whether georgia republican congresswoman marjorie taylor greene should be removed from her committee assignments due to statements she made on conspiracies and other issues. a final vote is expected at about 5:00 p.m. eastern. and now live to the floor of the house here on c-span. order. the prayer will be offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: would you pray with me? o holy god we humble ourselves before you, coming together in prayer as thousands across the globe and hundreds in this congress have done on this, the day of the national prayer breakfast. we pause to lay before you ourselves, our hopes, our dreams, our frustrations, and our anger. keenly aware of your sovereignty over our lives and our failures in living them. even as we kneel before you, anoint us with your mercy and lift up our eyes to your grace. shine your redefermentive light

on us that we reflect the love that you have shown to us, that our attitudes toward each other and to the tasks you set before us would be changed to demonstrate the benevolent plan you desire to share with each one and with this country. as your people, wholly and dearly loved, we commit to clothe ourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentlemanness, and patience. forgiven by your mercy, we devote ourselves to bear with one another and to forgive the grievances we have against another. so transformed, may we live lives of reconciliation, not as a political position, but in a posture of compassion. and with these virtues, we will choose this day to love, that we would be bound together in perfect unity by the strength of your most holy name in which we

pray, amen. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 5-a-1-a of house resolution 8, the journal of the last day's proceedings is approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from california, mr. cost tafment -- mr. costa. mr. mr. costa: 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 pro tempore: 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 california seek recognition? mr. costa: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. costa: madam speaker, i rise today to talk about an urgent

need to address the doctor shortages in rural and medically underserved communities throughout our country. the current pandemic and problems with vaccine distribution have highlighted dangers behind a lack of access to the quality of health care in these areas. i am working to change that right now. unlike producing productive personal protective equipment, it takes years to train a physician. this week i will introduce legislation to invest in medical education and to create new medical schools throughout this country in underserved communities like mine in the san joaquin valley. this bill will help curb the shortfalls of medical professionals. students who can study closer to home are more likely to stay there and practice thereupon graduation. -- there upon graduation. if we want to keep the promise that everyone who wants a vaccine can get one, we need more doctors and nurses and medical providers throughout our country. this legislation would do just

that. helping my constituents and keeping them safe is my number one priority, and i'll continue to do whatever it takes to make that happen. this is important legislation. i ask my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to support this legislation. 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 michigan seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. in the midst of these hard times, we are especially grateful for the health care and frontline workers who have bravely answered the call. thankfully, we see glimmers of hope with the discovery and distribution of multiple vaccines. mr. walberg: yet, sadly here in congress, democrats are using the pretense of covid relief to ignore bipartisan consensus and push a $2 trillion liberal wish list of unrelated provisions.

let's not forget the most recent targeted covid relief bill was signed into law only one month ago and together with previously enacted stimulus laws, over $1 trillion remain unspent. back home in michigan, governor witmer continues to go at it alone, having punitive and arbitrary restrictions that have harmed too many small businesses and hardworking families. it's time to work together to end this pandemic and help our constituents get back on their feet. let's get students back in the classroom, vaccines distributed, and workers back on the job. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> i seek recognition, madam speaker, to address the body for one minute and to revise and extend, unanimous consent. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> i rise today in honor of

david snyder, a constituent, a colleague, and a friend who passed away late last month. in every role he dedicated himself selflessly and tirelessly to his community. i was honored to spend years working together on our state's water conservation and management issues. water is the lifeblood of the southwest, and david helped ensure that families across our great state had access to clean drinking water. mr. o'halleran: he wore many hats, but the one that jumps out is two terms as county supervisor. his efforts helped keep arizona on track during the drought that still exists and his plans and expertise have helped us to inform important multistate water agreements. i know david's legacy will live on. my heart is with the snyder family and the entire community

as we mourn his passing. thank you and i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> good morning, 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 for one minute. >> thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today to congratulate orin samuelsson on his retirement and his work at wgn radio. his hall of famer career leaves behind a legacy known throughout the country, especially in our agriculture community in central and west central illinois. mr. lahood: born on a dairy farm in la crosse, wisconsin, he got his start in appleton and in green bay. in 1960, he came to chicago and joined wgn radio as their farm director. in the six decades since, he's became the best known voice in agriculture radio, from

presenting his agriculture reports, to anchoring the noon show and hosting his u.s. farm report, which still airs today. he's a legend in broadcasting and agriculture. in 1963, orrin was the first to read the on-air bulletin that president kennedy had been assassinated in dallas. orrin's booming and distinctive voice is known well throughout illinois and in our agriculture community. we will miss hearing his voice on air, seeing him at the illinois state fair in springfield, and hearing his reports that help guide our farmers to success over the years. i want to thank orrin for his years of work in service and hope he enjoys a well-earned retirement. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida 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 gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. demings: mr. speaker, i have attended more police officers' funerals than i care to admit, some i have eulogized.

the services are beautiful but the loss is tremendous. officer sicknick's murder hit us hard. it hit me hard for a lot of reasons, but this death should be personal to every member of congress, because i believe this body failed our capitol police officers. we tell everybody else, if you see something say something. yet, while brian was being murdered, other officers suffering great bodily harm and significant numbers of members in this body said nothing and continued to uphold the big lie. they followed the lawful, inhumane, and criminal orders of their commander in chief. but brian remembered his oath. everyone should follow his example. many have given much, but officer brian sicknick gave all. he paid the ultimate sacrifice, and we are forever grateful for a life well lived. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman

from minnesota 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. >> mr. speaker, today i introduce resolution commemorating the 100th anniversary of the department of minnesota veterans of foreign wars. the minnesota v.f.w. was founded on january 17, 1921, and today has over 200 posts across the state and serves more than 32,000 veterans who fought for america onlily overseas as well as an additional 21,000 members consisting of veterans' family members. the minnesota v.f.w. century of service has helped strengthen the common bonds of our military heroes by improving the quality of life for veterans and their families. the v.f.w. provides a wide array of services to its members, including youth development and scholarships, national security, advocacy, legislative affairs,

citizenship, education, veteran fellowship retreats and financial assistance for disabled assistance. mr. hagedorn: here's to another 100 more years. i ask members to co-sponsor my resolution. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania 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 gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. a lot of people in this body are talking about jobs these days, and rightfully so. ms. houlahan: our economy is in crisis. i want to urge everyone when we talk about rebuilding this economy, we talk about all of the issues that make for a successful economy, and that includes childcare and attention to our children. like many industries during this pandemic, childcare is struggling. many facilities can't pay their bills due to reduced demand in

services and increased costs to keep safe facilities for both children and staff. many of us on both sides of the aisle have rightfully celebrated the heroes of this pandemic, health care workers, frontline workers, and essential workers. and these are the very people who are using childcare right now, and they are the ones who cannot work from home and, therefore, need enriching and safe places for their children to go while they literally save lives and provide for the american people. so i ask every member who has spoken so passionately about our heroes and about returning to normal life to move beyond those words and to take meaningful votes on legislation that will ensure access to equitable, high-quality childcare for infants, toddlers, preschoolers, and after-school care children alike. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, the first and most important job the federal

government is protecting its citizens. from day one, president biden, who campaigned as the unifier in chief, has made a record unilateral decision to compromise the security of our country and undermine the rights of the american people. mr. arrington: in his executive orders, president biden has already stopped deportation, lifted travel restrictions from terrorist countries, halted border wall construction, empowered sanctuary cities, weaken asylum policies. i'm running out of breath, madam speaker. i welcome all freedom-loving, law-abiding citizens who want to make a life for themselves in this country, but we must respect the sovereignty of this country. we must respect the rule of law and we must always respect the american people's safety first. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i seek permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise today

in recognition of youth mentoring month, which we celebrate in january. established in 2002, youth mentoring month celebrates the powerful impact of mentoring relationships and raises awareness about the need for more caring adults to become mentors in their community. ms. scanlon: in 2006, i created a career development and mentoring program at constitution high school in philadelphia. and through the years, i served as a mentor many times over. we often talk about mentoring in terms of benefits to young people, but what surprises so many about mentoring is the emotional satisfaction and benefits to the mentor. whether it be through a classroom, an arts program, or local youth sports team, mentors provide young people with the guidance and earn couragement they need to -- encouragement they need to reach success. as part of the bipartisan mentoring caucus, with representative jamie herrera beutler, i look forward to celebrating and promoting

mentoring programs across our country. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> today, i would like to bring attention to a troubling assessment that was issued by the national counterintelligence and security agency on monday. china continues to aggressively seek to acquire americans' genetic information. they have targeted american hotels. they have targeted government agencies, as well as our universities through hacks and ill-intentioned partnerships. they recently even tried to buy fertility clinics in the united states to gather american d.n.a. as was cataloged on "60 minutes" last week, the chinese are now targeting family research databases that americans innocently use to research their family trees. mr. murphy: make no mistake, our health care information can be and will be used against us. the chinese have already demonstrated the lengths to

which they are willing to go to use genetics against their own people as they experiment on the uighurs. this threat cannot be ignored. china has already personally received identifying information on most americans. as citizens, we must take better control of our information and congress must act to keep this problem from getting worse. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> on february 4, 1960, four young black men sat down at a whites only wool worth's lunch count for the greensboro, north carolina, and asked to be served. these students from ncac state university had trained for weeks to be able to withstand the hostility and abuse thrust upon

them. the next day, the greensboro four were joined by women from bennett college and greensboro women's college. the courage demonstrated by these students sparked a national sit-in movement that spread to 55 cities in 13 states. the sit-ins lasted for six months until finally the wool worth's lunch counter was integrated. as the representative from greensboro, i join my colleagues, representatives adam and butterfield, in introducing a resolution to recognize the leg sthoif greensboro four and follow their lead in fighting for a future that will bring equal rights to all people. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina 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: the gentleman is recognized. >> i am grateful for the service

of joshua grant. this week he joined the office of my fellow charlestonian tim scott and legislative corsponedent for finance. he joined the office of the second district shortly after graduating from benedict college, a historically black college in columbia in 2016. during his time in the office josh cant yulely went above and beyond and made every constituent feel and guest feel welcome. mr. wilson: he instituted a small town sense of community to capitol hill. congratulations to his parents, joseph and diana grant, as well as his siblings, tonya, tiffany, lisa, and grant for raising a kind, smart, and inspired young man, a favorite of my wife roxanne. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. after last night, republicans are united to stop socialism which destroys jobs. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. i request permission to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you. madam speaker, i rise today in opposition to president biden's executive order to revoke the permit of the keystone pipeline. this decision was political, provides no benefit to the environment, and it came at a cost of approximately 11,000 good-paying american jobs. president biden cited concerns regarding climate change for his reason for stopping the pipeline. but under president obama and vice president joe biden the state department conducted a

review and found the pipeline to have minimal impact on the environment. now instead of having the pipeline, the oil from canada will now be transported in less safe ways like trucks and railways. axing the keystone pipeline destroyed thousands of jobs. won't reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, and will only deepen the divide on the issue of climate change. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> thank you. i'd like to 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.

>> thank you. with our wond -- our wonderful country, america, has been given wealth beyond belief and natural beauty i think is greater than anything around the world. in 1973, how howe did this country respond to those gifts? the united states supreme court in rowe v. waide legalized abortion, something that even in days before the ultra sound was condemned around the world. since that time 62 million unborn babies have had their lives cut short in america. the united states is one of only seven countries in the world where late term abortions are legal joining countries like china, north korea, vietnam, singapore, canada and hollande. now we extend under the current administration, look to push for still more abortions by talking about removing the hyde amendment, allowing for taxpayer

funding and even worse repealing the new mexico city policy in which the united states gives money to organizations abroad who will wind up performing abortions. that is what the united states will become known for around the world. how is this to respond to the natural wealth and bue i have to the country. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to recognize the meals on wheels program in indiana county, pennsylvania, who recently celebrated a 50-year milestone of helping neighbors in need. mr. thompson: marty yasasheko is

the life blood of this operation. marty has been running the meals on wheels program since 1981. five days aweek marty and his volunteers gather to prepare meals for senior citizens. currently they serve 35 seniors but in the past they've served up to 70 individuals daily. before covid-19 almost 10 million seniors were facing hunger threats. meals on wheels provides incredibly valuable service. for many seniors, their only social interaction a day may be the visit from the meals on wheels volunteer that connection is invaluable. meals on wheels indiana is always looking for more volunteers, looking to help seniors an their community. thank you to marty and the team at meals on wheels indiana county for their dedication. thank you, madam speaker and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition?

>> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to join my community in recognizing and celebrating the lunar new year. 2021 is the year of ox, which represents the strength, determination and perseverance. we have seen this period in the american people during covid-19 pandemic. ms. kim: while we faced unprecedented challenges we have shown that the american people are resilient. and i hope this year, this new year, is filled with many blessings, joy, and renewal. i pray that this year brings success and happiness to all. and i hope to be a voits for our community to ensure that the american dream that i was able to achieve is available for everyone and for our next generation.

together, i know we can make a better world. i would like to extend a happy new year to everyone. [speaking chinese] and thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. we request that you provide a translation for the reporter. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 91 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will renorlte resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 4, house resolution 91. resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the house the resolution h.res.72, removing a certain member from certain standing committees of the house of representatives. the resolution shall be considered as read. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the resolution and preamble to

adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ethics. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one hour. mr. mcgovern: for the purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. cole, 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. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, yesterday, the rules committee met and reported a rule, house resolution 91, to provide for the consideration of h.res. 72, removing a certain member from certain standing committees of the house of representatives under closed rule. the rule provides with one hour

of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the committee on ethics. madam speaker, this is one of those miamis where this institution must decide where the line is drawn. a person in this house encouraged violence against members of this institution, part of a larger pattern of disturbing rhetoric. she's also called the sandy hook and parkland shootings, where young children were killed, a hoax. she followed and harassed a survivor of the parkland shoot, david hyde. she promoted a video featuring a holocaust denier which contained disgusting anti-semitic language. she's even claimed that 9/11 was a hoax, that a plane didn't really hit the pentagon. and what did our distinguished minority leader, kevin mccarthy, do, madam speaker? did he take action to push this disgusting rhetoric out of the

republican conference? no. he rewarded congresswoman greene with seats on the education and labor and budget committees. now i don't get surprised by much around here these days but i was shocked by this. our teachers and students are watching, madam speaker. two of them are my sisters who are public school teachers in massachusetts. i can't imagine how they feel knowing that someone who says the deadliest high school shooting in our nation's history was a false flag operation, how they will feel if that person sits behind the dais of the education committee. or behind the dais of any committee. madam speaker, serving on a committee is not a right, it is a privilege. and when someone encourages violence against a member, they should lose that privilege. this is not a radical idea. when something like this

happened in the past, party leadership on both sides stepped up and took action. that's what happened with democrat bill jefferson. and republican steve king. we are here today because minority leader mccarthy does not have the courage to do what is right. now i remember a time when republican leaders had the courage to do what was right. dealing with the livings steve king was not an isolated incident. in 1991, when the republican party contended with david duke, a holocaust denying neonazi and former k.k.k. grand wizard, former president george h.w. bush said, and i quote, he should be rejected for what he is and what he stands for, end quote. david duke was pushed out of the party and stripped of of my credibility and recognition. even as recently as 25016, when duke announced a run for the u.s. senate, the then-republican

national committee chairman said, and i quote, david duke and his hateful bigotry have no place in the republican party, end quote. madam speaker that seems like forever ago. what happened? the party of lincoln is becoming the party of violent conspiracy theories. and apparently the leaders of the republican party in the house, today, are not going to do a damn thing about it. now i never thought i would say this, madam speaker, but i agree with mitch mcconnell. the senate minority leader this week called congresswoman greene's embrace of conspiracy theories, and i quote, a cancer for the republican party. . i would take it staep further. i think -- a step further. i think giving congresswoman greene a microphone on a standing committee would be a cancer on this congress. as members of this body, it is our job to set the standard for the conduct of those who serve

here. especially when they cross the line into violence. the republican talking point now seems to be -- i condemn congresswoman greene's words but. madam speaker, her words are indefensible, period, and we must act. not because it helps us or hurts them, but because it is the right thing to do for this institution and for america. it is nothing beyond the pale. is there something so depraf and disgusting that my colleagues would do? would they not draw the line for calling an asass -- for an assassination of another member of this body? it's my understanding that congresswoman greene got a standing ovation for many members during their conference meeting last night. c'mon. who applauded the person who

advocated putting a bullet in the head of the speaker of the house? who applauded the person who said school shootings are a false flag operation? who applauded the person who suggested that 9/11 was a hoax? i'd like to know. i'd like to know exactly who on the other side believes that these sick ideas deserve a standing ovation? can we see a show of hands, please? you know, when the history books are written, they will remember this moment. but more than that, we all have to live with ourselves. and i could never live with myself if i did nothing here. this is not the time for any of us to just look the other way. now, i'm actually hopeful that there is some republican members who are willing to stand up and to join with us and vote for this resolution, because it is the right thing to do. partisanship be damned. i challenge any one of my colleagues to take a moment and

read -- take a moment and read what she has said and what she has posted and come down here and try to defend it. you can't. it is indefensible. congresswoman greene says this resolution could set a precedent for the future. i hope it does. because if this isn't the bottom, then i don't know what the hell is. i hope we are setting a clear standard for what we will not tolerate. anyone who suggests putting a bullet in the head of a member shouldn't serve on any committee, period. this is the standard that we are setting here today. and i'm betting it's a standard the american people wants us to uphold. this is where we draw the line, madam speaker. these words and actions are the worst i think i've ever seen, ever, in all my time here. we should have the courage to pass this rule and the underlying resolution on a bipartisan basis.

to stand up for what is right. to demand better from those who serve in this institution. and to demand more for the people that we represent. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i thank my -- the distinguished gentleman from massachusetts, my good friend, chairman mcgovern, 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. cole: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, today, it's a sad one for us, for me, personally, for the rules committee, for the entire house of representatives. today, we're meeting on an unprecedented resolution by the majority, removing a member of the minority party from her committee assignments. now, before i continue, madam speaker, i want to be very clear that i find the comments made by the representative in question, before she was elected to congress, to be deeply offensive. members of congress are and

should be held to a high standard, and if she spoke any of what has been reported while a member of this body, her words would certainly not meet that standard. combu at last -- but at last night's republican conference, representative greene spoke with regret to her past statements. representative greene is not being given the courtesy of a referral to the ethics committee, the body empowered to investigate the condugout of -- conduct of members. she's not being given the same due process that was given to others before facing punishment by the house. why should the majority not do that before they strip her of her committees? today's resolution raises serious questions for this institution. indeed, these questions have nothing to do with this particular member at all. instead, they are about the future of the institution, the

action the majority is proposing to take today is not only premature but in fact unprecedented in the history of the house. madam speaker, what the majority is really proposing to do today is establish a new standard for punishing members for conduct before they ever became a member. the majority is proposing to hold members of congress accountable for statements made before they were even a candidate for congress. this change opens up troubling questions about how we judge future members of congress and whether or not we, as an institution, should impose sanctions on members for actions they took before they were even candidates for office. under this majority's new approach, could a member be punished for statements they made five years ago, 10 years ago, 20 years ago? i would remind the majority that several of their own members have engaged in activities or made comments that republican

members find offensive and inappropriate. if the majority changes hands in the future, as it surely will at some point, how would the current majority feel if these members are stripped of their committee assignments with no due process? my friends run the risk of setting off a tit for tat exchange for partisan punishment that could cripple the operation of the house now and well into the future. what has also never been done before in the history of the institution is this -- the majority has never taken steps to exercise a veto over the minority's committee assignments. it has never done that, madam speaker. i know chairman mcgovern attempted to point out cases in yesterday's rules committee to the contrary, but each of those cases he cited actually involved the party sanctioning their own members. the majority exercising a veto over the minority's assignments

have never happened before. i would like to point out that the same majority raised no objections a week ago when the house unanimously approved resolutions on committee assignments. in the past, the majority and minority have respected each other's rights to place members on committees without interference. it has ultimately been the responsibility of each side to also hold their members accountable for unacceptable behavior, including making decisions to remove members from their committee assignments when warranted. indeed, madam speaker, republicans have removed members from committees in the past. i know. i have personally been part of those proceedings. we can and will do so again if necessary. but it will be done with due process and with the members in question, whoever they may be, allowed to make their case. that is a simple standard of fair play and decency when the majority has decided not to extend to a member of the minority in this case.

i truly believe that the majority claiming a new right to be able to exercise a veto over minority committee assignments will ultimately be dangerous for this institution. a change in norms away from an institution built on mutual consent and for an institution where the majority holds a veto power over everything, including committee assignments, is ultimately an institution that cannot function. if one side feels the other should take corrective action for one of its members and has failed to do so, then the bipartisan ethics committee exists to adjudicate matters related to the code of official conduct. i believe it would be appropriate for the ethics committee to determine if a new standard relating to the actions taken by a member of congress before they're elected should be covered by the code of official conduct and make the appropriate recommendations for the institution to guide us going forward.

i fear that doing anything other than this would send the institution down a precarious path. the ethics committee is the appropriate venue for considering claims of misconduct. as traditionally what this institution has done when considering the conduct of an individual member. and i believe today it is appropriate to adhere to that norm. madam speaker, the matter we are faced with is bigger than any one individual member. it's about how we as an institution will continue to function in the future. i fear that if we open this particular pandora's box, we will not like what happens next. i would strongly urge this house to consider an alternative course before it's too late. with that, madam speaker, i urge opposition to the rule and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: yeah, madam speaker, let me just i yield myself such time as i may consume. respond to a couple of things my good friend, mr. cole, just

said. as he pointed out, in the past, members were removed from committees as a result of the -- the wishes of their party leaders. it did not go through the ethics committee. and the reason why we're here is because -- in this case it seems very obvious to us, the republican leadership chose not to act. in fact, they met last night and they voted on whether to remove congresswoman cheney from her position because she had the courage of her convictions and came down and voted her conscience. they didn't vote on this. and, again, let me also point out with regard to the ethics committee, there's no ethics committee that exists quite right yet because republicans haven't appointed members to the ethics committee so it doesn't function at this particular

point. and i would just also say that, you know, listening to my good friend, he talks about all of this as if it's somehow ancient history. well, the gentlewoman from georgia, as we speak, continues to fundraise off these disturbing remarks. i'm not sure what she said to the republican conference last night, but just last week she tweeted raising $175,000 off of this and said, quote, we will not back down, we will never give up. that's not contrition, madam speaker. i say that to my colleagues. that's doubling down and profiting. and so with that, i want to yield two minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from pennsylvania, ms. scanlon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. scanlon: i, too, have to agree with the ranking member on rules, that this does raise serious questions for our

institution and assure him this is not a move taken lightly. but our colleagues have left us no choice. historically, the parties have policed themselves. even as recently as two years ago. our republican colleagues removed a member from committees after he made a series of false and despicable statements which were less serious than the conduct we consider here. but apparently that was the old g.o.p. in the words of republican senator john thune of south dakota, the party of limited government and fiscal responsibility, free markets and peace through strength has become the party of conspiracy theories and qanon. no matter how much our colleagues here today say they disapprove of the conduct of the representative from georgia, they have to realize that's the face of their party. if today's house republican caucus wants to embrace this behavior, the majority does not. the member in question has advocated for insurrection and violence against elected officials and children, has challenged the safety of members and our capitol police, and has promoted fringe conspiracy theories that damage our work.

such behavior would not be tolerated in any other workplace, and it cannot be tolerated in the people's house. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know this and while they have been careful to distance themselves from their member's remarks and actions, they have not shown the courage to hold a member of their own party accountable when they don't have the shield of a secret vote. they force us to take this action, to stop the spread of conspiracy theories, lies, and hate in the halls of congress. this isn't canceling the representative from georgia's voice. it's about accountability. there is no right to committee assignments, but if a member conducts his or herself in such a disgraceful a way that she displays -- and her own party cannot address the problem, then the house as a whole has to deal with it. i urge my colleagues to recognize what the public has recognized in a bipartisan manner, that the indecent behavior of this member is a threat to congress and our government. and with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts

reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oklahoma. mr. cole: thank you, madam speaker. i quickly yield myself such time as i may consume just for informational purposes. there's no way my friend from massachusetts could have known this. but last night, the republican members were formally named. we expect them to be approved to the ethics committee. we expect them to be approved today so the committee could function immediately. but, again, my friend would have no way of knowing that. with that, madam speaker, i'd like to yield 10 minutes to the gentlelady from georgia, mrs. greene. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from georgia for 10 minutes. mrs. greene: thank you. madam speaker, my democrat colleagues, republican colleague, my district back home in georgia 14, to the american people, to my mom and dad and my husband and my husband and children. i've been here for one month and a day and i've gotten to know part of my conference, my republican colleagues, but not even all of them yet.

i haven't got ton know any of my democrat colleagues and i haven't had to have any conversations with any of you to tell you who i am and what i'm about. you only know me by how media matters, cnn, msnbc, and the rest of the mainstream media is portraying me. what you don't know about me is that i'm a very proud wife of almost 25 years, that i'm a mother of three children and i consider being a mother the greatest blessing of my life and the greatest thing i'll ever achieve. i'm proudly the first person graduating college in my family, making my parents happy and proud. i'm a very successful business owner, we have grown our company from one state to 11 states. i'm a very hard worker. i've always paid my taxes. i've never been arrested. i've never done drugs. but i've gotten a few speeding tickets in my day.

what you need to know about me is i'm a very regular american. just like the people i represent in my district. and most people across the country. i never, ever considered to run for congress or even get involved in politics. as a matter of fact i wasn't a political person until i found a candidate that i really liked and his name is donald j. trump when he ran for president. to me he was someone i could relate to, someone i enjoyed his plain talk, not the offensive things but just the way he talked normally. and i thought finally maybe this is someone that will do something about the things that deeply bother me, like the fact that we're so deeply in debt, that our country has murdered over 62 million people in the womb, the fact that our borders are open and some of my friends have had their children murdered by illegal aliens, or perhaps that maybe we can stop sending

our sons and daughters to fight in foreign wars. and be used as the world's police, basically. or maybe that our government would stand up for american businesses an american jobs and make the american people and the american taxpayers their focus. these are the things that i care about deeply. so when we elected president trump and then i started seeing things in the news that didn't make sense to me, like russian collusion, which are conspiracy theories also and have been proven so, these things bothered me deeply and i realized just watching cnn or fox news, i may not find the truth and so what i did is i started looking up things on the internet. asking questions. like most people do every day. use google. and i stumbled across something, and this is at the end of 2017, called qanon. these posts were mainly about

this russian collusion information, a lot of it was some of what i would see on the news at night and i got very interested in it. so i posted about it on facebook, i read about it, i talked about it, i asked questions about it. then more information came from it. but you see, here's the problem. throughout 2018, because i was upset about things and didn't trust the government really, because the people here weren't doing the things that i thought they should be doing for us, the things that i just told you i cared about, and i want you to know, a lot of americans don't trust our government. and that's sad. the problem with that is, though, is i was allowed to believe things that weren't true and i would ask questions about them and talk about them. and that is absolutely what i regret. because if it weren't for the facebook posts and comments that i liked in 2018, i wouldn't be standing here today and you couldn't point a finger and

accuse me of anything wrong. because i've lived a very good life that i'm proud of. my family is proud of. my husband is proud of. my children are proud of. and my -- that's what my district elected me for. so in -- later in 2018 when i started finding misinformation, lies, things that were not true in these qanon posts, i stopped believing it. and i want to tell you, any source, and i say this to everyone, any source of information that is a mix of truth and a mix of lies is dangerous, no matter what it is saying, what party it is helping, anything or any country it's about. it's dangerous. an these are the things that happened on the left and the right. and it is a true problem in our country. so i walked away from those things and i decided, i'm going to do what i've done all my life, i'm going to work hard and try to solve the problems that i'm upset about. so i started getting involved in

politics. you see, school shootings are absolutely real. and every child that is lost, those families mourn it. i understand how terrible it is because when i was 16 years old in 11th grade, my school was a gun-free school zone and one of my schoolmates brought guns to school and took our entire school hostage and that happened right down the hall from my classroom. i know the fear that david hogg had that day. i know the fear that these kids have. and this is why, and i say this sincerely with all my heart because i love our kids, every single one of your children, all of our children, i truly believe that children at school should never be left unprotected. i believe they should be just as protected as we were with 30,000 national guardsmen. our children are our future and they're our most precious resource. i also want to tell you 9/11 absolutely happened. i remember that day, crying all

day long, watching it on the news. and it's a tragedy for anyone to say it didn't happen. so that i definitely want to tell you, i do not believe it's fake. i also want to tell you that we've got to do better. you see, big media companies can take teeny, tiny pieces of words that i said, that you have said, any of us, and can portray us into someone that we're not. and that is wrong. cancel culture is a real thing. it is very real. and when big tech companies like twitter, you can scroll through and see where someone may have retweeted important, this is a problem. this is a terrible, terrible thing. but yet when i say that i absolutely believe with all my heart that god's creation is he created them male and female and that should not be denied, when i am censored for saying those

type of things, that is wrong. you see, here's the real situation. i decided to run for congress because i wanted to help our country. i want americans to have our american dream. i want to protect our freedoms. this is what i ran for congress on. i never once said during my entire campaign qanon. i never once said any of the things that i am being accused of today during my campaign. i never said any of these things since i have been elected for congress. these were words of the past. and these things do not represent me. they do not represent my district. and they do not represent my values. here's what i can tell you. i am beyond grateful for this opportunity and i'll tell you why. i believe in god with all my heart and i am so grateful to be humbled, to be reminded that i'm a sinner, and that jesus died on

the cross to forgive me for -- to forgive me for my sins. this is something i absolutely rejoice in today to tell you all. i think it's important for all of us to remember, none of us are perfect. none of us are. and none of us can even come close to earning our way into heaven just by our acts and works. but it's only through the grace of god. and this is why i'll tell you as a member of this congress, the 117th congress, i am a passionate person. i'm a competitor. i'm a fighter. i will work with you for good things for the people of this country, but the things i will not stand for is abortion. i think it's the worst thing this country has ever committed. and if we are to say in god we trust how do we murder god's creation in the womb? another thing i will say to this body is i want to work with all of you for our people.

it should be america first always. always. there's nothing wrong with that. and if this congress is to tolerate members that condone riots that have hurt american people, attacked police officers, occupied federal property, burned businesses and cities, but yet wants to condemn me and crucify me in the public square for words that i said and i regret a few years ago, then i think we are in a real big problem, a very big problem. what shall we do with americans? shall we stay divided like this? will we allow the media that is just as guilty at qanon of presenting truth and lies to divide us? will we allow ourselves to be addicted to hate and hating one another? i hope not. because that's not the future i want for my children. and it's not the future i want for any of your children. i yield back my time. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman ease time has expired. the -- the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: well, first of all, madam speaker, to equate the media to qanon is beyond the pale. secondly, the gentlewoman said she now believes that 9/11 really happened but let me read a quote theafment conservative american priority conference she said, and i quote, it's odd there's never any evidence shown for a plane in the pentagon but anyway, i won't i'm not going to dive into the 9/11 conspiracy. that was in 2018 and the gentlewoman said she had an epiphanny and decided not to follow conspiracy theories anymore. but then in 2019 she claims that speaker pelosi is guilty of

treason and then says, quote, it's a crime punishable by death is what treason is. nancy pelosi is guilty of treason. also in 2019 she liked a comment on social media that advocated a bullet to the head of speak pelosi. also in 2019. she -- in an interview, she called a student survivor of the parkland massacre, quote, very trained, he's like a dog, end quote. and then said he was an idiot who only talked when he is scripted. also in 2019, you know, on the grounds of the capitol complex, representative greene follows a survivor of parkland massacre, calling him a coward. and then when he ignored her shouted question, said, he can't say a word because he can't defend her stance. that's 2019. we could be here all week.

going over comments in 2019 and 2020. and so i, you know, i just -- you know, i just have to say that, you know, that i did not hear a disavowment or apology for those things. i did not hear an apology or denouncement for the claim, the insinuation that political opponents should be violently dealt with. i didn't hear anybody apologize or retract the anti-semitic and islam phobic remarks that have been made and posted over and over again. and again, the gentlewoman's campaign has profited off of these hurtful remarks. and these dangerous statements. and so i -- i just point that

out. for the record. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from -- the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: i yield one and a half minutes to the distinguished georgia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. scott: i want to thank the gentleman for yielding. this morning, as many of you, i was watching the national day of prayer and while watching i was reading an opinion piece in baptist news and this quote stuck out to me, whoever has the power makes the rules, whoever makes the rules makes them in their favor. madam speaker, i want you to know that i read that before i saw your prayer, which i thought was a wonderful closing prayer. i would point out some others who don't share our faith may not. i thought it was wonderful an that's the first amendment we get to enjoy in this country and i thank you for that prayer. i rise today in opposition to

house resolution 7 an efforts by the majority to remove a member of the minority party from their committee assignments. this resolution and i think this is important, was introduced three days ago to the ethics committee but it was brought to the floor without so much as a hearing before the ethics committee. i want to stress i want to stress the past remarks or emomingies you bring up of our colleague do not represent the values in our conference nor my home state of georgia. i expressed this in her primary and i continue to express that today. but if this was about the remarks our colleague made, you would put a resolution on the floor condemning those remarks, but no matter what those remarks are or how bad they are, she and every other member of this body should be entitled to due process just as every other american is entitled to due process. and in this case it would be before the ethics committee before it came to the floor. house. -- to the floor of the house. let's be honest about what this is --

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. cole: i yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has an-dational po seconds. mr. scott: you have a 10-vote margin in this body. this body has 20 standing committees. you created a proxy voting system to allow your members stay at home while republican members show up for work. you have another resolution which you haven't discussed yet to remove over 100 republican members of congress, including six from my home state of georgia. do you really think that we believe you are going to stop with the gentlelady from the 14th, miss marjorie taylor greene? we know better. we know better. the truth of the matter is you've got a math problem in passing your agenda. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. members are reminded to direct in your remarks to the chair. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, let me just tell my colleague from georgia i can't resist.

mentioned proxy voting. i hate to tell him but a lot of republicans are voting by proxy, too. so the same one who is condemned it are the ones who are now utilizing it. again i also remind him that this is not a criminal trial. and that when the republicans removed steve king from his committees, there was no ethics committee deliberation on that. the decision was made to remove steve king because finally, at long last, there was a realization that embracing what supreme sism -- supremacist was unacceptable. when bill jefferson, a democrat, was removed by democrats, again -- removed from his committees, it wasn't a ethics committee deliberation -- at this point i'm going to finish my thought. it was a decision that our leadership made and there was bipartisan support for that as

well. we can sit here all we want and try to make excuses for not taking action -- i mean i think the standard here republicans coming to the floor and saying we don't want to associate ourselves with these remarks, condemn these remarks, but -- we don't appreciate any references to violence, we don't appreciate any references to anti-semitism, but. but, but, but, but. here we are. so the issue here is that the republican conference last night met to really deliberate on the fate of congresswoman cheney. didn't take a vote on this. and basically by doing nothing -- what does that message send? how refreshing it would be, how welcome it would be if there was a strong bipartisan vote on this resolution?

imagine what that would mean to the american people to know that we were all unified on the issue of when a member, when a person who serves in this house has advocated the use of violence, called for assassinations that we all agree that that is so unacceptable that at a minimum they ought not have the privilege of being on a committee. i'm not sure we are going to get that unity here today, but i hope we do. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: thank you, madam speaker. quickly i yield myself such time as i may consume. just for my friend, just to respond to my friend briefly, remember, we are doing something here that's never been done before. the majority is taking away a

committee assignment of a minority. that has not happened in this house before. also remember, we are applying, or you were choosing to apply, the code of official conduct to a member before they were ever a member. that's not to my knowledge ever been done before, either. we haven't said let's do nothing. we said these are pretty serious questions. let's go to the ethics commission, adjudicate them, have a discussion, and have the recommendation come back out. so to say we don't want to do something is simply inaccurate. frankly i think you are overlooking the unprecedented nature of the acts that you decided upon and where that may lead us when the majority changes. with that i want to yield two minutes to my very good friend, the distinguished gentleman from california, mr. issa. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. issa: thank you. i find myself sort of the oldest freshman in my class, returning

after just a two-year hiatus, and finding a house that i'm having a hard time understanding how it got so bad in such a short period of time. as my colleague on the other side of the aisle aptly said, we have had to remove people for cause in this body when i was a freshman, some 20 years ago, we removed jim traficant because he had been tried and convicted and still wouldn't resign. we have stripped people of their committees when they have been indicted and ensured they left this body when they were convicted. but we have not and should not, in fact, hold people responsible for actions before the people of their home state elected them, and their secretary of state certified them, and they came here. in so doing we could pick a plethora of people not to seat

or not to give committees to. on the other side of the aisle there is a gentleman who i respect, who i have served with for my entire time in congress, who was impeached and removed from office by this very body, and yet has served honorably here for more than two decades. and sits at a high position on many committees. after the civil war, in time there were people who had been confederate soldiers who came here as congressmen. in fact, the famous senator byrd was a grand wizard of the ku klux klan before he was a member of these bodies. we cannot and should not judge people by what they have done before they arrive. and we should not tell the minority who they can seat. you may shame us, you may disparage us if we give somebody a committee assignment, but that is part of the free speech. in closing if we do this, it

will be no different than when john adams allowed for a member -- the speaker pro tempore:. mr. cole: an additional 15 seconds to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. issa: when a member of this body was incarcerated for something that john adams felt was injurious to him under the sedition act, it was retroactive, he had written it before the act was passed, and the act was, in fact, not in keeping with our free speech. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma reserves. and the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, let me again respond by reminding the gentleman that this isn't an issue because of political differences on policy. it just isn't.

i remind him, representative greene in january, 2019, on her social media, writes the comment that advocated a bullet to the head of the speaker of the house of representatives. that doesn't bother you? that doesn't give you pause? there is a whole bunch of those kinds of posts on her social media. is there anything that is so awful that will give you pause? we have heard mrs. greene, she came down here, we heard 10 minutes of what aboutism and conspiracy -- about-ism and conspiracy -- comparing american journalists to violent qanon extremists. basically saying it's not her fall. it's everybody else's fault. not taking personality. not apologizing for any of these really offensive things.

so this is one of these moments of truth as to what do we think about this institution? i really do think this is a vote about the integrity of this institution and about upholding a standard of decency. and quite frankly, we were all hoping you'd do it. you would do the right thing. but apparently i think a political decision was made that it's advantageous not to alienate certain types of voters in this country, even if they think the way and advocate for the policies and ideas mrs. greene has put forward. that's what this is about. i know, i have talked to many that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks colleagues on the other side, i know many are very uncomfortable and offended by what she has said and posted, but apparently not offended or uncomfortable enough

to actually take action. and i think that that's unfortunate. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the distinguished republican whip of the congress, my good friend, mr. scalise from louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for three minutes. mr. scalise: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman from oklahoma for yielding. madam speaker, i have been clear for a long time that the comments made by mrs. greene prior to being elected a member of congress are completely inappropriate and, in fact, i have spoken directly to her to express that. and we had a long conversation, frankly, similar to the one that we just heard on the floor a few minutes ago, madam speaker, where we heard mrs. greene herself come and give a full account of things she's done in

her past. in fact, at the end she said, jesus died on the cross to forgive me of my sins. she actually held herself to account. as many of us have as well. i wonder if that same new standard that is being talked about today is anticipated to be applied equally by the majority's side of people who have done things egregious and haven't, haven't given account. in fact, done those things as sitting members of congress. not what happened in 2018, 2019, that we all decry. madam speaker, if the things that happened in 2018 and 2019 were so egregious that they weren't the unprecedented step of removing a member of congress from all committees by the majority party against someone in the minority party, if that

was so egregious, why, then, did not a single democrat object to that last week when that issue came before this congress on this floor and she was added to those committees? this is the resolution that added her to the committees. not a single democrat last week, not in 2018 or 2019, last week, not a single democrat objected. but now with this new standard seems to be applied. this morning we continued a great tradition in this congress. the national prayer breakfast. where republicans and democrats come together and leaders from the entire world come together to pray. today things like forgiveness were freely discussed. i want to read chapter 8:7, john, 8:7, so when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself and said unto them,

he that is without sin among you let him first cast a stone at her. madam speaker, we need to stop casting stones at each other and rise to the level where we are going to start spending every day on this house floor not fighting battles of the past but fighting for the hardworking families of this country who are counting on us to come together. i ask that the leadership withdraw this resolution and let's get back to work for the american people. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: let me say to the gentleman who just spoke, i do believe the standard we are upholding today should be viewed equally for everybody. if any member of this chamber has advocated for the execution of another member, then i will

join, whether democrat or republican, i will join with everybody here and advocate they be taken off their committees. i have said that over and over and over again. i don't know -- is that a controversial idea that if people advocate that kind of stuff that somehow we are going to look the other way, or we are going to move on and let's not even talk about it? . and i remind the gentleman, this is not ancient history, she continues to fundraise off this stuff. read social media, i'm sure you do. so come on. and i'm a little confused because the gentleman says we shouldn't be doing this today, we should have done it last week when there was an unanimous consent request to basically move forward a whole bunch of committee assignments, democrats an republicans, forward. i mean, the deal is, if we had

taken that down, a whole bunch of people would be without committee assignments as we speak. we have a lot of to or -- a lot of work to do to get the economy back on track and crush this virus, especially in the aftermath of the four years we have been through. so, i mean, you know, we all want to move forward. we all want to move on. you can't move forward unless there's some accounting here. unless there's some reckoning with what all this means. and i would think that for the sake of this institution, i mean, if we want to uphold the standard of decency in this institution, that we'll all come together on this. i mean, what we just heard was not an apology. if that was the speech that was given last night in the republican conference, i guess my question would be, and that got a standing ovation? i didn't hear an apology for the incredibly dangerous and hurtful remarks she has made. i didn't hear an explanation for

why she is still fundraising off of, you know, off of these terrible things here. so you know, i don't know what my colleagues found so convincing. but i stand here today, still, deeply, deeply troubled and offended by the things she has posted and the things she has said and still not taken responsibility for and still not apologized for. and the idea of coming to the familiar and basically saying, well, it's the media's fault, it's this person's fault or that person's fault and the american media is equivalent to the violent qanon eextremist, i've got to tell you, just when you think you've heard everything, then you hear that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: just quickly for the record, the resolution the whip was referring to, mr. scalise was referring to last night, or just a few minutes ago, only concerned republicans. we wanted to -- if you wanted to object to republicans, that's what you could have done, didn't involve democrats at all. i yield myself such time as i may consume. if we defeat the previous question i'll offer an amendment to the rule to amend house rules that anyny rule proposing to remove a member from a committee assignment shall not be offered in order unless offered by or with concurrence of the leader of the party of the member of the subject of the resolution. this speaks to a norm of basic fairness that today's resolution doesn't comply with. in the past the majority has never attempted to exercise a veto over the minority's committee assignments, nor has the minority attempted to do the same to the majority. this has been in the past an unwritten rule, a norm of the house, that is adhered to in

order -- in order to protect the operations of the institution. the actions today threaten that norm and threatens to set off a new round of escalating partisan punishment any time the majority changes hand. enshrining new pracks atist and new rule is important to protect the institution as a whole. i ask madam speaker consent to insert the text of my amendment in the record along with extraneous material immediately prior to the vote of the previous question. i urge a no vote on the previous question and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i want to respond by saying, we have been waiting, we've been members now for over a month in this new congress. and we've been waiting for action. i guess we got the answer last night. a standing ovation for somebody who has said and posted what mrs. greene has said and posted.

i mean, that is -- that's the response. so we waited and now are going to move forward with this action. and with that, i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized. mr. cole: just in response to my good friend, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i was actually there. so number one she didn't get a standing ovation for things she said. she got a standing ovation for regretting things she had said and saying she had been wrong and saying -- denouncing qanon and denouncing school shootings. that's what she got the standing ovation for. my friend didn't have the opportunity to hear that, i wanted to take the opportunity to inform him. i would advise my friend i am prepared to close whenever he is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: thank you very much, madam speaker, i yield myself the plans of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cole: in close, i oppose the rule. never before in the history of

this institution has the majority attempted to exercise a veto over the minority's right to make committee assignments. today the majority is choosing to do just that. this leads the institution down a dangerous path, the end of which we cannot see. madam speaker, there are alternative paths open and i believe the house should consider. we owe it to ourselves and to the institution to do so. before we strip a member of her committees, before that -- for remarks the person made before they were subject to the official rules of conduct of the house, maybe we ought to have a discussion about that, if we're going to extend that in a way we never have before in the institution. i'm not necessarily against that, by the way. i think that's a worthy topic. i also think if we're going to strip a member before they've ever served on a committee, they ought to have an opportunity to tell their side of the story in judicious proceeding. our ethics committee has

received a lot of knotty issues in a bipartisan way and without members escaping punishment. we're not saying let's not do anything, we're saying let's go through the ethics committee, rather than exaging he -- change this -- changing the scope of official conduct provisions of house that apply to members, let's talk about whether it's appropriate for the majority to try to dictate the people the minority puts on committee. and finally let's give a member we accuse of something an opportunity to make his or her case. that's what we asked for. that's what the majority has chosen not to do. i think, madam speaker, it's a dangerous mistake. it's a mistake that frankly, when the majority change, the temptation will be overwhelming for members to say, oh, well there's a member i didn't like or said something or did something i didn't like. as a member, i think i'm just going to take that committee assignment away. i can give you a list of people that have done things i think

are inappropriate on both sides of the aisle, quite frankly. but we've never done that here. and i don't think we should start doing that here. all we've asked for is a process, an ethics commission discussion. we think that's the appropriate way to proceed. so madam speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question. no on the rule. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: this is a very serious matter. i appreciate my ranking member, mr. cole, for the way he conducts himself because i know he cares deeply about this institution and he knows i admire him greatly. the gentleman from louisiana, mr. scalise, was on the floor and he quoted the bible. and i read the bible too. i want to inform the gentleman. and i believe in the jesuit tradition. apology is not just words, it's

action. and i didn't hear mrs. greene do that today. i heard, you know, a lot of what aboutisms. but i didn't hear her take responsibility, nor did i hear her apologize for some of the most egreengs things she's posted and said. i also have to point out for the record, because i think this is important, i'm not convinced her memories is 100% accurate here on some things. she said, here just now, she spoke to the whole chamber, she said she didn't discuss qanon in her campaign. but last july, she said in a local interview, and i quote, i've only ever seen patriotic sentiment coming out of that source, end quote. and she wouldn't answer if she was still a follower. so i'm a little confused. she's now trying to denounce qanon but yet she said recently

that they're patriots. never seen anything other than patriotic sentiment coming out of that source. qanon is a dangerous, sick cult. period. and nobody, nobody, certainly nobody in this chamber, should ever in any way, shape, or form try to associate themselves with them. they're not patriotic individuals. they are pushing sick, dangerous, violent conspiracy theories. many of the people who attacked this chamber on january 6 had qanon flags and insignias. give me a break. i don't know what it's going to take for some here to act. i will just repeat what i said earlier. i don't know what the hell happened to the republican party. the party of lincoln, the party of eisenhower, the party of reagan is becoming the party of marjorie taylor greene.

and the party of violence, violent conspiracy theories. if anyone has any question about the things she has said or done, anybody who is watching, you know, just spend a moment and look at her social media posts. don't take my word for it. you know, go research it for yourself. google it. it's all there. they go well beyond anything that we have seen from any member in this body. encouraging violence against another member. posting and saying that 9/11 was a hoax. that school shootings were planned by gun safety advocates. spreading anti-semitic and anti-muslim conspiracies and hate speech. it's all there. not just saying this, it's there. i'm a big believer in the ethics committee process but i don't need an investigation to tell me what i can read with my own eyes. the only question is this.

what are we going to do about it? just as there was bipartisan agreement that congressman king had no business on the committee, there should be bipartisan agreement that congresswoman greene d doesn't either. the only reason this is taking a resolution on the floor today is that leader mccarthy is unwilling to apply that same standard here. a stern conversation is not enough. we aren't talking about expulsion here today though some think that's warranted but that's not what we're talking about. we are deciding whether someone who has encouraged violence against members should be given a platform on a standing committee. that's what the topic is here today. i have to say, i didn't even know that was a question. i assumed the answer was obvious. but apparently it is not to some here. inaction is complicity, madam speaker. we must set a standard of conduct in this institution and

ensure that the violence, conspiracy theories and the lies that we see on the darkest corners of the internet don't get a platform on a standing committee here in the house of representatives. i hope my colleagues will vote their conscience. i hope my colleagues will do what is right for the institution. this is about the institution, about who we are. and again for the life of me, i don't understand what is complicated here. you know, what is giving people hesitation. we know, we know the result of these violent conspiracy theories. we saw that on january 6. we know what it leads to. i don't ever want to see that again. and we all should make clear where we stand on this. so, you know, coming here, congresswoman greene coming here and speaking for 10 minutes, and

not taking responsibility for any of this stuff, trying to make us believe she doesn't believe in qanon anymore, just pointed to an interview that was fairly recent. not apologizing for the most egregious comments that she's posted. i mean, we have to be better than this. this is -- this can't be the future. and i'm hoping that we will get a bipartisan vote here. i'm hoping that, because i do think, as i said before, a strong bipartisan vote on this, what a refreshing signal that would be to the american people. that all of us together are standing up against hate, against violence, against conspiracy theories. that we're together on this. this shouldn't be hard. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. 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. cole: on that i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 3-s of house resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. [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: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. mchenry of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mchenry will vote nay on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker. as the member designated by ms. wilson of florida, i inform the house that ms. wilson will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, as the member designated by miss tray lan of massachusetts, pursuant to house resolution 965, i inform the house, i inform that mrs. trahan will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. gonzalez, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house , mr. gonzalez will vote aye on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by mr. gallego, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote aye on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by mr. vera, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house, i that mr. villa will vote aye on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by mr. cardenas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cardenas will vote aye on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? >> thank you, madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. john larson of connecticut, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. larson will vote yes on ordering the previous question. madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. langevin of rhode island, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. langevin will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. larson -- lawson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lawson votes yea on the motion to move the previous question h. resolution 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. lawrence of michigan, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mrs. lawrence will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member napolitano, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congress member napolitano will vote yes on ordering the previous question. and madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member

roybal-allard, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congress member roybal-allard will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. carson of indiana, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. carson will vote yes, he will vote yes, on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by mr. price of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. price will vote yes, he will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. desaulnier,

pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. desaulnier will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. bonnie watson coleman, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mrs. watson coleman will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. ruiz, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. moulton, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. moulton will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by mr. cohen, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cohen will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by ms. barragan, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. barragan will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by mr. lieu, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lieu will vote yes on ordering the previous question. mr. beyer: as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. titus of nevada, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house , ms. titus will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. brown: as the member designated by mr. mfume of maryland, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mfume will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by by chairwoman zo lofgren, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house chairwoman lofgren will vote yea on the previous question. mr. jefferies: as the member designated by representative carol maloney, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house mrs. maloney will vote yea on the previous question. as the member designated by congressman boyle, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congressman boyle will vote yea on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from missouri seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. billie long of missouri, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. long will vote nay on the previous question to h.res.

91. and as the member designated by mr. gosar of arizona, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gosar will vote nay on the previous question to h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. rush, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. rush will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from virginia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. mceachin, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mceachin will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by ms. porter, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. porter will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from massachusetts seek recognition? ms. clark: as the member designated by by mr. bowman, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. bowman will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by mr. cooper, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cooper will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by ms. frankel, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house ms. frankel will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by ms. jayapal, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. jayapal will vote yes on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by by mr. lynch, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lynch will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

as the member designated by ms. meng, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. meng will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. buchanan of the great of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. buchanan will be a no on the previous question. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. wasserman schultz: as the member designated by mr. payne of new jersey, i inform the

house that mr. payne will vote yea on ordering the previous question. as the member designated by mr. hastings of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. hastings will also vote yea on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mrs. axne, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss axy will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. fallen, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. fallen will vote no on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania

seek recognition? ms. scanlon: as the member designated by ms. speier, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. speier will vote yes on ordering the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 218. the nays are 209. the previous question is ordered. the question is on the adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. cole: mr. speaker, on that i would request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 3-f. of house resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. [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: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? -- will kildee -- mr. kildee: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mrs. lawrence, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. lawrence will vote yes on h.res.

91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: as the member designated by mrs. trahan of massachusetts, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. trahan will vote yes on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from missouri seek recognition? mrs. wagner: as the member designated by mr. long of missouri, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. long will vote nay on h.res. 91. and as the member designated by

mr. gosar of arizona, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. gosar will vote nay on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? ms. wasserman schultz: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. payne of new jersey, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. payne will vote yea on h.res. 91. and mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. hastings of florida, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. hastings will also vote yea on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> as the member designated by by mr. fallon of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. fallon will vote no on house resolution 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jefferies: as the member designated by chairwoman zo lofgren, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that chairwoman lofgren will vote yea on h.res. 91. pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house as the member designated by, mrs. maloney, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that chairwoman maloney will vote yea on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by

congressman boyle pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congressman boyle will vote yea on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. connolly: mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. titus of nevada, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the

house ms. titus will vote yes on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. mchenry of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mchenry will vote yea on house res. 92. the speaker pro tempore: would the gentleman from indiana repeat his statement again. mr. banks: mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. mchenry of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8,

i inform the house that mr. mchenry will vote yea on house res. 92. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. ruiz, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote yes on house resolution 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the

gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? ms. adams: thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by ms. wilson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house ms. wilson will vote yes on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? ms. underwood: as the member designated by mr. rush, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. rush will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from massachusetts seek recognition? ms. clark: as the member designated by by ms. meng, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. meng will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by mr. lynch, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lynch will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by ms. jayapal, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. jayapal will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by ms. frankel, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. frankel will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by mr. cooper, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cooper will vote yes on h.res. 91.

as the member designated by by mr. bowman, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. bowman will vote yes on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. arrington: as the member designated by mr. buchanan of the great state of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. buchanan will be a no vote on the adoption of h.res. 91. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. lawson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lawson will vote yea on

the motion -- agreeing to the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? mr. courtney: thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by by mr. john larson, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house i hereby inform the house that mr. larson will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by mr. langevin of rhode island, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. langevin will vote yes on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition?

>> as the member designated by by ms. speier, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. speier will vote yea on h.res. 91. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> as the member designated by by mr. carson of indiana, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. carson will vote yes, he will vote yes on h.res. 91. mr. butterfield: as the member designated by mr. price of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that will price will vote yes, he will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. gomez: as the member designated by mr. gallego, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote aye on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by mr. gonzalez, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gonzalez will vote aye on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by mr. cardenas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cardenas will votey on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by mr. villa, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. villa will vote aye on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. brown: mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. mfume of maryland, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mfume will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from virginia seek recognition? ms. wexton: mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. mceachin, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mceachin will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by by ms. porter, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. porter will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. congress member napolitano, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congress member napolitano will vote yes on h.res. 91.

mr. speaker, as the member designated by by congress member roybal-allard, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congress member roybal-allard will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. lieu, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lieu will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by ms. barragan, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. barragan will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by mr. cohen, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. cohen will vote yes on h.res. 91. as the member designated by ms. moulton, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. moulton will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. matsui: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. desaulnier, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. desaulnier will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mrs. bonnie watson coleman, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. watson coleman will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? ms. stevens: as the member designated by mrs. axne, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. axne will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? ms. stanton: as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes on h.res. 91.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 218 and the nays are 210. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i move to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion. those in favor say aye. . those opposed, no. the noes have it and the the

unfinished business is the vote on the motion of is not adopted. mr. roy: i ask for the yeas and nays. pursuant to section 3-s of house resolution 8. yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. [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.] house of representatives

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by mrs. wilson, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that i inform the house that mrs. wilson will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. butterfield: as the member designated by mr. price, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. price will vote no, he will vote no, on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. carson of indiana, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. carson will vote no, he will vote no, on the motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition?

>> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. desaulnier, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. desaulnier will vote no on the motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from virginia seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. mceachin, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mceachin will vote no on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by ms. porter, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. porter will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by mr. john larson of connecticut, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. larson will vote no on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. langevin of rhode island, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. langevin will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. connolly: mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. titus of nevada, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. titus will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker as the member designated by mr. ruiz, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. gallego, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. gay ageo will vote no on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. gonzalez, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. gonzalez will vote on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. villa, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. villa will vote no on the motion to journ. as the member designated by mr. car den as, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. car den aswill vote no on the

motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by by mr. buchanan of the great state of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. buchanan will vote yes on the motion to adjourn. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from massachusetts seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. meng, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. meng will vote no on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. lynch, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lynch will vote no on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by by ms. jayapal, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. jayapal will vote know. as the member designated by ms. frankel, pursuant to h. res. 8,

i inform the house that ms. frank yell will vote no. as the member designated by mr. bowman, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. bowman will vote no. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from. mrs. wagner: as the member designated by mr. long of missouri, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. long will vote yes on the motion to adjourn. as the member designated by mr. gosar of arizona, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gosar will vote yes on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. kildee: as the member designated by mrs. lawrence of michigan, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. lawrence will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: as the member designated by mr. larson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. larson votes no on the motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, zegged mr. mchenry of north carolina, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. mchenry will vote yes on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mrs. axne, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. axne will vote no on the motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. speaker, as the member designated by by ms. bonnie watson coleman, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. watson coleman will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> as the member designated by by mrs. kirkpatrick pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. kirkpatrick will vote no on the motion to adjourn.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. spir, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. spir will vote no on the motion to -- ms. speier -- will vote no on the motion to adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jeffries: as the member designated by chairwoman zoe lofgren, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that chairwoman lofgren will vote nay on the

motion to adjourn. as the member designated by chairwoman carolyn maloney, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that chairwoman maloney will vote nay on the motion to adjourn. mr. mcgovern: as the member designated by mrs. trahan, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. trahan will vote yes on the motion to adjourn. hold on. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: as the member designated by mrs. trahan of massachusetts, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. trahan will vote no on the motion to