are from damascus. another from aleppo. these families survived a bomb,

al qaeda and isis violence. they found temporary refuge in turkey. they have now found permanent freedom in vermont. these good people endured all these hardships to do what all parents strive to do -- protect their children from harm. mr. speaker, i wish president trump was with me last thursday to meet them. do we really fear these families when they've been so rigorously vetted? and i wish president trump was with me to meet the generous people of rutland. they had good questions about the refugee program, its costs and their security but, madam speaker, unlike president trump, the folks in rutland never, never wanted to ban muslims and welcome only christians. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask for unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'm heartened by the administration's announcement that it will preserve workplace protections for lgbt federal contractors. this is a meaningful and positive step toward ending discrimination against hardworking lgbt americans who only want to earn a living and provide for themselves and their families. for many years i have been working with my congressional colleagues on both sides of the aisle to protect skilled, qualified and motivated lgbt employees. too often these individuals experience rejections at job interviews or denied promotions or face other types of harassment in the workplace simply because of their sexual

orientation or gender identity. this shameful practice of discrimination on the job runs counter to our core values of fairness and equality. i hope that the administration and congress can work together to extend equal rights to lgbt individuals in every sector. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom new york seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mig-ins: i rise on behalf of so many western new yorkers and americans about the president's executive order on immigration. the story of america is defined by the struggle of immigrants overcoming incredible odds to claim their piece of the american dream. mr. higgins: the executive order on immigration is calous, unlawful and unconstitutional. and immigration ban based on anyone on religion or country of origin is in conflict with

basic american values and who we are as a people. inspired by the work of the international institute, catholic charities, jericho road, jewish family services and so many more, my western new york community continues to be welcoming to refugees and immigrants from all over the world, including those countries directly affected by this order. i know my community will continue to lead by example and proudly project american values. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. poe: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: madam speaker, according to a russian proverb, quote, if he beats you it means he loves you. in russia that has become the norm. 40% of all violent crimes in russia are done within the home. 36,000 people are beaten by their partners every day.

madam speaker, this is disturbing, but the russian parliament has voted overwhelmingly to decriminalize domestic violence. if it does not cause substantial bodily harm and does not happen more than once a year. so if a husband beats his wife once a year, that's fine, say it the lords of siberia. madam speaker, domestic violence is not just a family issue. it's a human rights issue. as long as -- as a life-long advocate for victims, our societies and countries must recognize the devastating affect of domestic violence. t tears at the fabric of society. and not legalize it but stop this nightmare wherever it is like my grandmother said, you never beat somebody you claim you love and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to

address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, the recent executive order signed by president trump to ban refugees and other individuals from certain muslim majority nations is a shameful attempt to create a religious test for entry into our country. rather than making our nations safer it discredits our heritage and undermines our shared values. the american people demonstrate these values every single day. ne example just last friday, one synagogue welcomed a refugee family fleeing the violence in syria. 22 members met the family at o'hare airport greeting them with flowers, toys and well wishes. volunteers then brought the family to their new apartment full of donated furniture, clothing and food to help them start their new life here at home. mr. schneider: this was the last family before president

trump slammed the door shut. i am the son and great grandson of those who fled centuries ago. that's the american dream. we must not allow fear to turn us inward or bar the gates of -- to innocent refugees seeking a safe home and better future here in america. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to speak out for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to share my isgust and contempt by the manning's communtation. it was opposed by president obama's secretary of defense ash carter. mr. rogers: after field reports and intelligence reports, 200,000 diplomatic cables, the taliban went on a killing spree

taking out everyone who seemed to fit the description of individuals working with the u.s. it was indiscriminant killing. mr. speaker, we're hearing the usual hand wringing this morning from president trump's critics about the impacts of his executive orders of those who helped news iraq and afghanistan. these individual voices would be much more credible if they had criticized president obama for his irresponsible communtation of inmate manning. president obama may be gone, thankfully, but we're still suffering from his irresponsible decisions. change has finally come to america, mr. speaker -- madam speaker. manning and other enemies of our nation should be on notice. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from washington seek recognition? without, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. jayapal: for hours i worked

with colleagues from the port of seattle, the northwest immigrants rights project, the aclu and our governor to get people who are being held to be released because of president trump's muslim ban. in the utter chaos, i found a gentleman who had come from somalia to be reunited with his wife, had awful his legal papers and instead was blindly turned away without ndou process. we were able to get two other individuals released. one from yemen and one from sudan, after a brutal and determined effort to literally stop the plane they had been boreded onto in order to be deported. this wasn't -- boarded onto in order to be deported. this wasn't just in washington. our office was contacted by thousands of people who are terrified. these are students, legal residents, who do not know where their place in this country is.

i myself emcombrated when ways 16 years old and took me 19 years to become a citizen. i am aware of the barriers people face in our immigration system and i hope that all of the members of this chamber work to welcome immigrants the way we always have. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor the memory of officer from mcwill he farah delaware county, pennsylvania. madam speaker, 15 years ago yesterday, officer mcnamara was brutally gunned down while serving his community in the line of duty. mr. meehan: he's survived by his wife diane and children spike and melissa. i was with them yesterday as we dedicated a road in dennis'

hometown in upper darby. it was a fitting memorial to his wonderful life and the legacy he's left behind and one of the many ways dennis' own community has never forgotten. i will soon be presenting dennis and his family with two flags. the first flag flew over the united states capitol yesterday which was the 15th anniversary of his death. the second is a flag of the national law enforcement officers memorial foundation which flew over the law enforcement memorial just blocks from here in judiciary square during national police week. no gesture will bring dennis back to his family but it's my hope these flags will continue to have his community honor his memory and the ultimate sacrifice he made. madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pascrell: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: boyd, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. pascrell: thank you.

a stark similarities what happened in the 1850's and now, you judge for yourself. in 1856, former president millard fill more ran for president -- filmore ran for president for the no-nothing group. they joined the newly formed republican party. you can't make this up. a primary concern of the know-nothing party was the large number of german and irish catholics coming to the united states. a worry was that the character of the country would change because they were coming here. lincoln said this, as a nation we begin by declaring that all men are created equal. we now practically read it, all

men are created equal except negros. when the know-nothings get control, it will read all men are created equal except for negro, foreigners, and catholics. when it comes to this, i should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty. russia. the similarities are unbelievable. ere depottism cab -- where despotism can be taken hour, that's the difference but there's a lot of similarities. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> anyone who wants to protect americans from terrorist attacks should support president trump's immigration executive orders.

put aside the hysteria of his political opponents, here are the facts. mr. smith: there will be a temporary halt on admission to the u.s. of those from seven designated countries, including iraq, iran, syria. these are the same countries designated as a security threat by president obama. congress passed legislation in 2015 designating these countries as security risks in order to protect our homeland from terrorism. the bill passed the house of representatives by a vote of 407-19. despite what the media and others imply, muslims are not being targeted. many muslim-majority countries, in fact are not singled out. the purpose of the temporary halt is to allow time to improve procedures so better background checks can be developed. who could possibly oppose fforts to keep americans safe?

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. last week i introduced the reporting efficiently to proper officials in response to terrorism act the report act. it creates a legal requirement that the secretary of homeland security in coordination with the united states attorney general, the director of the federal bureau of investigation and the head of the national counterterrorism center submit a report to congress when an incident of terrorism occurring in the -- occurs in the united states. curbly there's no legal mandate in this report which would help us learn more an respond to emergencies. i'd like to thank my colleague, representative ken calvert, an original co-sponsor of the bill, for working with me and my office over the past year to lp in the san bernardino

terrorist attack. and i'd like to thank mr. play klay born, the father of one of the victims of the san bernardino attacks, sierra claiborne. this is bill is a tribute to sierra and all those affected by the attack on september 2. while it does not address every issue raised by the attack, it is a commonsense change to help us understand how this and other attacks unfolded, so we can prevent these types of tragedies from happening in other cities and to other families. i urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill and to help strengthen our national security. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to honor the life and legacy of one of arkansas' great leaders and a dear friend. former state senator stanley

russ who passed away earlier this month at the age of 86. born and raised in conway, arkansas, he served in the korean war before becoming a state senator for 25 years. mr. hill: stanley received numerous rewards for his work, including being named one of the 10 outstanding state legislators in the united states by the assembly of state governmental employees. he also received a distinguished service award from the conway chamber of commerce and was elected into the arkansas tech university hall of distinction as well as the arkansas agriculture hall of fame. our state and faulkner county will miss stanley's smile, his enthusiasm and ability to get things done to enrich the lives of all arkansans. i extend my respect, affection, and prayers to his family and loved ones. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire 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 gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to recognize change direction new hampshire, a first of its kind statewide campaign to raise awareness of the five signs of mental illness and emotional suffering. since its first launch last may, change direction has touched the lives of thousands of granite staters, helping to change the culture and erase the stigma surrounding mental illness in new hampshire and across the country. campaign co-chairs, my dear friends the honorable john broderick, peter everse and dr. bill gunn have dedicated countless hours to help spread this twain -- campaign through schools, workplaces across the granite state. ms. kuster: they've met with schools and community leaders, holding more than 100 presentations. they've distributed 320,000

informational posters an cards and placed a billboard on one of highways. the goal of change direction is and hopelessness as well known indicators as the indicators of a heart attack. this increased recognition will help improve treatment of mental illness, address substance misuse and help prevent suicide among our friends and neighbors. but the impact of this campaign goes far beyond the five signs. please join me in recognizing john, peter, and bill, and all those who spoort the change direction campaign. thank you, madam speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose duds the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, on thursday,

members of congress and leaders across the globe will gatt for the washington, d.c. to mark one of our finest traditions, the national prayer breakfast. mr. thompson: this event is hosted annually on the first thursday in february. more than 3,000 people typically gather for this forum that allows individuals from various sectors, including political, business, and social, to build relationships and come together in faith, fellowship, and prayer. personally i look forward to the national prayer breakfast each year as a time where thousands around the world and right here at home can reflect on faith, focus on the year ahead and walk away from this remarkable event with a renewed sense of hope and faith this nonpartisan event brings together so many individuals who will hear the stories of inspiration from faith-filled speakers. the book of first chronicles in stripture tells us to look toward the lord and seek his face always. this is what we'll be doing, we'll be seeking at the national prayer breakfast.

it is my hope that i will see many of my colleagues there this thursday. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, whatever you call the president's executive orders, the reality is they constitute a muslim ban. yesterday, one of my constituents was crossing the border into san diego when she was singled out for having brown skin. she was asked by a c.b.p. agent if he was muslim and well in fact he is an indian american man who got his citizenship mere months ago. and he was so proud to become a u.s. citizen because it meant he could finally vote in our elections. his wife called our office, horrified at how casually her

husband's civil rights have been riletted -- had been violated and she told us she was scared now to travel with her kids because she didn't want to tell them they shouldn't talk to any agents at the airport. her voice wavered as she explained that she's lived here for 45 years but this is the first time she ever felt scared because of her skin color. mr. speaker, i demand, in fact, we all should demand that president trump rescind these discriminatory orders immediately and that my republican colleagues stand up against these un-american policies. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expire. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? without objection. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, the executived orer is patently

and clearly unconstitutional. an executive order to ban muslims is unconstitutional. none of us stand against the stringent review of individuals to determine who would come to do well or who would come to do harm. a ban or a temporary suspension of all the refugees around the world who have been vetted over and over again is clearly discriminatory. it is true that the constitution of the united states has started with we, the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, issue domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense and welfare. deputy attorney general sally yates made the right decision. many court jurisdictions have already said that this is an unconstitutional and discriminatory order. the office of public service in the united states government requires you take an oath to

defend and protect the constitution of the united states. i believe the president should uphold his oath. so i stand here today to join with the resolve of deputy attorney general and i ask unanimous consent for the -- for h.r. 724 and h.r. 725, the u.s.a. values act, all dealing with banning and repealing and rescinding now the unconstitutional executive order on banning muslims. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? without objection. the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i, like millions of americans, have been watching over the last 10 or 11 days and especially this past weekend, shaking our head and wondering just what is happening in our

country. this is not who we are. i can't tell you the number of people that i spoke to this weekend from all walks of life, all backgrounds, who have said this phrase -- i can't believe i'm really saying this in america. mr. boyle: mr. speaker, i can understand why, in light of brussels, paris, san bernardino, i can understand why many of my fellow americans are scared. i share their concern. but let's be clear. this illegal, un-american executive order signed on friday does absolutely nothing to protect us. it makes us less safe. it was a wonderful gift to isis and it must be repealed. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized.

>> mr. speaker, the safety and security of our citizens here on american soil must remain our top priority. our borders must always be secure against anyone who would enter our country legally or illegally to cause us harm, especially those who wish to exploit our nation's generosity and compassion. mr. yoder: however, compassion and security are not conflicting ideals and we must continue our nation's legacy of being a beacon of hope and freedom around the world. the idea of reform and oversight of our nation's vetting system is not in conflict of our long-standing value of accepting refugees an it is not new. the obama administration and the trump administration alike have now both paused refugee settlements into our nation. president trump should have our nation's support to carry out his mission to protect our nation's borders, but he must do so without unnecessarily burdening lawful entrance into the united states. i stand ready to work with you and my colleagues in congress to come up with clear proceed wrurs to ensure that our refugee program can continue in the

safest possible manner and together we can live in a nation that is both secure and charitable. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. without objection. the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in opposition to the president -- to president trump's muslim ban because that's exactly what it is. i am sea saddened by the actions being taken in the name of national security. mr. trump's actions make us less secure as nation. they take ar sledgehammer right to the founding principles of our nation. america is not an anti-refugee nation. quite frankly, president trump's actions is beneath us and downright dangerous.

mr. espaillat: the people have hit the streets. we will continue to march and we will keep demanding what's right. we will keep fighting tone sure american families are upheld and that our evil -- that our civil rights are not trashed like yesterday's news. to our muslim, lgbt, immigrant, women and all our brothers and sisters hurt by mr. trump's garbage -- i mean, executive orders -- i am with you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities towards the president. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to call on president trump to remove steve bannon from the national security council. mr. speaker, the national

security council was created in 1947 and it is designed to provide the president of the united states with diplomatic, military, intelligence and economic information to coordinate, to plan and to implement national security. mr. brown: to make sound decisions affecting national security with input from professionals and not from political operatives. and the national security council has done that for seven decades. yet, last week the president issued an ill-conceived, dangerous and unconstitutional executive order that bans muslims. it puts americans abroad, american communities at home and american soldiers around the world at risk, and i believe that steve bannon, who might become a member of the national security council, was the architect of that executive order. mr. speaker, i ask president trump if he's not willing to remove mr. bannon from the white house, at least for the safety of this country, remove

him from the national security council. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. >> i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, i rise this afternoon really with a very, very sad and heavy heart. ms. eshoo: i don't know anyone in our country who watched what took place across the country that wasn't dismayed, that wasn't heart broken, that wasn't confused, and as my constituents said, what is happening in our country. now, there are some that say this must be done. this executive order must be done in the name of national security. i'm a veteran of the house intelligence committee, but it doesn't take a veteran of the

house intelligence committee to understand that this harms our national security. we need to have more voices in the house. we need republicans and democrats standing up together. because historians will replace your surname, and those that don't raise their voices will be called coward because this is ripping at the fabric and the soul of our nation. it is appalling, it is unlawful. i believe it is unconstitutional. if you stood up for history and what was done to others, it's taking place right now in our country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. bucshon: mr. speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house

resolution 70 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar umber 6, house resolution 70, resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the joint resolution, house joint resolution 38, disapproving the rules submitted by the department of the interior known as the stream protection rule. all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution are waived. the joint resolution shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the joint resolution are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour deaf bait equally divided -- one hour of debate equally divided by the chair and the ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources and, two, one motion to recommit.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for one hour. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman and my good friend from florida, mr. hastings, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and . tend their remarks the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, on monday, just yesterday, the house rules committee met and reported a rule, house resolution 70, providing for the consideration of house joint resolution 38, legislation utilizing the congressional review act to overturn the final stream rule -- stream protection rule promulgated by the office of surface mining, reclamation and

management, or the o.s.m., which is at the department of interior. the rule provides for consideration of the joint rulings under a closed rule as is customary with the c.r.a. measures. mr. speaker, this rule provides for consideration of a critical measure that will help protect american businesses and families from the obama administration's rampant regulatory overreach. mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the house will be in order. please, take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman will resume. mr. newhouse: h.j.res. 38 disapproves of the final stream protection rule which was released by the department of interior on december 19, 2016. representing yet another last-minute midnight regulation from the previous administration. this burdensome rule seeks to

govern the interaction between surface mining operations and streams. by establishing a buffer zone rule that blocks mining within 100 feet of those streams. this was done despite the department of interior's own reports which show that virtually all coal mines in this country have no offsite impacts. they are being operated safely and that lands are being restored successfully under existing federal and state regulation. during the rulemaking process, o.s.m. and interior ignored existing regulatory success at the federal and the state level and shut out the cooperating agencies, the states who are responsible for enforcing federal mining regulations. n 2015, nine of the 10 cooperating states withdrew as cooperating agencies in the rulemaking and development

process due to o.s.m.'s exclusionary tactics, failure to provide for meaningful participation and continual limiting of the states' involvement over the past several years. the national environmental policy act, or as we know it as nepa, requires o.s.m. as the lead rulemaking agency to involve states in the drafting regulation -- of the regulation , requires them to involve states. these failures and the restrictive tactics that were employed by o.s.m. led the house natural resources committee chairman, mr. rob bishop of utah, to send a -- r in 2015 to the goor, to the g.a.o., the government accountability office, requesting a review of o.s.m.'s compliance with nepa in the agency's development and drafting of the proposed stream

protection rule. ample evidence exists that o.s.m. excluded these states from the nepa process in contradiction of both nepa regulations and the memoranda of understanding between o.s.m. and the states. mr. speaker, the stream protection rule unilaterally rewrites over 400 existing rules and regulations. it threatens over 1/3 of the nation's coal mining work force and will send repercussions throughout the broader u.s. economy. the final rule is a definition of a one-size-fits-all solution due to o.s.m.'s failure to conduct the seven-year rewrite in a transparent process consistent with their statutory requirement to engage state and local stakeholders. an economic analysis conducted by the national mining association found that the total number of jobs at risk of

loss is somewhere between 112,000 and 280,000 people, approximately 30% to 75% of the current industry employment levels. further, the misguided regulation would jeopardize 40 ,000 to 77,000 in both surface and underground mining operations, industries that are still reeling from eight years of overregulation from the previous administration. and while the obama administration never seemed to mind the consequences of its actions on hardworking americans, i can assure you that the new unified republican government is opposed to ineffective regulations like this one which unnecessarily put people out of work and raise energy costs on consumers and do nothing to improve the environment. by passing this rule, we have the opportunity to consider a resolution that will prevent this regulation from removing

over one half of the total u.s. coal reserves available for extraction while also reducing oppressive barriers to responsible coal production. the congressional review act of 1996 was enacted to be a powerful tool to allow congress to overturn last-minute regulations from the previous administration under an expedited legislative process. if congress passes a joint resolution disapproving the rule and the resolution becomes law, the rule cannot take effect or continue. c.r.a.'s are designed to address and invalidate problematic rules from the previous administration, and the stream protection rule clearly fits the bill. furthermore, this c.r.a. provides certainty to state regulatory bodies tasked with regulating 97% of the coal mines in the united states and enforcing mining regulations by

strengthening the state framework provided in the surface mining control and reclamation act. blocking the final stream protection rule will restore an important stream of state and federal tax revenue associated with coal extraction across the country that is benefiting hardworking american taxpayers. mr. speaker, every member of this body wants to protect the environment, ensure clean water and clean air for our citizens and encourage innovative and responsible ways to produce energy. however, these goals are not mutually exclusive as some opponents of this legislation will argue. t is past time that we embrace commonsense, practical regulationes that protect the environment and the countless americans working in the industries that support our economy and provide for greater

domestic energy independence. the rule we consider here today provides for the consideration of a bill that's critically important to the future economic growth and job growth of our country. by passing this c.r.a., we can take a badly needed step towards protecting american families and businesses from the rampant executive overreach that will be the defining achievement of the past administration. i urge my colleagues to support this rule as well as the underlying legislation, and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank my good friend, the gentleman from washington, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. mr. speaker, i rise today to debate the rule for consideration of a joint resolution disapproving of the department of interior regulation known as the stream

protection rule. through this action, my republican colleagues are now attempting to repeal a thoughtful and thoroughly vetted regulation that reflects current science, technology and mining practices in order to better protect people and the environment from the negative impacts of mountain top removal mining. in regulation took seven years to develop and updates a 30-year-old coal mining regulation. this regulation is not, as we have seen, coming out of the administration of late, somefully buy night executive order -- some fly by night executive order, but a move to make us a more environmentally conscious nation.

but what we see here is typical of the republican party. turning a blind eye to science in order to help wealthy polluters at the expense of the public's health and the environment. just because my friends' unending attempting to normalize such misguided governance have become almost numbing in their effects does not make any such attempts less appalling to those of us who believe in the scientific method and a clean and safe environment. indeed, the positive care that we see here today in ridding the books of a regulation that hardworking and good people took seven years to write, with, mind you, input from all stake holders, is starting to look like a variation on a theme when we consider the paucity of care the republicans in the white house have exhibited over the past 10 days.

as everyone knows, last friday, president trump issued an executive order banning muslims from certain countries from entering the united states and carelessly shutting down the refugee program. hat ensued and continues and i predict will continue to ensue as we speak here today was nothing short of chaos. scores and scores of people were detained for hours. including green cardholders. children. the elderly. and even a iraqi translators who had helped the united states during the insurgency. equally as horrifying as this muslim ban that is the antithesis of everything we value as americans is the ineptitude in which such a sweeping policy was implemented. relevant agencies were not even

consulted. in fact, secretary kelly, the homeland security secretary, found out about the executive order on the phone while on a coast guard plane heading back to washington. secretary mattis was also left off the list of those consulted. had he been on it, he would have almost certainly expressed the sentiment he expressed during the campaign, mainly that the muslim ban would cause great damage and send shock waves through the international community. like ms. eshoo who spoke earlier, i'm a veteran of the intelligence committee as well. we served there together. and i can assure you our experience leads us to know and anyone that's on the intelligence committee knows knew, that what we are about to experience is a handout to our

enemies and will cause additional shock waves in the international community. the result of this amateur hour rollout was a customs and border patrol agency that wasn't sure how to even execute the order. from management on down. no one knew what was going on while scores of people were riddled with fear that their realization of a flee and fair life here in the united states was lost forever. people with visas and green cards were held for hours. someone please tell me what does it mean to issue a visa to persons if they cannot utilize the visa? people were denied access to a lawyer even after a federal court order stayed the executive action. here's a small sampling of the immediate impact of this muslim ban.

a 5-year-old boy a u.s. citizen, was detained for several hours. 5 years old. a truer threat to our national security we never faced. an 88-year-old man and his 83-year-old wife, both wheelchair bound, and both possessing green cards, were detained for hours. he is legally blind, she recently suffered a stroke. detained for hours. a ph.d. student at stonybrook university who has lived in the united states for 12 years was detained for more than 24 hours. the mother of an active duty united states service member was detained for more than 30 hours. ll me, what danger did these people pose? what security objective is achieved by detaining them? i argue, none.

senator robree with portman when he said what was so plainly obvious to see and i quote him, this was an extreme vetting program that wasn't properly vetted. as thousands arrived at airports across the country to protest the president's executive order and hundreds of lawyers showed up to volunteer their time to write habeas petitions for those so clearly wrongly detained, president trump, living in a world all his own, tweeted the following. and i quote. all is going well. with very few problems. all is not going well, mr. president. and there are many problems. then he defended the hastily implemented order saying that, and i quote if the ban were announced with one week notice, the ban would rush into our country during that week a lot

of bad dudes out there. this is a stunningly ignorant and offensive statement that reveals to the entire world a person with no grasp of even what the refugee program is or how the visa process works. immediately preceding this tweet, the president advised everyone, quote, study the world. i encourage him to take his own advice. beyond the human toll, this foolish and ka louse policy has inflicted on scores of innocent people the executive order actually undermines our efforts to defeat terrorism, jeopardizing the very safety the order purports to provide. the chairman of the senate armed services committee, senator john mccain, along with senator lindsey graham, underscored this irony and i quote their joint statement, we fear this executive order will become a

self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. unquote. nothing further that president trump's executive order may do more to help terrorists recruit than improve our security. so i find it interesting now that the majority of my republican colleagues in the house, even the ones that voiced opposition to a muslim ban during the campaign when the president-elect trump first proposed it, including our speaker of the house are now deafeningly silent. instead, republicans are using their time today to respond to this chaos inducing executive order -- an executived orer that so clearly violates core american values but rather to repeal a rule that was actually properly vetted seven years using the best science and technology available and allowing input from public --

from the public and leaders in the industry. i caution my friends, the events of today and how you respond to them will be written in the history books of tomorrow. a question emerges from the fog that is the trump administration's full frontal attack on our constitution -- what is more important, appeasing a man who is just as likely to tweet insults at you as he is -- as he is to rush out ill-conceived and horrid executive orders protecting our constitution and the ideals of this great nation? the ideals and dedication to the rule of law that have inspired the poor, the tired, the huddled masses to seek a better and freer life here in the united states and it didn't begin with muslims, it began with the founders of this country and it was followed by countless others

from irish, italians, poland, hungarians, vietnamese, chinese, all over this worldcoming to this country to seek the kind of life that many of our ancestors sought over the course of time and some of our ancestors had no choice but to undertake. the time to act in the name of short-term political expediency is over. it is time to stand up and do what's right. it is time to protect our constitution, it's time to defend the idea that we can indeed form a more perfect union. but we cannot do that with the kind of division that's being sold by this administration and we cannot do that by spending what appears to be the month of february disapproving executive orders that the previous president issued and it seems to

me somehow or another in that fog is going to be the kind of confusion and chaos that we just witnessed this weekend. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. getting back to the issue at hand, the stream protection rule, there's a couple of -- many points that my friend from florida brought up but one occurred to me as well. is this really a midnight rule? could something started in 2008 really be considered as something that was shoved through at the last minute? i did ask that question. and the answer is a resounding yes. during the process of 2011, some of the reports came out that were leaked that the department was not -- did not see as favorable as it related to jobs and the economy and the negative impact they would have on that. so they stopped the process,

shutting out the states, violating the memorandum of understanding that they're required to work with the states on rule making process, leaving those states with no recourse but to withdraw from the process. in 2015, this congress told them to re-engage with the states which they did to some degree, providing -- make it necessary for states to pay for the scientific evidence that was necessary for them to be engaged , so there's several problems that cause this to be an issue that we need to address today. certainly making it a midnight rule, the last thing done as the administration walks out the door, qualifies this as something that we should be considering for many reasons and on many levels. at this point, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield tree minutes to the good gentleman from the state of pennsylvania, my good

friend, mr. g.t. thompson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i -- mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from washington state i've been proud to serve with, i had an opportunity to visit his district. i know natural resources are important to him. i appreciate him yielding on what is germane to this discussion which is basically trying to -- trying to claw back regulation that had no basis in science that essentially was causing harm and taking away good-paying jobs for americans. mr. speaker, i do rise today in strong support of the underlying legislation which disapproves of a midnight regulation that the obama administration made with just one month left in this presidency. the stream protection rule negatively targets coal country and will devastate communities that have already been hit hard

by job losses and reduced mining activity. making sure that america has affordable, reliable energy, electricity, you know, pennsylvania is the fifth largest coal producing state and generates roughly 25% of its electricity from coal-fired power plants. coal-fired electricity provides roughly 45,000 jobs in my state, equaling nearly $8 billion in economic impact. though coal continues to be an essential component of our energy mix this rule duplicate miss existing laws while providing very little environmental gain. what the rule does is expand the office of surface mining reclamation and enforcements regulatory authority. in effect this federal agency would overtake the regulatory authorities of individual states. this makes no sense. states should be able to

continue their own regulation of coal production. this is the epitome of a midnight rule that has more to do with empowering the federal government at the expense of coal miners' jobs than it has to do with protecting streams. o.s.m., the office of surface mining's own reports show that virtually all coal mines have no offsite impacts. the reports year other year show that coal mines are being safely operated and the lands are being successfully restored thanks to the matchful eyes of the states that regulate 90%, 97% of the mines in the united states. this rule does nothing to protect our streams that state and federal regulators are not already doing. we do not need a one size fits all approach from washington. that rarely works. in order to bring real world thinking back into regulatory process, we must act quickly to stop this rule.

i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the joint resolution of disapproval under the congressional review act. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: soap the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, both my colleagues on the other side refer to the rule they seek to disapprove as a midnight rule. well, i don't know how you take seven years of midnight that it took to develop this rule and call it a midnight rule. seven years. mr. speaker, i yield three minutes to my very good friend, the distinguished gentleman from new jersey, the ranking member of the committee and energy and commerce, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. pallone: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to strongly oppose h.j.res. 38, which would disapprove the department of the interior stream protection rule. when the obama administration

announced the final stream protection rule, it was a victory for those who live in coal country. the rule prioritizes the health of our fellow americans by establishing clear requirements for responsible surface coal mining, especially dangerous mountaintop removal mining. if this obama rule was fully enforced, it would protect or restore 6,000 miles of streams and 52,000 acres of forests over the next two decades. at the time the rule was finalized, i called for a stronger stream buffer zone protections, but the announced regulation was unundoubtedly a win for human health, clean water, and our environment. i want to be very clear about what our stream protection rule does. this rule requires that mining companies avoid practices that permanently pollute streams and sources of drinking water, damage forests, and increase flood risks. the rule requires for the first time streams around mining sites be monitored own tested for the presence of toxic chemicals like

lead and arsenic. this rule also requires mining companies to restore polluted streams and replant mined areas with native trees and vegetation. these provisions ensure mining companies take responsibility for their actions. to ensure coal country communities do not suffer because of destructive practice. we're debating an ill-conceived resolution which would negate these advances f this rule were to be overturned, american families living near impacted streams and rivers will not be protected from toxic chemicals getting into their water. what's even more appalling because the congressional review act prevents substantially similar regulations from being developed in the future, this joint resolution means these affected communities might never be impacted from the impacts of mining waste in their water. protecting our rivers and streams from the damaging impacts of mountaintop removal has been a priority for me and it's why in past congresses i have introduced the clean water protection act which would end the dumping of mining waste into

our country's rivers and streams. and i'll be reintroducing that legislation this session. but, mr. speaker, it's unfathomable that congressional republicans would pass this joint resolution and doom generations of children of families to irreparable harm. i strongly encourage all of my colleagues to oppose this resolution. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields. the gentleman from florida reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, at this time i'd like to yield three minutes to the good gentleman from ohio, mr. bill johnson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for three minutes. mr. johnson: i thank you for giving me the time to speak today. it's interesting to me that my colleagues on the other side take offense to this being referred to as a midnight rule. this is actually a midnight rule twice. let's look at how this thing

started. the bushing the bim -- administration, five years of effort went in to codifying how coal mining operations should take place around streams. the president announced during his campaign that he was going to make coal-fired energy financially, economically impossible. thereby launching his war on coal. ere was a lawsuit with the bush-era rule. the interior department and the administration settled, paying that settlement out of taxpayer dollars, and then launched an effort to rewrite that rule. when we came in in 2011, they were planning to release that rule in april.

of 2011. in only four months what took five years to codify, they wanted to redo in just four months. not only that, but they left the states out of the equation. the states complained about that. no one in the administration was listening. when the contractors then told the truth about how many tens of thousands of jobs were going to be lost as a result of this rule, the administration fired the contractor that was doing the work. not only that, but they paid them in full. now, go figure. look, we have been back and forth with the administration asking that the states be involved. asking that the rule making process be transparent. asking that if it really had to do with stream protection, then

why was it talking about and was it going to be negatively impacting underground coal mining that takes place hundreds if not thousands of feet below the surface of the earth? you answer me that. so here we're today. and now we have the congressional review act and i am so grateful that we have the opportunity to set the record straight and to do away with this rule now and forever. and i urge my colleagues to support joint resolution 38 when it comes to the floor this week. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio yields. the gentleman from washington reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, president trump's xenophobic executive order banning syrian refugees and suspending immigration from certain

countries is driven by fear. it demonstrates a callous indifference to human suffering. it ignores the constitution. and it will not only tarnish our impassenger abroad but harm our -- image abroad but harm our national security. if we defeat the previous question, i will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up my good friend, representative lofgren's bill, to overturn and defund this dangerous executive order. let me be abundantly clear for people watching this debate. the question we're about to decide is should we even have a vote on undoing trump's order. a no vote on the previous question will give us the opportunity to overturn this order. a yes vote means that the house will do nothing to stop trump's executive action. the american people watching

this debate should take notice to see how their representative votes on this important motion, and they should hold their elected officials accountable. did your member of congress turn a blind eye to trump's unconstitutional policy by voting yes? or did your representative reject this attack on our core american values and voted no? mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hastings: to discuss our proposal i yield five minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman, my good friend from california, ms. lofgren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, the president's executive order of

friday violates the law, it violates the constitution, and it violates good sense. how does it violate the law? section 202-a-1 of the immigration and nationality act specifically prohibits nationality-based discrimination in the issuance of immigrant visas and other visas. that's what this order did. now, the law is clear that individuals who pose a threat to the united states can and i should add should be barred from the united states, but you can't just legally make a blanket objection based on nationality, and i would add based on religion. and that's what the president's order does. it suspends refugee admission completely for months. who are these refugees? most of the refugees admitted last year were from burma and the congo, not from syria.

but people who have been vetted for years, many of whom are fleeing for their lives, will continue to live in fear. and it does something else. it suspends admission even of legal permanent residents from seven countries, violating their rights to equal protection and to due process. people want to keep the country safe. we all do. of course i do. but how does this order keep us safe? let me just give an example. general talib from iraq commands the ewleet american trained counterterrorism forces that have been leading the fight against isis for two years. his family relocated to the u.s. for safety and he can't visit them anymore. he said this, i have been fighting terrorism for 13 years and winning. now my kids are asking am i a terrorist? i am a four star general and i am banned from entering the

united states. i ask you, how does this advance our safety to bar our allies who are fighting isis? it doesn't. i have to correct something else. people have said that president obama had an order in 2011 barring immigrants from iraq. that's false. we did additional vetting in 2011 because we wanted to make sure that anyone coming in was thoroughly examined. that slowed things down a little bit because there were new procedures. there was never a halt to dmission from those -- who are our allies in iraq fighting with us. i would like to say this, in addition to violating the law, causing hardship for families trying to visit people in the hospital, permanent residents who are engineers trying to come back to run their companies in

a icon valley, this order is gift to isis. they are already using it to recruit enemies of our country by saying america is fighting islam. as george bush said when he was president, our argument, our fight is not with islam. our fight is with terrorism. and to issue this order with the president's rhetoric saying that we're going to make a distinction on who is admitted to the united states based on their religion is not only illegal, it's contrary to american values and it's contrary to our safety. so i hope that we instead of doing this anti-environment bill today that we will, instead, billup h.r. 724, this is a that would defund and rescind president trump's ill-advised order from friday. let me just say this.

i would like to issue a formal invitation to every republican member of this house to join me as a co-sponsor of this bill. i'll be sending out a formal note to each one of you later today, but you're on notice, please join us of. because we as american legislators need to make sure that the rule of law is upheld. and many of our constituents are very uncertain about whether the rule of law is going to survive this presidency. help give them faith and hope by co-sponsoring this bill. with that i yield back the alance of my time. to the gentleman managing the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. the gentleman from florida reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. at this point i would like to yield three minutes to the good

gentleman from west virginia, mr. mooney. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from west virginia is recognized for three minutes. mr. mooney: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in strong support of the rule and the underlying joint resolution to begin the process of rolling back president obama's war on coal. not to be confused, that is the rule we're debating here today. that's the bill before us. not the other issue being discussed. . i was proud that in the last congress, i was the lead spon so far the stream act, h.r. 1644, which would have prevented the implementation of a new coal regulation that would have cost upwards of 70,000 good-paying jobs. my legislation passed the house of representatives in january of 2016 with bipartisan support and sent a clear message to president obama's administration that the so-called stream protection rule was bad policy. unfortunately, my bill never received a vote in the u.s.

senate. despite the clear message from congress, the obama administration in the final days issued a disastrous stream protection rule. again , he did this as he was leaving the presidency in the final days before he left office. but don't let the clever name fool you. the new regulation will have far-reaching impacts for the coal industry. an industry, i might add that provides over 90% of the power generation in my home state of west virginia. the rule prescribes a one size fits all approach in defiance of commonsense and the federal law. there is no need to rewrite over 400 regulations and this rule does other than as a blatant attempt to regulate the coal industry out of business. we cannot allow this rule to move forward and thus we need to support the rule and the underlying joint resolution of disapproval. let us not forget that former

president barack obama promised that he would bankrupt the coal industry. people are losing their jobs and dignity that comes with work. our communities are also suffering. fewer jobs means less economic investment and less hope. i encourage my colleagues to visit west virginia or appalachia and see firsthand what president obama's policies have done to our communities. it is heart breaking to hear the stoyrrs -- stories and see the faces of struggling families as they try to pay their bills. i stand today with those communities in rolling back the policies that have caused so much harm and pain. these new regulations would be catastrophic to the coal industry and all of the hardworking american families that depend on coal to keep heir energy costs low. and the shame of it all is that it's preventable. we must end this war on coal now. and that process begins today.

i made a promise to my constituents of the second district of west virginia that i would fight for the coal industry and bring back jobs to my state. today is the first of many steps this congress, along with president donald trump, will take to make good on the promises we made in november. again, i encourage support for the rule and the underlaying -- underlying resolution of disapproval and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to refrain from wearing communicative badges while under recognition. the gentleman from washington reserves. the chairman recognizes the gentleman. mr. hastings: would you be so kind as to tell me how much time remains on both sides. the speaker pro tempore: sir, you have 9.5 minutes. the gentleman from washington has 11.5 minutes. mr. hastings: at this time i'm pleased to yield to the distinguished minority leader,

ms. pelosi, for the purpose of a unanimous consent qusm the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. i ask unanimous consent to bring up congresswoman lofgren's h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on individuals like the 30-year-old and was detained and transferred to county jail. the speaker pro tempore: all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. does the gentleman from washington yield for the purpose of this unanimous consent request. mr. newhouse: i do not yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman does not yield therefore the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained.

ms. lofgren: i plead for unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 to overturn president trump's refugee ban so ndividuals like hamid khalid derwish who helped the united states in iraq won't be detained at j.t.f.k. airport for 19 hours. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from washington yield for the pup of this unanimous consent request. mr. newhouse: mr. speaker, i'm reiterating my earlier announcement, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only and i will not yield for any other purpose. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman does not yield. therefore the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. mr. hastings: i yield to ms. eshoo for a unanimous consent qufment ms. eshoo: i ask unanimous con onet bring up h.r. 74 to

rescind the president's ban. the speaker pro tempore: the chair understands the gentleman from washington has not yielded for that purpose. therefore the unanimous consent cannot be entertained. mr. hastings: i yield five seconds to ms. waters for debate. ms. waters: thank you very much. i'm referring to h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban so that green visarar usef on his way home after getting engaged in kurdistan won't get detained at l.a.x. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield five seconds to mr. butterfield from north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. butterfield: i ask that president trump rescind his refugee ban on children like the 12-year-old girl who was not

allowed to board a plane to join her u.s. parents leaving her in limbo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield five seconds to mr. cardenas from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cardenas: i ask to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind the ban on women like whose life is in danger because of her husband's work with americans and who was refused boarding on a flight to the u.s. out of erbil. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman's time has expired. mr. hastings: i yield for unanimous consent request, ms. brownley from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. brownley: i rise to ask this house to bring up the lofgren bill, h.r. 724 tch would rescind president trump's refugee ban on

omen from iraq like nada who was not allowed to board a flight and remains separated from her husband a former interpreter. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentlewoman making a unanimous consent request or not? the chair understands that the gentleman from washington has not yielded for that purpose therefore the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. mr. hastings: parliamentary inquiry. am i not allowed to yield a limited amount of time to members for debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman said -- you said you were yielding to her for the purposes of a unanimous consent request. mr. hastings: i did. my question and parliamentary inquiry is am i permitted to yield a limited amount of time to each member for purposes of debate? the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman may yield to members for debate. mr. hastings: i yield five seconds to ms. -- mr. nadler from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nadler: i ask to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on dividuals like the dr. sujah sbushama a prestigious doctor at the cleveland clinic who was denied entry and forced to leave the country, therefore depriving the country of his medical services. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hastings: i yield five econds to mrs. napolitano. ms. in a poll taulow: i ask to bring up h.r. 724. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield five seconds to ms. velazquez of new york.

ms. velazquez: mr. speaker, bring up h.r. 724 which will end president trump's refugee ban so members like a 69-year-old iraqi national will not be refused boarding on a flight to visit wiz u.s. citizen family in the united states. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. mr. hastings: i yield five seconds to mr. blumenauer of oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: i hope we bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's ban on iraqi translators for the united states like faroud shah riff who was cleared to settle in the united states but stopped before he could board his flight and sent back to harm's way in iraq. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. mr. hastings: i yield five seconds to mr. levin of michigan. mr. levin: the headline in "the

washington post," muslim families sought refuge in america's heartland, now trump's visa ban is tearing them apart. one is in my district. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hastings: i yield five seconds to the gentleman, mr. gutierrez. mr. gutierrez: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 to rescind president trump's immigration ban so students can return to the university of chicago and others can continue their studies at u.s. colleges an universities. mr. hastings: i yield to ms. jayapal from washington. ms. jayapal: i ask to bring up like 24 to allow children ae one who lost his family in

bombing can come to america. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent to bring up house rule 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on women like sara, an afghani television presenter who fled amidst death threats, had waited for years to be resettled in the u.s., only to have her hopes dashed. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to the distinguished minority whip , my good friend, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding and urge we bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on children like a 5-year-old that came to dulles airport with another family, her mother was waiting for her and for four

hours she was not allowed to see her mother. that's not good policy, it's not good for the safety of our troops, it's not good for the safety of america. let's pass h.r. 724. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield five seconds to mr. snyder from illinois. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. snyder: i ask this house to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's efugee ban on women like sajar agnini who came here to care for her elderly mother who had just undergone surgery only to be detained at o'hare airport and ultimately returned to abu dhabi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: how much time do i ave remaining? the speaker pro tempore: one quarter minutes. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to

yield to the gentleman from new york, mr. serrano. mr. serrano: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 to rescind president trump's refugee ban on families like the one en route to pennsylvania from syria on approved visas and turned away and flown back to qatar. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced the unanimous con sent request cannot be entertained. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to ield 10 seconds to mr. asballah. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 which will rescind president trump's executive order to ban muslims, having been at j.f.k. airport this weekend, i stand in support of military soldiers who risk their lived and whose family members were unlawfully detained and questioned after their service to our country. this is un-american. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced the

unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to ms. schakowsky of illinois. ms. schakowsky: i ask unanimous consent which would rescind on president trump's refugee ban in light of individuals, women, like s tambings an diab, a syrian refugee and former charity worker whose family applied for resettlement to the united states but will now not be able to come. .

ecognized. i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 to rescind president trump's refugee ban on those o, like 69 yield arman and 79-year-old are christian

refugees who have applied for resettlement in the united states. the speaker pro tempore: unanimous consent requests cannot be entertained. the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to mrs. davis from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. davis: i ask to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban in light of individuals, a cardiology fellow in connecticut whose wife is a syrian doctor and whose family cannot visit because of the ban. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced the unanimous consent cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to the gentlelady from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. >> i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 to rescind president trump's refugee ban. the speaker pro tempore: the jams consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is

recognized. mr. hastings: i'm pleased to yield to my home girl 10 seconds for unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. >> i ask that we bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on individuals like amir baccari, a statistical physicist from iran who was just offered an assistant proffers job at yale university. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. 24 egentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for unanimous consent to mrs. adams of north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. adams: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on women like the 77-year-old held at dallas/fort worth airport as she tried to see her son and his family for the first time in

years. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, unanimous consent requests cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. . mr. hastings: i yield to mr. sablan for a unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, as a grandfather i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on women like the 69-year-old who was scheduled to visit the u.s. this past weekend to meet her new grandson but is now in limbo. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. speaker, i yield for a unanimous consent request ms. chu from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. chu: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on families like the syrian refugee family of six who are scheduled to arrive in

cleveland on tuesday, on january 31, but are now blocked indefinitely. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm very pleased to yield to ms. clark from new york for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. clarke: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind donald trump's refugee ban and help unify the family of fariah, a refugee who hispaniced her life for united states forces in iraq and whose father, mother, and sister are now barred from entering the united states of america. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield to mrs. maloney from new york for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. mrs. maloney: mr. speaker, i ask

unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind the president's refugee ban that impacts green card holders like the woman located in iran with her 3-year-old u.s. citizen daughter. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield 10 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. detazzo: h.r. 724 would repeal trump's overreaching executive order that purports to make america safer. it's time to restore american values. one of the republicans afraid of? if you support his action, bring up the bill and vote against it. if you don't support his action, we're giving you an opportunity to restore the lawful rights of american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. as previously, the unanimous

consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida. there hastings: mr. speaker, i yield 10 seconds to the -- mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield 10 seconds to the distinguished gentlelady from texas. ms. jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: i don't know why we don't bring up h.r. 724 which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on student lie the iranian born an he throw polgi student who left the us to us carry out research is now likely to be unable to return to defend this thesis if you believe in this ban, if you do not believe in a ban, bring it up so we can vote against this ban. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. -- the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for a unanimous consent request to miss torees -- torest from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california is recognized. miss torest: thank you, mr. speaker. this is what a refugee looks like. i ask for unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's

refugee ban and help unify the family of an iraqi refugee who is now separated indefinitely from her husband and children because of the ban. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized mr. hastings: i'm very pleased to yield to my good friend that i serve on the rules committee with, mr. mcgovern, for 10 seconds, for debate. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i ask my republican friends to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's appalling and discriminatory refugee ban on women like samira, a scientist from ire ran who was set to begin a project to study tuberculosis at harvard medical school and was stopped from boarding her flight to the united states. let us have a vote. let us have a little democracy in the people's house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for a

unanimous consent to ms. shea-porter. ms. shea-porter: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's refugee ban on individuals like the syrian skin cancer researcher living in germany whose visa to visit colleagues in philadelphia has now been revoked. let us vote. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield to mr. boyle from pennsylvania for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. boyle: thank you. mr. speaker, you probably won't be surprised to learn i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, to rescind president trump's appalling refugee ban on individuals like the young scientist in iran who was awarded a fellship to study medicine at harvard but whose visa has been indefinitely suspended. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained.

the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for 10 seconds to mr. sherman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. sherman: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's outrageous ban on muslims so that the san fernando valley's own, darren, can be reunited with his wife who is a humanitarian worker working with afghan war victims in iran. she has been denied even the chance to schedule a visa interview at our embassy in abu dhabi. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield 10 seconds to the gentleman from california, mr. huffman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's unconstitutional muslim ban that

led to a stanford university graduate student who has lived in the united states since 1993 getting handcuffed and then detained at j.f.k. airport for five hours. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for a unanimous consent to mr. johnson from georgia. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's dold cold and callous refugee ban like travelers from a u.k. resident who holds an iranian passport, due to fly back to glass cao via smork and had her visa revoked. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. ruiz from california for unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. ruiz: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president

trump's refugee ban and help unify the family of muktar and his wife who spent 24 years in a refugee camp after fleeing somalia and continue to be separate interested their children who still live in the camp. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield to mr. can rarea from california for unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. can rarea: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724 that will rescind president trump's refugee ban in who of mothers like arrived five years ago and going through the naturalization process but separated from her sister and two children who were set to arrive in mid february. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for unanimous consent request to ms. kaptur from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. ms. kaptur: i thank the gentleman for yielding and ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's misguided refugee ban scheduled to arrive today in toledo from war-torn iraq was a fully vetted mother and her three young daughters, one of whom is less than a year old, they are forced to remain in tunisia with their futures uncertain. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield for a unanimous consent to mr. tonko from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. tonko: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's tragic refugee ban that would have women like the syrian violinist who has performed at the white house and worried about her family that remain in alpeppo. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announceders 9

unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield to ms. tsongas from massachusetts for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from massachusetts is recognized. ms. tsongas: thank you. i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, which would rescind president trump's refugee ban that keeps apart families like that of lukea who had planned to move to harvard medical school in march but whose iranian wife would not be able to join him. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i yield to ms. delauro from connecticut for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized. ms. delauro: i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 724, president rescind trump's refugee ban on women like shahaddy, a philosophy student to the university of at this rein -- university of tehran accepted to new york university but now unsure if she

would be able to attend. the speaker pro tempore: as previously announced, the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, parliament inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: state the inquiry. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, with the members that have come here and asked for unanimous consent by with it being denied virtue of my friend from washington not agreeing to the unanimous consent, and with the notion in mind that the period for debate is what is to be recognized. my question is, do the people who did come here and seek unanimous consent, although it was not accepted, have the opportunity to insert a statement in the record signifying of their intentions with reference to the matter at hand?

he speaker pro tempore: the speaker pro tempore: members may insert certain remarks under the previous. mr. hastings: thank you very much. i would urge my friend from washington through you that i have no further speakers and i'll be prepared to close when he is. if he'd be so kind, again, to give us the amount of time each of us have. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has five minutes and 55 seconds remaining. the gentleman from washington has 11 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. at this time i'd like to yield to the majority leader of the republican conference, mr. mccarthy of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in favor of the rule and the underlying

legislation. since the beginning of this congress, we have devoted ourselves most prominently to a single goal. making washington work for the people again. and there's one thing here in washington that consistently stands against our people, our economy, and our constitution. the federal bureaucracy. and nobody even knows how many there are. they spend their lives thinking up new rules and the rules they produce weigh down businesses. destroy jobs, and limit american rights. career bureaucrats who can't be voted out of office wield punishing authority with little to no accountability. they are agents of the status quo and the revolving door of federal employees moving to lobbying arms and consulting

firms breed thousands of regulations that enrich the connected and powerful. sometimes at the great expense of the average american. this is the swamp. this is what opposes the people and we are draining it. in recent weeks this house has already started our two-part plan. to trip the burach -- to strip the bureaucracy of the power, we started to change the structure in washington by passing the rains act thndthand the regulatory accountability act. this week we begin part two, targeting specific rules and stripping them from the books. now, there have been no industry than ica more regulated the energy industry. we're going to use the congressional review act to repeal the stream protection rules that could destroy tens of thousands of mining jobs and put up to 64% of our country's coal reserves off limits. then we'll take on president

obama's 11th hour b.l.m. meethain emissions requirement. -- methane emissions requirement. the oil industry in america has already drastically reduced methane emissions while increasing output and the e.p.a. has the authority to regulate air emissions. instead of helping the environment this rule could cost the american energy industry up to $1 billion by 2025 and force smaller operations, especially out west, to shut down and lay off employees. so this friday, the house will get rid of it. we will also take the ax to the s.e.c. disclosure rule which now, if you can believe it, targets publicly traded, american energy companies with even more regulatory compliance while letting foreign companies off the hook. washington should put american companies first. not put them at a disadvantage to foreign competitors.

but mr. speaker, it's not just energy. that would be bad enough. but under president obama, the bureaucracy has even threatened our basic constitutional rights. a new rule from the social security administration would increase scrutiny on up to 4.2 million disabled americans if they attempt to purchase firearms. for the completely unrelated circumstance of having someone help manage your finances. social security recipients could be kept from exercising their second amendment right. in an effort to due process, the bureaucracy has even attempted to blacklist from federal contract any business accused of violating labor laws. and that could be before the company has a chance to defend itself in court. every single one of these will be gone. with a vote in the house a vote

in the senate and the signature of president trump, we'll get rid of every one of these job-killing and disruptive regulations. the house is always at the service of the people. now we're making the bureaucracy serve the people too. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california ields. the gentleman from florida is elect niced. mr. hastings: i ask again through you, mr. speaker, if my friend is prepared to close. mr. newhouse: we have no further speakers, yes, we're prepared to close. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. speaker. the majority leader just got through saying that all of the things that they're getting ready to do to drain the swamp. my feeling about what's happening, and aisle speaking for myself, is they may very well drain the swamp but if you take out the alligators and you put in crocodiles and you put in

snakes, you've just made the swamp just that much more dangerous to the american people. mr. speaker, the cavalier nature by which my friends across the aisle approach the awesome responsibility of governing is as disturbing as it is disappointing. you all own this now. you're in charge. and although i may understand the motive desire to turn things on their head, you all would be wise to come to the realization sooner rather than later that your actions affect real people. all you have to do is just see what transpyred this past weekend. -- plan spired this past weekend. -- transpired this past weekend. the children, the elderly, the students waiting in airports across our country, trying to escape their oppressors or

trying to return to their lives here at home, are real people. you heard them identified in the requests of my colleagues who came forward. the children, the elderly and all other folks who have to live in an environment that's less clean an more likely to make them sick because of your flippant approach here today are real people. to be taken seriously. you must ask seriously within that context, i would have to surmise that you all would be judged and found wanting. to truly convey the devastating consequences of what has happened these past few days, i could quote from one of the founding fathers about the ideal of freedom from religious persecution. or i could recite for you the inscription on the statue of liberty which has guided and

inspired generations of immigrants and refugees as they have come here seeking a better life for themselves and their family. or i could quote from luke 10:25 in which jesus tells the paraable of the good samaritan. i will not. instead, i'll leave you with the words of dr. amir adari, a bare yat rick surgeon and united states citizen who has lived in the united states for nearly 40 years, and who was detained for questioning this past weekend. his statement, and i quote, i wanted to live somewhere that celebrated freedom. freedom of speech. freedom of religion. all of these kinds of things. that's what everyone in the world thinks about the u.s.a.

and unfortunately, when these types of actions are taken, the image is not the same anymore. unquote. i urge my colleagues to oppose this rule today and the underlying measure and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida yields. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. newhouse: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to take a minute to remind the american people and my friends across the aisle that we're here today to, as the minority leader said, to begin the process of unwinding burdensome regulations that are truly stifling job creation and hurting our friends and our families in each and every one of our neighborhoods across the country. many from the other side have tried to distract from -- with unrelated issues. i just want to be clear that the rule today does not address

immigration. in any way. and none of their requests went through the regular and bipartisan process to clear such requests. so let's focus on why we're here. we're here because we must take a firm stand against the overly burdensome and restrictive regulations that have been issued in the waning days of the previous administration. by passing this c.r.a., we can rescind the final stream protection rule which o.s.m. produced without input from state responseable for enforcing mining regulations and which disregards existing regulations on both the state and the federal level that have proven effective. this regulation will have devastating effects on mining communities across the country. leading to significant job losses and higher electricity costs, all while weakening u.s. energy scommurt for decades. the stream protection rule will

drastically reduce our access to coal and our ability to develop new, clean coal technologies, resulting in reduced domestic energy production and tens of thousands of lost jobs in coal producing states, as well as industries reliant on this energy that are across the country. if we fail to pass the underlying bill, the rule's devastating impacts will be felt far and wide in our great land. as approximately 78,000 mining jobs will be lost. which is in addition to the tens of thousands of mining jobs that have already been lost in the last eight years. mr. speaker, coal is essential to the u.s. economy. provides affordable energy that accounts for almost 40% of the nation's electricity supply. almost 0% -- almost 20% in my

good friend's home state of florida. because of its abundance, reliability, and affordability, eelect trissties generated from coal is generally 30% cheaper than other alternative energy sources. additionally, at current consumption rates, our country has more than 250 years of oh remaining coal reserves, ensuring we'll have energy security here at home for generations to come. passing h.j.res. 38 will protect american jobs and families from yet another burdensome regulation that failed to follow the basic tenets of transparency, inclusivity, and cooperation with stake holders, and most importantly the american people. now is the time for congress to overturn this unparalleled executive overreach and implement policies that protect communities long forgotten by

the former administration. the c.r.a. was designed for this exact purpose and we now have a unique opportunity to pass this legislation through both chambers and see it signed into law. mr. speaker, this is a good, straightforward rule, allowing for consideration of an important resolution that will ensure mining communities and hard working families are not crushed by another crippling federal regulation. i believe this rule and the underlying legislation are strong measures that are important to our country's future. i urge my colleagues to support house resolution 70 and the underlying bill. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no.