and now to live coverage of the u.s. house here on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by he guest chaplain, imam omar suleiman from the yaqeen institute for islamic research in irving, texas. the chaplain: let us pray. in the name of god, the most compassionate, the most merciful, our sustainer, our guide, ever present, never unaware, infinitely able, your servants in your loving care. guide us to pure convictions that inspire in us the courage to match those convictions. we pray for peace, not war. love, not hate.

benevolence, not greed. unity, not division. and we commit ourselves to not betraying our prayers with actions that contradict them. let us be for truth, no matter who is for or against it, and justice no matter who or for it is against and hope no matter what obstacles lie ahead. let us not d be deterd by the hatred that has claimed the lives of innocent worshipers across the world but emboldened by the love that gathered them together to remember you and gathered us together to remember them. let us not be overcome by the darkness of evil, nor the slumber of indifference that turns human beings into hashtags and neighbors into enemies. let us be the light that we seek from you. guide the deliberations of our members of congress to just decisions and guide our nation to the abode of reconciliation.

may we honor one another, glorify you together, and inspire the world to be better. men. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the chamber her approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from montana, mr. jean forte. -- mr. gianforte. mr. gianforte: 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: for what purpose does the gentlewoman seek recognition? ms. johnson: to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute.

ms. johnson: thank you, madam speaker. imam today to thank suleiman for offering the opening prayer before the house of representatives and to recognize the commencement of ramadan. the muslim holy month of fasting and spiritual renewal. he offers counsel and religious guidance to many muslims in my district and throughout the north texas region. we are fortunate to live in a nation that embraces religious diversity and interfaith understanding. i am proud to have introduced a resolution to recognize the commencement of ramadan and to commend the muslim community in the united states and throughout the world for their faith. i thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 further requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam 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 for one minute. mr. takano: thank you, madam speaker. [speaking spanish]

thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will provide a translation of his remarks. for what purpose does the gentleman from montana seek recognition? gian villante madam speaker, i seek o-- mr. gianforte: madam speaker, i seek 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. mr. gianforte: madam speaker, i rise today to raise mental health awareness during mental health month. according to the national alliance on mental illness, about 164,000 montanans have a

mental health condition. unfortunately, mental health care is not available to many montanans. in fact, over 50% of montanans live in an area where there's a shortage of mental health professionals. i recently brought together providers, leaders, and advocates in montana to discuss how we can improve mental health care, substance abuse treatment, and suicide prevention. they told me about the challenges they face to provide care and of their promising progress. they told me about resources like telemedicine that could improve treatment and help fill coverage gaps. individuals impacted by mental illness can lead healthy, fulfilling lives. access to treatment, though, is critical. let's work together in a

bipartisan way to address mental health care. our communities depend on it. thank you, madam speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, two years ago, our republican friends voted to repeal the affordable care act. they brought in cases of beer to celebrate. they piled into luxury buses that ferried them to the white house and celebrated the attempt to kick millions off their health insurance. fortunately, we stopped them. this bill never became law, but two years later they're up to the same old tricks. the president trump is asking a federal court to strike down protections for coverage for pre-existing conditions, but the entire affordable care act. talk about not getting the

memo. the american people sent a message to president trump in november and to my republican colleagues on the other side of the aisle. they want government to stop working for special interests and start working for the people again. that's why house democrats are about to pass legislation to strengthen protections for folks with pre-existing conditions, h.r. 986. while president trump continues his assault on the affordable care act, democrats are going to continue our work for the people. by passing legislation to make sure every american has access to the quality, affordable health care they deserve. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to honor the life of volunteer firefighter mitch titus. over 15 years ago, chief titus took the helm as chief of the winona lake fire department. while he worked a full-time job also in excavation, he was also

a very dedicated public servant. in the wake of his tragic passing on sunday, chief titus has been described by fellow colleagues and friends as, quote, very dedicated and loyal, a fireman's firefighter, a great guy, a great leader, and a great fire leader. it's people like mitch titus who embody the very best that our nation has to offer. while all of the county and the rest of indiana mourn his loss, his endless dedication to his county and to his fellow people will be remembered for many years to come. i offer my deepest condolences to his three children, his family and friends, as we mourn the loss of chief titus. thank you. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

>> madam speaker, i rise today because i have heard from too many parents and siblings from upstate new york who lost a loved one from opioid overdose. overdose fatalities are the leading cause of death for americans under 50. i rise because addressing the opioid crisis means understanding and treating addiction. we must see addiction for what it is, not a weakness, but a disease that requires treatment. i am proud to have introduced legislation to address this crisis, h.r. 2482, the main street addiction treatment act. this bipartisan bill would end a redundancy in federal law that restricts health providers from prescribing a proven treatment for addiction. to tackle this crisis, we must go beyond taking the needed steps of holding big pharma accountable and creating more drug courts. mr. delgado: we must treat the

addiction. madam speaker, we cannot let the wrong-headed stigmatizeation of addiction undermine our acting. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. and i rise today to wish a very happy 70th birthday to billy joel, a resident to the greatest congressional district in america, the first congressional district of new york. he has song about allentown. he's sung about vienna but he never forgot where he came from. it's important, whether you're in politics or music or business to never forget where you come from. he would sing songs about our bays, our beaches, our boaters, our fishermen, our restaurants, our media. he is someone who, to this very

day, looks at long island as his home. he has a concert tonight celebrating his 70th birthday with so many fans. for everyone that works in the first congressional district, from those from long island, happy birthday, billy joel. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom oregon seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. blumenauer: i note the passing of larry handily, the international president of the international transit union. he was a big man with a big heart and a passion for transportation. not just for what it meant for his members, although he was their tireless champion, he had a bold vision for what his union meant to enrich tens of millions of lives every day for people who use transit and another 100 million who benefit even if they don't ride.

he started as a bus driver, rose through the ranks to become not just the transit union president, but one of the finest of american labor leaders. we are sad for the loss, for larry's wife, thelma, his daughter, monica, is on, larry jr., and almost 200 million -- 200,000 of his members. we're grateful for the enormous contributions he made to enrich the lives of us all. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i rise to seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today in support of h.r. 2460, the first piece of legislation i've introduced as a member of congress and one that reduces the regulatory burden on the hardworking men and women of indiana and

america's transportation and agriculture community. mr. pence: the modernization agriculture transportation act of 2019 will ensure our truckers, farmers, and producers have the flexibility needed to keep america's agriculture industry moving. the bill ensures that transportation and agriculture stakeholders are included in the rulemaking process so that relevant stakeholders can share their experiences and knowledge. i'm proud to lead this bipartisan effort with house agriculture committee chairman collin peterson of minnesota. improving our infrastructure is not a partisan issue. sixth district hoosiers sent me to washington to get things done, and that's exactly what i'm doing. i ask my colleagues to support h.r. 2460. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new mexico seek recognition? >> madam 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 gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise to call attention to the challenges rural communities face to access basic health care. in new mexico, i've seen firsthand health challenges these areas face. they include expecting mothers who have to drive for hours, often across state lines for every single prenatal appointment. ms. torres small: they have to get on the bus in the middle of a night for drar's appointment in albuquerque the next day. it includes teenagers in crisis, facing a long waiting list for a much-needed mental health care appointment. and it includes rural and community hospitals on the verge of closing their doors. this is what rural america faces. even with these hardships, we are often the first to be forgotten when legislators and health care experts discuss health care quality, access and affordability. so as congress begins discussing how to decrease the

cost of health care insurance, to lower the cost of prescription drugs, to provide mental health care and protect millions of americans with pre-existing conditions, i urge you to consider the pressure points that rural communities face. that is how we deliver better health care across to all our constituents. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, may 4 marked two years since house republicans passed their trumpcare legislation to dismantle the affordable care act. if passed, this reckless bill would have rip aid way health care for millions.

thanks to americans' tireless activism this bill did not become law but that wasn't the end of the crusade to protect our care. this administration continues to sabotage the affordable care act, implementing rules and gutting programs in a cruel conspiracy to undermine it and people are pre-existing conditions are some of the most vulnerable in a very dangerous game. madam speaker, the affordable care act with its strong protections help maryland of these americans obtain health insurance for the very first time. but now this administration is using a back door guidance to allow junk insurance plans the ability to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. that's why i'm glad the house plans to vote on h.r. 986 which would stop this move and protect americans living with pre-existing conditions. i will proudly vote for this

bill. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to urge that any long-term infrastructure agreement reached between congress and the president must invest in the resiliency of coastal communities. lake ontario is already over 11 inches higher than average and as rain falls and water levels continue to climbing, my community and others like it are bracing for yet another season of devastating flooding. we must take proactive steps to adjust to changing weather patterns, the impacts of plan 014 and improve our community's ability to withstand, recover, and adapt to weather-related events. the army corps of engineers will soon be conducting a study to develop a coastal resiliency

plan and it's imperative that it includes -- that any long-term plan include funding for these findings. a package thatto offers these. hank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? >> address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker, this week the nation has seen this congress deal with the questions of the rule of law and the constitution. but this congress believes that

our work is for the people and at the same time, our oversight on issues of national security are immense and important. yesterday, i raised the question military presence off the shores of iran. for no explanation has been given to the united states congress on the need for that presence. and having been a member of congress doing the -- during the iraq war and certainly during the war in afghanistan, committed to the men and women of the united states military, only congress can declare war. this administration must advise . d seek consent of congress for those of us concerned about national security must be

briefed and must be made aware to protect the american people. so i stand here today to say the rule of law is important. the national security of this country is important. no war without the involvement and engagement of the united states congress. we believe in peace and diplomacy. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. chalet lay -- ms. shalala: by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 354 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlewoman mean to call up house resolution 357. ms. shalala: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar 22,

house resolution 357. resolved, that at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 986, to provide that certain guidance related to waivers for state innovation under the patient protection and affordable care act shall have no force or effect. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. no amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member

designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, at any time after adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2157, making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2019, and for other purposes.

the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on appropriations. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 116-12, modified by the amendment printed in part b of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the house and in the committee of the whole. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. clause 2-e of rule 21 shall not apply during consideration of the bill. no further amendment to the

bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part c of the report of the committee on rules. each such further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the house or in the committee of the whole. all points of order against such further amendments are waived. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the house with such further amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for one hour. ms. shalala: madam speaker, for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from texas, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only. i ask unanimous consent that all members be given five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. shalala: madam speaker, on tuesday, the rules committee met and reported a rule. house resolution 357. providing for consideration of h.r. 986, the protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act, under a structured rule. the rule makes in order 12 amendments. the rule provides one hour of -- equally ly and

divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on commerce and it provides for consideration of h.r. 2157, the supplemental appropriations act under a structured rule. the rule self-executes a manager's amendment and makes in order 10 amendments to h.r. 2157. finally, the rule provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on appropriations. madam speaker, i yield myself uch time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. and the gentleman from texas -- excuse me. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. shalala: thank you. i rise in support of the two bills in this rule, h.r. 986, the protecting merps with pre-existing conditions act of 2019, and h.r. 2157, the

supplemental appropriations act. h.r. 986 will ensure that the patient protections and benefits of the affordable care act are protected. it will prevent this administration from doing administratively what they failed to do legislatively -- make health insurance inaccessible for the at least 52 million americans who live with pre-existing conditions. the administration is trying to coax states, through misuse of the 1332 innovation waivers, to make available plans that don't cover all of the essential health benefits that the a.c.a. requires or don't cover pre-existing conditions, possibly with tax credits. this is consumer fraud. it is a misuse of taxpayer money. the administration would make it possible for plans to deny

coverage or charge higher premiums based on health status. under their guidance, plans could have lifetime or annual limits. they would be able to charge higher rates to older people than the a.c.a. allows and are not required to cover essential health benefits. it will hurt consumers who think they are buying comprehensive health insurance and then find out that their plan doesn't cover whatever health crisis they may be facing. the guidance if the administration is a backdoor to destroying the affordable care act, h.r. 986 makes sure that that will not happen. i also rise to support h.r. 2157. the disaster supplemental will provide $17.2 billion in disaster relief to communities across america, including my own

state of florida. the house passed a similar bill in january which the senate failed to take up. since january, there have been floods in the midwest, tornadoes in alabama, and we've included additional money to fund those disasters. no american should wait for assistance while congress squabbles. seven months have passed since hurricane michael devastated the panhandle in florida. ncluding completely leveling tyndall air force base. it's time pass bolt of these bills. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserve the gentleman from texas is recognized. . mr. burgess: i thank the gentlelady for yielding me the customary 30 minutes and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. burgess: we're considering a bill that appropriates a little over $17 billion for disasters affecting all parts of the united states. as members of congress, we are elected to serve the people, and part of that duty is providing emergency aid when disaster strikes. i'm supportive of disaster relief, and we certainly could have provided this crucial aid months ago. at this time, our communities are still in need. this is the third time that the house will consider a relief bill to address the same set of disasters. on 20, december, 2018, the -- on 20 december, 2018, the house of representatives passed a continuing resolution to fund the government through february 8 that also included delm -- almost $8 billion of disaster relief. the house passed a supplemental appropriations package that would have provided a little over $12 billion in aid, but at

the last minute during the rules committee debate, democrats added a short-term full government continuing resolution through a manager's amendment that did not include president trump's request for border security funding. as a result, the government remained closed without providing a resolution to the problem. it has now been four months since the house last considered providing disaster aid, long enough that additional disasters have struck our country, necessitating an increase number. the bill before us seeks to provide relief for the funding for hurricanes michael and florence as well as continued support from hurricanes harvey, irma, and maria. the wildfires in california will be included in this supplemental, as well as the severe storms and flooding in multiple states, including texas. also, the alaska earthquake, typhoons in the northern mayor yawna islands and -- mariana

islands and guam. volcanic eruptions in hawaii. devastating floods across the midwest. this third iteration of disaster relief legislation is similar to a bill passed by the house in january of this year with an additional $500 million for the department of agriculture's emergency conservation program to rehabilitate damaged farmland. $1.5 billion for the army corps of engineers for projects and flood mitigation. and $1 billion for the community development block grant disaster recovery account for rebuilding houses, businesses, and public infrastructure. the bill also includes $600 million for disaster nutrition benefits in puerto rico as that island recovers from hurricane maria. the president has expressed concern about puerto rico's management of the billions in

disaster aid the island received. senate republicans are working with the white house on a compromise, but democrats have continued pushing this legislation forward without engaging the other two parties who will be required in order for the bill to become law. this bill also includes language prohibiting any funds from being used for the construction of a border wall. the crisis on our southern border is not a natural disaster. it is a humanitarian and security disaster, one that we can stop and take steps to prevent in the future. but democrats refuse to accept our customs and border patrol, officers are overwhelmed. that our resettlement facilities are near capacity, and our immigration judges are facing years of backlogged cases. this is a disaster that we can do something about now. but rather than negotiating in

good faith, democrats have chosen once again to bring up a bill that will not pass the senate. i'm disappointed these controversial provisions are included in the bill. it does beg the question, when are we going to get back to the business of legislating? as an aside, the house adjourned yesterday at 2:00 in the afternoon. plenty of time to continue working on some of these problems. but for whatever reason, we decided not to do that. now, the second bill under consideration, h.r. 986, is supposed to protect americans with pre-existing conditions. it has a very catchy title, but despite that catchy title, the bill does nothing to enhance pre-existing conditions protections under the affordable care act. the first vote that republicans called this congress was a motion to require legislation protecting individuals with pre-existing conditions. rather surprisingly, the democrats voted against that previous question, blocking the motion. in 2017, as part of the proposed replacement for the

affordable care act, republicans included legislation that would have preserved access for those with pre-existing conditions. again, this was not supported by house democrats. h.r. 986 eliminates health care choices for states you by infringing upon the authority that was given to the department of health and human services under the affordable care act. section 1332 of the affordable care act established the waiver for state innovation. this allowed states to waive certain a.c.a. regulations in order to provide flexible coverage through new state health care programs. the secretary of the department of health and human services was required, was required to promulgate regulations for the granting of these waivers, maintaining that new state health programs stay within the guardrails provided by law. look, my constituents in north

texas are consistently concerned about not having access to affordable health care. i take meeting after meeting with families who say they are suffering from the high cost of health care and prescription drugs, deductibles and co-pays. texans are struggling to afford their health insurance, and i'm sure we're not the only ones experiencing these premiums and deductibles. what good is health insurance if you are afraid to use it because you cannot afford your deductibles and co-pays? this is an issue i would like to see us tackle. yet, we are here today discussing a bill with a very misleading title that would take flexibility away from states. during the rules committee hearing on tuesday, we discussed innovative strategies for providing high-quality and affordable health insurance, expanding consumer choice, and some of the positive results for states that have implemented these waivers. in no way did we discuss removing a.c.a. protections for

people with pre-existing conditions. in fact, i pointed out the centers for medicare and medicaid services, the administrator stated in her remarks at the c.m.s. national forum on state empty pourm and won't quoted, a waiver undermine these protections, closed quotes, and yet, democrats have titled this bill, protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act of 2019. this is clearly an attempt to coerce members of congress into voting for a bill that actually scales back the guidance recently issued for the application of state innovation waivers. energy and commerce ranking member greg walden offered an amendment to more appropriately title the bill, this bill has nothing to do with protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act. i hope this amendment will alert members to the partisan word play of the democrats when

we should be focusing on improving health -- the health insurance marketplace. taking flexibility away from states is one step closer to a single payer government-run health care system, and the single payer government-run health care system would only further deteriorate our nation's health care. the affordable care act was one step in that direction, and while it is clear the affordable care act has proven to be nothing but affordable for americans, section 1332 waivers would have allowed states the flexibility to employ innovation that works for their citizens. to date, eight states, alaska, hawaii, maine, maryland, minnesota, new jersey, oregon, and wisconsin have approved state innovation waivers, and seven have created their own reinsurance programs. premiums in these states -- and this is important. premiums in these seven states were almost 20% lower on

average in the first year of enactment. maryland, maryland saw the greatest percent change with the individual average market premium coming down by more than 40%. 43.4%, to be precise. again, section 1332 of the affordable care act explicitly gives the department of health and human services the authority to provide guidance surrounding these innovation waivers. as more states submit applications, the administration has learned more out what hurdles states must traverse in order to obtain these waivers. one limit to a state's ability to apply for an innovation waiver is that the state must have already enacted a state law establishing authority to pursue and implement the waiver. for a state like texas, where the state legislature meets only every two years, this can be a substantial barrier. the recent trump administration

guidance provides clarity, stating that in certain circumstances existing state legislation, coupled with a duly enacted state regulation or executive order could satisfy this requirement. this guidance, 1332 guidance removes some hurdles while maintaining the integrity of the coverage guardrails established by law. those stafftory requirements maintain -- statutory requirements maintained -- maintains that it would provide st sharing against excessive out-of-pocket costs. i would like to reiterate this is a misleading bill title and that h.r. 986 will restrict health care choices for states. once again, we are using the valuable time on the floor of the united states house of representatives to debate

something that will not solve the issues of affordability in our nation's health care system and really has no chance of becoming law. it is unfair to patients who are not going to the doctor because, on top of their monthly premiums, their deductible is so high they cannot afford the visit. we need a comprehensive solution to address the high patient out-of-pocket costs. this bill moves us in the wrong direction. it will inhibit innovation and much-needed flexibility in our state insurance markets. as a physician, i cannot support such a piece of legislation. so i will urge opposition to the rule and i will reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, a distinguished member of the energy and commerce committee, ms. carsor. -- ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman is recognized for three minutes. ms. castor: i thank my friend and colleague from florida for yielding time. madam speaker, i rise today in support of the rule and the two very important bills the house of representatives will consider. the first is house bill 986 by my colleague, representative kuster from new hampshire, that will work to protect our neighbors who have a pre-existing health condition like cancer or heart disease. unfortunately, the trump administration is trying to weaken those protections. they're doing so in the courts and through congress, so it's very important that the house of representatives pass this new -- pass into law protections for our neighbors with pre-existing conditions. in fact, the name of the bill is protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act. passing this bill will help keep health care accessible and affordable for all americans. the second bill is also very important, h.r. 2157. it provides about $17 billion

in disaster relief to americans who need it, who have suffered through horrendous natural disasters. it was october 10, 2018, when florida took a direct hit from hurricane michael. it was one of the most powerful storms to make landfall in the united states. it slammed into the panhandle with tremendous -- and caused tremendous damage and destruction. to help meet the disaster needs, the house of representatives -- the democratic-led house, one of the first bills we passed was a disaster relief package on january 16, 2019. it passed by a wide margin with a bipartisan vote. unfortunately, it ran into opposition from the senate and the white house. so i urge my colleagues now to come back together in a bipartisan way and use this bill to break the logjam in the senate, keep focused on our fellow americans who need disaster assistance.

disaster used to be bipartisan. we need to return to those days and pass it in a timely manner. thank you and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: while our last volt was just after 2:00 p.m. yesterday, the house adjourned after 3:00. i did want to make that correction. i'm now pleased to yield two minutes to the gentleman from ennsylvania, mr. meuser. mr. meuser: thank you, mr. burgess. i think everyone in this chamber can agree that individuals with pre-existing conditions should be protected and american people should have access to affordable, quality health care. this bill falls short of achieving or making progress toward these important goals. this bill showcases the

fundamental misunderstanding of section 1332 waivers which allow states to pursue more creative and innovative strategies to provide their residents with access to high quality health insurance. this bill rolls back the ability of states to innovate lower costs and expand coverage options for patients and families. additionally, this bill is disingenuous in suggesting that it's protecting individuals with pre-existing conditions when section 32 waivers already require states to do so. rather than calling the the protecting americans with pre-existing conditions act this bill is more appropriately named the don't let states innovate act. not surprisingly this bill also neglects to address the grievous shortcomings of obamacare. in my district not a day gos by that i don't hear about the untenable cost of obamacare it's no secret that obamacare led to

skyrocketing premiums and deductibles, offering anything but affordable care to the american people. however the data clearly shows that states using section 1332 waivers to create their own reinsurance programs saw premiums drop an average of 20%. we must make our country's health care system work better by supporting choice, access andened affordability. this puts us on the path toward one size fits all, government-centered health care and the democrat vision of a topdown health care system is one i cannot support. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule and the underlying bill. i yield back. mr. burgess: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. merchandise shalala: i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is

ecognized for three minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentlelady from florida and i thank her for her leader shirp. -- for her leadership. the american people will insist that this legislation passes. my republican friends, since my time in helping to pass the affordable care act, have never offered a plan to ensure that america's wonderful citizens have good health care and that those with pre-existing conditions such as many of us including myself are able to access health care and many of my constituents in houston, texas. let me be clear on what this legislation does, as i thank representative kuster for her leadership. h.r. 986 which i'm strongly in support of. h.r. 986 is a saving grace because what it does is it stops

the trump administration in their tracks from watering down an opportunity of flexibility. section 8-1332. here's what's going to happen if we do not pass this legislation. we will stop the coverage of pre-existing conditions. period. there'll be no protection. you'll see a rising cost in health care, short-term plans will be thrown to the people and other plans that will destabilize the risk pool. you will limit access to comprehensive coverage because the trump guidance says just give access, don't worry about if the plan even allows you to be admitted into a hospital. finally, it'll reduce the benefits like maternal -- maternity coverage and mental health care and comple of prescription drugs. is that what americans want? every day many my district i'm seeing people desperate for health care. there's been not one proposal coming here.

i rise as well to support the supplemental appropriation because i've been to puerto rico and the u.s. virgin islands. we need these resources. but i've also seen the devastation of victims who are impacted by hurricane michael in alabama, florida, and georgia, the damage in nebraska, missouri, south dakota, iowa and kansas, and now in houston 10, inches of rain and flooding and more rain coming. i know that people who are impacted by hurricane harvey are still suffering. and so this particular legislation appropriations is important. it is important in particular to ensure that we add more funding and that we shore up the train -- infrastructurism submitted amendments that tchovered idea of improving fema, that it woult stay longer, that it would have oversight to know if it's helping people. to increase energy services that they don't black out so people are suffering and to make sure we have the right kind of water. there are many other elements to the appropriations bill which i

hope to debate at a later time. but this rule should be supported. let me additionally go back to 986 legislation and indicate, pre-existing diseases cover things like sickle cell which one in 13 african-american babies are born with. triple negative breast cancer, the most deadly and causes immediate or short-term life to white women, plaque women, asian pacific islander -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. ms. jackson lee: diabetes, hiv-aids. this is why h.r. 986 is important and why the appropriations bill is important. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you, mr. speaker. let me yield myself 30 seconds for a response before i yield to the gentleman from iowa. sickle cell, this congress, or last congress, passed the first comprehensive standalone sickle cell bill in as long as i can remember thrasms partial

re-authorization in 2004 signed by president bush that was part of the tax bill. but danny davis' bill passed through our committee, passed through the senate, passed on the floor of the house. in the previous congress last year. and as a consequence, for the first time in four decades, new sickle cell therapies are coming through the national institute of health. i need to yield one minute to the gentleman from iowa, mr. king. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. king: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from texas yielding to me. i came to the floor, i wanted to highlight the disasters we have in the midwest. and i recall time back in 2011 when missouri river was 11 miles wide at its widest, five to six miles wide most everywhere else, all the way through iowa and across missouri. but it was a secret flood because you couldn't drive there you had to fly over to see it. we have some of these similar circumstance this is spring though it's gotten a little more press.

we had more water come down below gavin's point than ever before. it wiped out a lot of ag land on the iowa side and the nebraska side. we've got critical infrastructure that has to be reconstructed. we have to protect communities that have been nearly wiped out. this corps of engineers has 41 breaches on the levees just on the iowa side of the river. so i urge that we get to a conclusion and adoption of a final package on this disaster relief but i would point out, mavepls, that this message from the white house said the congress should not use natural disasters as a pretext to engage in unnecessary spending outside the agreed upon discretionary spending caps. i'm hopeful this gets worked out between the house and senate. we need the relief and we need it soon. thank you, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman yields. ms. shalala: i yield 30 seconds to ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for 30

seconds. ms. jackson lee: i happen to live and be in the area of the texas children's hospital. i have obviously supported the legislation of danny davis. the point is that people with pre-existing conditions including sickle cell will not have access to health care under the trump guidance and i'm standing here not about the research, which is certainly beneficial, but it is about the fact that i'm standing for those with sickle cell, with pre-existing conditions, which is a pre-existing condition, to not be blocked from having good health care. that's why i rise to support h.r. 986 in order to ensure access to health care and not stopping pre-existing conditions from being covered. i thank the gentlelady and i ield back. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new mexico, mr. lujan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes.

mr. lujan: i rise today to support the rule because for the past two years, the trump administration has relentlessly sabotaged the affordable care act and atacked my constituents' access to care. my republican colleagues use a lot of smoke and mirrors to talk about these plans so today i want to read straight from the texas department of insurance website. texas.gov. this page is titled, what you need to know about short-term health insurance. right there, the texas department of insurance says and i quote, know what the plans cover. it is important to ask what's covered and what's not. for example, short-term plans might not cover emergency care. might not cover maternity care. prescriptions. or certain other services. they might not cover care for accidents or health issues. listen closely to this these plans also do not have to cover

pre-existing conditions. if a company sells you a plan and they deny a claim, if it determines you had a related condition in the past. there it is in black and white on the texas department of insurance website. these trump junk plans discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions. let me continue because it gets better. to the third point. other costs -- here the state of texas specifies short-term health plans often have lower premium bus other costs may be higher. let me translate. these trump junk plans may be cheaper for us up front but you'll pay more money for less coverage on the back end. that's why today i stand proudly with my democratic colleagues for standing up to the trump administration's harmful policies and for acting to protect health care for the 50% of americans who have a pre-existing health condition. the trump administration's destructive policies will force the american people to pay more money for less coverage.

if you don't believe me, just go to the website yourself. this is unacceptable. and i urge my colleagues to vote annie the rule and yes on kuster's bill h.r. 986. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: let me yield myself two minutes for the purposes of response. first of all, grateful that the texas department of insurance does provide that disclosure and transparency, that's a good thing. in fact, chairwoman eshoork the chairwoman of the health subcommittee, when we were hearing bills on limited duration plans, actually had a bill that would require such disclosure for whatever reason it was pulled from the markup that we had that day. i was perfectly prepared to support it but again, for whatever reason, the chairman of the committee pulled the bill and we did not get to have that

debate or markup. then i also need to point out that our discussion today is not on limited duration plans. i rather expect that there will be an opportunity to debate limited duration plans, may come up as early as next week, i look forward to that debate. but it's also important to point out that these plans in texas were permitted under the previous administration for the duration of one year. so again, the state commissioner of insurance, exactly right, put those caveats up there so people could know what they're purchasing. i do believe that's important. i think that's an important aspect of the job of the texas commission of insurance. and i wish other state commissioners of insurance would behave in a similar fashion. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: i yield two minutes

to the gentleman from texas, a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, mr. doggett. mr. doggett: thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: after so many failed attempts to repeal our access to health care, trump and his republican cohorts are finding new ways to take away coverage from millions of americans who suffer with pre-existing conditions. now republicans have hijacked the mechanism that was designed to promote state health care innovation to subvert that very innovation. what they call innovation is finding new ways to destroy protections for pre-existing conditions and to promote junk insurance plans that cover, well, they cover what you don't need most. if you really need it, if it's for your condition, they're unlikely to cover it. how outrageous. a waiver of federal regulations

designed to encourage innovation that just waved good-bye to the safeguards that an estimated 0% of texans with pre-existing conditions really need. so while trump continues to hide his tax returns, he cannot hide the fact that he is sabotaging the health care protection for millions of americans. after bankrupting his own businesses and leaving creditors at a loss for decades, trump would bankrupt families with serious medical needs. it is almost a joke that he tells us he has a great plan to solve our health care needs. he said it again at the white house this morning, but he's going to wait until after the next election to show us what his secret plan is, which sounds a lot like the failed plan that he advocated in the last election. let's just pass this bill and tear down the wall that trump and his cohorts want to build

between too many americans and their doctors. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the the gentlewoman from reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: i yield myself two minutes. i want everyone to be clear here. his bill today is actually repealing part of the affordable care act. i didn't vote for the affordable care act. i argued against it passionately, articulately i might add a. what does it say? it describes the object of today's legislation, the so-called section 1332 waiver, section 1332 is a section of the affordable care act. and section 1332 is titled waiver for state innovation in general a state may apply to the secretary for the waiver of any and all requirements described.

this is interesting, with respect to health insurance coverage within that state for the plan years beginning on or after january 1, 2017. the way the law was written, none of these waivers were given during the years that president obama was president. they only became eligible, the secretary only became able to provide these waivers, january 1, 2017, which was the last three weeks of president obama's administration. so when people say the comparison between the waivers given in the obama years and the waivers given in the trump years are vastly different, that's true, because no waivers were available prior to january 1, 2018. look, the second has -- the secretary of health and human services has heard the angst people have trying to deal with the high premiums, premiums $600, $700 a month for an

individual, a deductible to ,000 to 7 -- $7,000. many people point out to me they spend more for health insurance, not using anything, but just for the insurance than they spend for their mortgage payment. not their mortgage insurance but mortgage payment. please, let's to remember, 1332 is part of current law. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. miss chalet lay: i'm delighted to hear a member of the other party defend the affordable care act by defending 1332. the waivers. let me say this, we are not eliminating the waivers. we are simply objecting to the guidance that was issued by the department of health and human services. arguing essentially that it's inconsistent with the congressional intent when the waivers were created.

madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record a letter signed by 24 health organizations, including the cancer action network,er the american lung association, the american heart association, the susan g. komen foundation, and others urging members to support h.r. 986. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. shalala: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. i thank my good friend for yielding. the administration's guidance permitting junk plans to replace the health care act has fooled no one. certainly not the millions with pre-existing conditions and those who now enjoy essential health benefits. the administration's true intent

is clear from its support in court now, as i speak to repeal the a.c.a. in its entirety, including pre-existing conditions. republicans historically have initially opposed virtually every form of coverage for the american people, including social security. but they have never succeeded in withdrawing or reducing benefits then in use. they will not succeed this time. in my own district of columbia, 106,000 residents with pre-existing conditions, would lose or risk losing or being denied or charged significantly more for health coverage. the district on its own has succeeded in overcoming republican attempts to weaken

e a.c.a. and now has reached virtually universal coverage in spite of a specific attempt to block the city's successful efforts. the administration's junk coverage is particularly untenable in allowing federal subsidies of junk plans, republicans fail to overturn the a.c.a. when they controlled the majority's in both the house and -- the majorities in both the house and senate. plans that the administration has put forward to dismember the act will not succeed, either. because of house insurance works, junk plans put all insured at risk of paying more for insurance. today we intend to expose and defeat the administration's dangerous substitution for the affordable health care act.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. the gentlewoman from florida reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you, madam speaker. let me yield myself two minutes for purpose of response. look, it is not the trump administration that is taking money out of the affordable care act and putting it to other purposes. it's clearly written into the law. again, i didn't vote for this law. i voted against it. i argued against it. but the taking of advance premium tax credits, cost sharing reduction, small business tax credits under section 36-b of the internal revenue code of 1986 under subpart 1, blah, blah, blah. an alternative means by which the aggregate amount of such credits or reduction that is would have been paid on behalf of participants in the exchanges established under this title had the state not received such a waiver, that amount shall be paid to the state for the

purposes of implementing the state plan under the waiver. so it's really -- it's pretty clear in the existing language alone. it's not the trump administration deviating funds, it was congressional intent, it was passed by this house of representatives. again, i didn't vote for it. i wouldn't have defended it at the time. i didn't think it was a good idea then. probably not the greatest idea now. but if the secretary has this tool to use and he's responding to requests from people's constituents do something about the high cost of my insurance, the high cost that i am required to spend in order to protect myself against a health catastrophe, i'll i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: i'm prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. mr. burgess: i have one other speaker who is just here. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized.

mr. burgess: at this time, i am pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from alabama, mr. rogers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. rogers: i thank my friend from texas. madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this rule. this rule demonstrates once again that the democrat majority refuses to acknowledge, accept, or address the very real crisis at our southern border. numbers came out yesterday illustrating the magnitude of the crisis. c.b.p. detained more than 100,000 migrants. a 591% increase compared with april of 2017. in just the last seven months, more than 1% of the total population of honduras and guatemala have migrated to the united states. in total, over half a million migrants have crossed our border since october of last year, approximately the population of tucson, arizona. smugglers, cartels continue to preach now is the time to come to the u.s. these criminal organizations run

an international smuggling operation filled with misery and abuse. c.b.p. has already rescued more than ,000 migrants this fiscal year. pulling families out of the rio grande river and saving children who smugglers have abandoned. my grants that survive often arrive in poor health, exhausted and in in need of medical care. the c.b.p. is doing the best it can can to respond to this crisis. they have run out of space to safely house and process unprecedented numbers of family units seeking entry into the united states. health and human services is own the verge of running out of funds to shelter unaccompanied children crossing our border at levels 50% hire than last year. last week the president sent congress an urgent request for supplemental appropriations to address this humanitarian crisis. ranking member collins and i filed an amendment to the supplemental which would have provided $4.5 billion requested by the president.

it would have replenished critical funds needed to feed and shelter migrant families and unaccompanied children, provide urgent medical care and transportation service, and pay the growing cost of overtime for the men and women of d.h.s. working on the front livepbs of this crisis. unfortunately, the minority refused to make our amendment in order and in doing so they again refused to take action to address this crisis. they stunningly refuse to support the men and women of d.h.s. and most remarkably they refuse to provide the needed assistance to thousands of vulnerable migrants arriving at our border on a daily basis. the majority's political dysfunction is disgraceful. i urge them to work with the president and republicans in congress to immediately resolve this humanitarian crisis. i urge all members to oppose this rule, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentlewoman from florida reserves. is recognized. the gentlewoman reserves. ms. shalala: i continue to

reserve and prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: i do have one additional speaker. i would like to yield three minutes to the gentleman from georgia who is a valuable member of the rules committee and gave us a stirring history lesson on the erisa plans and how the protection for pre-existing conditions goes back to 1996. i yield three minutes to mr. woodall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. woodall: thank you, madam speaker. i hope what i'm getting ready to say turns out to be redundant. we are going to hear it in the closings of both the gentlelady from florida and the gentleman from texas. we talk about this pre-existing conditions bill today as if it's going to help with pre-existing conditions. as we discussed already it's not. but the pre-existing conditions issue is a very real issue, it's a very real issue for families across the country and has been for a long time. undeniably elections were won and lost this past cycle over a pre-existing conditions issue based on the misinformation

around it. don't know how we are advantaged as a community by continuing to perpetuate the misinformation when we first tackled pre-existing conditions in a serious way, we did it together in this institution. i know because it was a gentleman from my state, madam speaker, speaker newt gingrich, sitting in that chairer at the time, it was 1996, bill clinton was sitting in the white house. newt gingrich was sitting here leading the united states house. and we came together, republicans and democrats, we passed the health insurance affordability and accountability act that abolished pre-existing worries for every single family with aner-eriesa based plan. those are the plans the federal government controls. what i mean, madam speaker, is that for every single plan the federal government had dominion over, we eliminating pre-existing conditions. medicare, no pre-existing conditions. medicaid, no pre-existing conditions. erisa plans, no pre-existing

conditions. collectively that's about 250 million americans. what we didn't do was go into the area where the federal government had no dominion, which were state regulated plans. we said, states should have the aket to regulate their own plans ability to regulate their own plans. president obama said they were moving too slow. he ran on the platform of taking those plans from state control. he won that debate. the affordable care act implemented those conditions. and the bill today says, if states have an idea about how to protect families from pre-existing conditions better than the one in the affordable care act, we don't want to hear it. there is one solution for pre-existing conditions and it's the one that president obama implemented, no other. i think that's wrong. i think that's wrong. dr. burgess knows more about medicine than i ever hoped to know. he knows more about serving patients than i ever hope to know.

ms. shalala as secretary of health and human services, knows more about health care than i will ever hope to know. i trust these folks to solve solutions differently in florida, in texas, than we do in georgia this. bill does one thing and one thing only. it continues the debate from 1996, not about whether to help people with pre-ex-ising conditions can, but about whether states have anything to add to the discussion. i'm certain the state of georgia does. i believe the state of florida does. i know the state of texas does. if we defeat this rule and defeat this bill we'll allow those best ideas to come out, not ideas about how to keep people down but ideas about how to lift families up. we've come together on those issues before, madam speaker. we can do it again. i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: thank you. i appreciate the comments of the

gentleman from georgia. i enjoyed the opportunity of working with him on the rules committee. we are not -- we are not objecting to what was done in 1996. we are saying to the states that they must cover pre-existing conditions as part of a waiver and they cannot undermine those conditions by imposing annual limits or charging more. the problem with the guidance is that -- is it gives states the opportunity to propose cheap plans that in essence undermine pre-existing conditions. i reserve my time. i'm ready to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. burgess: thank you, madam speaker. i will yield myself the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. burgess: if we defeat the previous question i'll offer an

amendment to the rule to move a resolution that reinforces the republicans' long-held views that every american should have pre-existing condition protections. on the open difing the 116th congress, house republicans brought a measure to the floor that called on lawmakers to legislate on locking in protections for patients with pre-existing conditions. unfortunately, in a fit of partisanship, house democrats blocked that effort. if democrats were serious, they would not object to making a statement on behalf of the house of representatives that we want to work together with the administration to protect patients with pre-existing conditions. our position is simple and clear. republicans stand ready to protect those with pre-existing conditions in a manner that will withstand judicial scrutiny. i hope our democratic colleague will join us in that effort. if the previous question is defeated, house republicans will move to immediately consider a resolution that maintains that no american should have their health insurance taken away or

lose protections for pre-existing conditions due to the democrats in congress enacting an unconstitutional law. we would instruct congress and the trump administration to ask the supreme court far stay in the texas vs. the united states decision should the affordable care act be found unconstitutional. would instruct congress to develop a bipartisan legislation that guarantees that no american citizen can be denied health insurance coverage or charged more due to a previous illness or health status. includes commonsense consume brother texts, provides more choice and affordable coverage than the affordable care act, lower prescription drug prices rules ients, strengthens for current and future ben fish yays and rejects the government run, soviet-style health care scheme that would outlaw the employer-based coverage of more than 180 million americans. i suspect our democratic colleagues will vote against

considering this resolution so i must ask why are democrats opposed to making a statement that the goal of the house of representatives of the united states is to work together to protect coverage for patients with pre-existing conditions? if that is not the goal, then what might it be? madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment into the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question and again i would reiterate that neither bill -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. burgess: neither bill under consideration today has a chance of becoming law. while i support funding for disaster relief, the democrats chose not to negotiate with the senate and included controversial positions. as a result, we will likely be considering a disaster relief bill yet another time and our hard-hit communities will continue to struggle without relief. once again, despite the title of h.r. 986, this bill will have no

impact on protections for pre-existing conditions for americans with those conditions. it will simply overturn a regulation -- overturns part of obamacare. it overturns a regulation that allows states to innovate in the affordable care act marketplace and provides flexibility and consumer choice to health care consumers. house republicans continue to support pre-existing condition protections an offered solutions to give patient this is assurance. republicans stand ready to work with democrats in a bipartisan manner to pass these protections into law and also provide desperately needed disaster relief. i look forward when we can all gather around the negotiating table. with that, i urge a no vote on the previous question, no on the underlying measures, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentlewoman from florida is recognized. ms. shalala: i yield myself the remained over my time. it was only 10 years ago that

people who lacked employer-provided insurance and had pre-existing conditions could not find health insurance in many parts of this country. and those who could find health insurance too often found that their plans were not comprehensive. they might not cover the type of cancer some buyers previously had or they might have an annual or even a lifetime cap on coverage. it was two years ago that this body passed a bill that stripped those protections, a bill that would make comprehensive health insurance out of reach for many americans. and thanks to a courageous few that bill kid -- did not become law. now that the administration has lost that battle to destroy the affordable care act, they're trying to do it through guidance and through lawsuits. h.r. 986 prevents the administration from enforcing guidance that would allow states to use taxpayer money to sell

subpar health plans on the exchange. the administration is taking the 1332 waivers which are designed to allow states flexbility to lower health insurance costs like through reinsurance and using it to take away important consume brother texts. the 1332 waiver requires high quality, affordable health insurance while retaining the basic protections of the affordable care act. as the american cancer society notes this administration guidance tips the scales in favor of insurance products that are inadequate to meet the needs of millions of americans with pre-existing conditions. madam speaker, i also support h.r. 2157, to provide disaster assistance to communities from every nook and corner of this country who are waiting for our help. when disaster hits this country,

we come together and support each other. when tornadoes and floods and hurricanes strike, we help people quickly. it is an embarrassment that a disaster bill has not yet made it to the president's desk in this congress. madam speaker, i urge a yes vote on the rule and the previous question. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. burgess: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: i think the noes won that. i'm going to ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman requests qust the yeas and nays? mr. burgess: the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested.

those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 227, the nays are 190, with one answering present. the previous question is ordered.

the question is on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. he ayes have it. the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]