for four bills, including replacing confederate staff statues in the capitol. and now live coverage of the u.s. house here on c-span. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by chaplain kibben. chaplain kibben: would you pray with me. almighty god, in the aftermath of the disaster in miami, florida, we commend to your care and protection the ongoing search and rescue efforts. we fervently pray that you would deliver all those who are yet clinging to life beneath the magnitude of the wreckage. preserve their spirits even as they struggle with overwhelming

fear for their lives. grant them a glimpse of hope, even a miracle, that they would soon emerge from the terrifying prison of panic and distrells. and for the families of the missing and the dead, give them comfort and strength as they wait for an answer or grieve their loss. even as they cling desperately to a photo or a memory, may they find a way to hold fast to their faith in you. guide and strengthen the rescue workers who face the daunting task of digging through the concrete rubble and the devastation that surrounds them. may they have fortitude of body to brave the dangers of this precarious structure. and the fortification of faith to endure the suffering they attend to. on behalf of all of these, we pray with the psalmet and in our

distress we cry for help, hear our voices. may our cries reach your heavens . in your saving name we pray. amen. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to section 11-a of house resolution 188, the journal of the last day's proceedings is approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from missouri, mrs. wagner. mrs. wagner: please join me in the pledge of allegiance. 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 gentlewoman from missouri seek recognition? mrs. wagner: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. wagner: mr. speaker, i rise as a tireless advocate for the most vulnerable. i continue to fight for the born-alive act, to mandate lifesaving care for abortion survivors. i also am proud to support h.r. 18, the no taxpayer funding for abortion act, which will permanently prohibit taxpayer funding for abortions by enshrining the bipartisan hyde amendment into law. sadly, both the born-alive act and the hyde amendment are under attack by my democrat colleagues. the hyde amendment protects taxpayers from paying for abortions, and has saved hundreds of thousands of lives. no one should be forced to

financially support the abortion industry. i stand with the majority of americans who believe in the essential conscience protection of this right. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committee of energy and commerce, ways and means, and judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18, and i ask for its immediate consideration in the house. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. under guidelines consistently issued by successive speakers as recorded in section 956 of the house rules and manual, the chair is constrained not to entertain the request unless it has been cleared by bipartisan floor committee leaderships. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

>> mr. speaker, my community of buffalo, new york, and our canadian neighbors in ontario would mark the first week of july with the friendship festival. mr. higgins: this year, this event that invites citizens to cross border and celebrate with music, cultural, festivities highlights the strong and lasting bond between the united states and canada. there will be no cross-border celebration this year on canada day and independence day, not due to the pandemic, but due to the failure of both countries to plan for a safe reopening of the u.s.-canadian border. for friends and families living along the northern border, crossing isn't an annual event. it's a way of life. vaccines provide the bridge that allows people to come together again. we need leadership to open those bridges and let us reunite. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlelady from iowa 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 gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today on a matter that is incredibly important to our national security, our public health knowledge, and preparing for the next pandemic. it has been well over a year since the start of the covid-19 pandemic, and our country has closed down in the face of a public health crisis the likes of which we have not seen in decades, and to this day, we still do not have an answer regarding the origins of covid-19. getting to the bottom of how this virus originated and how it spread across the globe should be one of our top priorities in congress. today, the republican members of the select subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis will hold a forum to discuss the originalins of this virus. mrs. miller-meeks: this isn't a partisan issue, and every member of this body should want to know where in virus came from.

as i said earlier, finding the origins is important to our national security, public health knowledge, and preparing for the next pandemic. additionally, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means, and the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18, no taxpayer funding for the abortion act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. mr. speaker, i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. as the chair previously stated, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: 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. mr. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. president joe biden claimed a bipartisan agreement on infrastructure. on the surface, this sounds like great news. unfortunately, quickly following this new found agreement, president biden crushed the bipartisan bill by mandating wasteful green new deal

borrowing, destroying jobs. improving america's infrastructure should be a priority and to delay it for partisan reasons is another insult to the american people. the president's voters are misled with an absurd interpretation of infrastructure. this chaotic mentality has been exhibiting a reversal from the bipartisanship he promised when running for president. dishonoring promises and undermining bipartisan negotiations, the administration should actually be focused on the needs of the american people instead of destroying jobs. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we should never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means, and the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18, no taxpayer funding for abortion act, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: as the chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> 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 remember the life of jeffrey robert halter. not only was he my neighbor and a family friend, but he was also a devoted husband to kim, director of constituent services for my congressional office. additionally, jeff was a loving father to kathryn, chelsea, laura leigh. jeff was a proud bowling green, kentucky, native. he graduated from bowling green high school in 1983 and attended stamford school of pharmacy where he graduated in 1989. mr. guthrie: as a prominent pharmacist, jeff served many patients in the local community and was always happy to help his

customers. a member of broadway united methodist chump. jeff's constage -- med dis church. jeff's contagious laugh will be remembered by all those who knew him. above all, he loved his family. in addition to his wife and two daughters, jeff's survived by his parents, brother timothy allen halter, and many other loving family members. jeff left a positive impact on our community and is greatly missed. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamborn: mr. speaker, i rise today to protect the sanctity of human life, especially the lives of the unborn. the hyde amendment has saved nearly 2 1/2 million lives since its first inclusion in an appropriation bill in 1976.

this historically bipartisan amendment, which prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars paying for abortion, is supported by a majority of americans. h.r. 18, of which i am an original co-sponsor, codifies the hyde amendment and applies it to all government funding, cementing the protections for the most vulnerable americans. this bill is called the no taxpayer funding for abortion act. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means, and the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18 and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: as the chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> to seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker.

today, i rise today to congratulate the honorable mike mcintyre, former member of the house from 1997 to 2015, for his induction into the university of north carolina's order of the golden fleece. the oldest and highest honor society at u.n.c. where mike received both a bachelor of arts and jurisdoctorate. he practiced as an attorney until he was elected to congress in 1996. during his 18 years representing other parts of north carolina, he was an advocate for rural communities, including his work on the agriculture committee and co-authoring the tobacco buyout legislation as well as fighting for full federal recognition of the lumbee. mr. bishop: for mike, country over party wasn't just a slogan. it was his approach to leadership. i'm honored not only to carry on his work serving the rural

piedmont of north carolina but strive to immolate his example as i do so. mike, congratulations on this appropriate recognition. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means, and the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: as the chair previously advised. that cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. for what purpose does the gentleman 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: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: after the five-month deployment of the natural guard around our u.s. capitol, after the fact of the january 6 break-in, the bill has come due now of over half a billion dollars, $521 million for the thousands of troops to guard this capitol. this was, again, after the big break-in of january 6.

of course, had the decisionmakers on hand here at the capitol with their security intel used ahead of time, decided to deploy just a handful of those troops, we wouldn't have had the january 6 situation happen. but they did not want the bad optics of armed troops standing in front of here at that time. so instead, we got five months worth of it with two rows of fence, razor wire, and the inability of the people to come visit their capitol. so now we have those -- months of those optics and half a billion dollar bill instead. if that bill doesn't get paid, now our national guard will not be able to do their training and have their other readiness needs met because congress hasn't paid the bill for what they didn't want -- not want ahead of time, bad optics. instead, the taxpayers get the bad optics of that bill and a possibly decimated national guard. i yield back. .

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, the biden border crisis continues raging on our southern border. cartels are getting rich, my grants are getting abused -- migrants are getting abused and assaulted and americans are becoming victims of crime. with a record number of aliens flooding across our border, what has the biden administration done? nothing. for months now the biden administration has been denying this crisis exists. telling the american people there is no crisis. telling the american people the border is closed. but we all know better. i saw it myself firsthand when i visited del rio, texas, a place where every day around 3:00 p.m. buses pulled up to the mexican side of the border and unloaded hundreds of illegal aliens. they then waded through knee-high water of the rio grande and into our country. once they arrive on the american side, they're picked up by border patrol agents in air

conditioned vans, given a wrist band and away they go to a city near you. mr. nehls: this happens tens of thousands of times every single day and there's no end in sight. not until we revert back to trump's policies. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i seek permission to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> today i rise because as a proud pro-life advocate, i cannot stay silent as i watch the biden administration chip away at the rights of defenseless unborn. democrats have been working overtime with the biden administration to roll back critical protections for the unborn. so they can push radical

pro-abortion policies and their latest victim, it appears, is the hyde amendment. for over 40 years the hyde amendment has saved millions of lives by preventing the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. a recent poll from the knights of columbus indicates that 58% of americans oppose the use of taxpayer dollars to support abortions. mr. baird: that number also includes 65% of independents and 31% of democrats. if millions of americans are against the use of tax dollars being used to support abortion, then why in congress -- is congress considering legislation that does just exactly that? if this legislation were for the people, wouldn't we listen to them instead of forcing american taxpayers to subsidize something that the majority of them are against? taking the life of an unborn child is simply unconscionable.

i believe that we are a governing body that has the responsibility to protect the life of every state, especially the defenseless unborn who are unable to advocate for themselves. we have no business using tax dollars to fund abortions. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to honor the high school softball team for winning the softball championship earlier this month with a 10-7 victory over armstrong. this is the pioneer's second state championship in just a few years. this capped off a dominant 30-win season. through the halfway mark, the pioneers were down one run entering the fifth inning. but after putting five runs on the scoreboard, including a two-run home run from senior cam biler, the game was over, the pioneers closed out to claim the

championship. mr. speaker, i'd like to extend congratulations to team members for their success this season. it's a great credit to the players, their hard work, head coach gene charles, the entire coaching staff. mr. smucker: for the past three years the pioneer have played in the championship game, bringing home the trophy this year and previously in 2018. our community's really proud of this truly outstanding accomplishment. we wish the graduating seniors best of luck in their future endeavors. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. bilirakis: i appreciate it very much. crime rates spike when you give into leftist demands and defund the police. it's as simple as that. sadly we are seeing this play out in mainly cities across the country. "the new york times" reports a sample of 37 u.s. cities saw an

18% increase in murders in the first three months of this year when compared -- when compared to last. this rhetoric and policy is dangerous, mr. speaker. and worst of all, it is responsible for the dismantling and demoralization of police departments across the country. we have also seen the dramatic increase on a tax against law enforcement this year. tragically two of my constituents are among those who have recently been killed in the line of duty. we must have law and order and support our heroes who placed their lives on the line to keep our communities safe. in short, we must defend not defund the police. thank you. -- defend, not defund, the police. thank you. it the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition?

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. blumenauer: in a moment we're going to hear the rule coming forward to support the invest in america act. i applaud my friend and colleague, peter defazio, for his tireless efforts to bring federal transportation policy into the 21st century. unlike past re-authorization bills, this legislation is centered around climate and equity. it makes historic investments in public transit and returns parity to the federal share of transit and highways, while integrating bike share and shared mobility into transit projects. it invests in amtrak and high speed rail, as well as biking and walking. i'm especially encouraged by the newly created reconnecting neighborhoods program, which will provide federal funding for projects like my community, to rebuild underserved communities that have been negatively impacted by past transportation decisions. in passing this legislation, my community and communities across

the country will be made safer with the incorporation of my vision, zero legislation. this is an unprecedented opportunity to deliver for our country and we are ready to get this job done. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the chamber for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. roy: right now in texas today, a little girl is being trafficked in human trafficking and sex trafficking. that's occurring. she's going to be put into the sex trafficking trade and be abused. and she's going to be done so because we've allowed cartels to have operational control of our border. that's true. these are facts. we know these are the facts. it's happening every single day. we see it on the ground. get the vice president of the united states -- yet the vice president of the united states only found a way to go to el paso as a pit stop on the way to los angeles. rather than meet with people in texas to see what's going on in

texas. we have no funding at all for the border, for i.c.e., for border patrol. you know what we have plenty of funding for? abortion. taxpayer funding for abortion. it is absolutely despicable the values that are being presented in the united states house of representatives, in the people's house. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that the committees on energy and commerce, ways and means and the judiciary be discharged from further consideration of h.r. 18, no taxpayer funding for abortion, and ask for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: as the chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize this past sunday, june

27, as national posttraumatic stress disorder awareness day, and june as national ptsd awareness month. we must do more to defy the stigmas surrounding mental health. national posttraumatic stress disorder awareness month is intended to raise public awareness about issues related to ptsd. reduce the stigma associated and to help ensure those suffering receive proper treatment. currently about eight million people in the united states are struggling with ptsd. treatment is a crucial tool that helps many individuals, particularly our nation's veterans, process, cope and treat emotional and mental trauma. while ptsd can develop among any individual who faces a traumatic experience, it's often common in our service men and women. many of our service members return home with injuries and scars. in some cases it is the invisible scars that hurt the most. the department of veterans affairs offers a variety of resources to help those suffering with ptsd.

there are a wide variety of options, group meetings, individual meetings, meetings via telemedicine. this ensures our veterans can receive timely assistance wherever they may live. i'd like to thank our nation's veterans for their service and encouraging those struggling with posttraumatic stress disorder to pursue treatment. thank you, mr. speaker. and 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 gentlewoman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> by direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 504 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 24. house resolution 504. resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill, h.r. 2662, to amend the inspector general act of 1978, and for other purposes. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the

committee on oversight and reform now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and reform or their respective designees, two, the further amendments described in section 2 of this resolution, and, three, the amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution, and, four, one motion to recommit. section 2. after debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution, each further amendment printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules not earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 3 of this resolution shall be considered only in the order printed in the

report, may be offered only by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. section 3. it shall be in order at any time after debate pursuant to the first section of this resolution for the chair of the committee on oversight and reform or her designee to offer amendments en bloc consisting of further amendments printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules accompanying this resolution not earlier disposed of. amendments en bloc offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on oversight and reform or their respective designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

section 4. all points of order against the further amendments printed in part a of the report of the committee on rules or amendments en bloc described in section 3 of this resolution are waived. section 5. upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill, h.r. 3005, to direct the joint committee on the library to replace the bust of roger brooke taney in the old supreme court chamber of the united states capitol with a bust of thurgood marshall to be obtained by the joint committee on the library and to remove certain statues from areas of the united states capitol which are accessible to the public, to remove all statues of individuals who voluntarily served the confederate states of america from display in the united states capitol, and for other purposes. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against

provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except, one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on house administration or their respective designees, and, two, one motion to recommit. section 6. upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill, h.r. 3684, to authorize funds for federal-aid highways, highway safety programs, and transit programs, and for other purposes. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on transportation and infrastructure now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 117-8, modified by rules committee print 117-9 and the amendment printed in part b of the report of the

committee on rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. the bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except, one, 90 minutes of debate, with 60 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on transportation and infrastructure or their respective designees and 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce or their respective designees, two, any further amendments and amendments en bloc provided by subsequent order of the house, and three, one motion to recommit. section 7. upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the house

the resolution, house resolution 503, establishing the select committee to investigate the januaryattack on the united states capitol. 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 rules or their respective designees. section 8. a, at any time through the legislative day of thursday, july 1, 2021, the speaker may entertain motions offered by the majority leader or a designee that the house suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule 15 with respect to multiple measures described in subsection b. the chair -- and the chair shall put the question on any such motion without debate or intervening motion.

b, a measure referred to in subsection a includes any measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules on the legislative day of june 28, 2021, or june 29, 2021, in the form as so offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and further proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20. c, upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection a concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such motions are considered as withdrawn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized for one hour. ms. scanlon: mr. speaker, for the purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from pennsylvania, 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 may have five

legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. mr. speaker, yesterday, the rules committee met and reported a rule, house resolution 504, providing for consideration of h.r. 2662, the i.g. independence and empowerment act, under a instruct urld -- structured rule. it will provide one hour for the chair and ranking minority member of the committee of government oversight and reform and provides one motion to recommit. it provides for consideration of h.r. 3005 under a closed rule. the rule provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on house administration and provides one motion to recommit. the rule further prosides for consideration of h.r. 3684, the invest in america act. the rule provides 90 minutes of general debate with 60 minutes equally divided and control by the chair and ranking minority

member of the committee on transportation and infrastructure. and 30 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. it combines the rules committee print for the surface transportation and clean water provisions of the bill, self-executes a manager's amendment from chairman defazio, and provides one motion to recommit. the rule additionally provides for consideration of h.res. 503, establishing the select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol, under a closed rule. the rule provides one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on rules. the rule provides the majority leader or his designee to en bloc suspension rules considered on june 28 and 29. this authority lasts through july 1. mr. speaker, we're here today to consider a rule for four measures that addresses some of the most fundamental issues upon which congress may act. as we continually strive to form

a more perfect uni, establish justice -- union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberties for all of us and our descendents. in passing these three bills and in creating a select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol, the u.s. house of representatives is putting forward real solutions to repair our physical infrastructure, protect our systems of accountability, acknowledge our relationship with the past, and establish a shared understanding and plan to address the deep wounds inflicted upon this building, those who serve and protect here, our government, and our democratic republic by the attack on the capitol on january 6. i want to first thank the members and committees that worked on the bills we consider here today. in particular, the herculean efforts by the transportation and infrastructure committee. the oversight committee. and congresswoman barbara lee, majority whip clyburn, and

majority leader hoyer, for their leadership to remove symbols of hate from the capitol building. mr. speaker, no one can deny that our nation's infrastructure is in a shameful state of disrepair. for decades, we've heard a lot of talk about infrastructure while efforts to build and maintain the networks and systems on which we all rely have been grossly underfunded. whether it be roads and bridges or ports and raillines, year after year we fail to muster the political will to properly fund infrastructure, and the consequences are increasingly dire. my district, pennsylvania's fifth congressional district, is home to philadelphia's airport, port, rail yard, and as a key part of the northeast corridor, dozens of miles of interstate highways and passenger rail lines, as well as regional commuter and light rail lines that links philadelphia and its suburb. true to its position, pp.a. -- p.a. 5th district is a key to

the network. the problems facing our transportation are not that different from other regions. our infrastructure is aging and in some cases beyond usable life span. it's heavily used and state and local authorities don't have enough money to meet maintenance needs as well as expansion and other improvements. anyone that travels our roadways knows that axle bending, tire rattling potholes are the norm. nationwide, the situation is no better. aging and inadequate electrical grid, shamefully deficient water infrastructure, 47,000 structurally deficient bridges. you can go to any congressional district and find a litany of projects in desperate need of funding. we've heard lip service about infrastructure week for so long that it's become a sick national joke. we must act now. while the u.s. has sat on its hands, our allies and

adversaries around the world have forged ahead on advanced transportation networks, to building out broadband and 5-g networks. china spends 8% of its g.d.p. on infrastructure. our european partners spend 5% on -- of their g.d.p. on infrastructure. and here in the united states, we spend a meager 2.4%. we're falling behind the rest of the world, and in doing so, failing to promote the general welfare of our citizens. that's why i'm proud to support this rule to pass the invest in america act. this bill will provide over $715 billion over the next five years to repair and improve our nation's infrastructure. it will create good-paying jobs and lay the foundation for robust economic growth in the 21st century. it will make record investments in roads, transit, and rail, allowing state departments of transportation to address maintenance backlogs and make forward-thinking investments in road safety, climate mitigation

and resiliency, and in low-income and underserved communities in our cities, suburbs, and rural areas. it will help build out our nation's e.v. infrastructure and help americans shift to the next generation of clean energy vehicles. and it will assist transit agencies in expanding service areas and adopting zero emission vehicles. and give states funding to help prepare for the impacts of climate change and extreme weather. this package also includes over $160 billion for drinking and waste water infrastructure. right now in the united states, there are millions of americans who don't have access to clean drinking water or who aren't connected to a waste water network. there's no excuse for that. the water provisions include much-needed funding to fully replace lead pipes throughout the country and strengthen water standards so that the e.p.a. can better address pfac contaminants. it is vitally important to my district and others in southeastern pennsylvania and others across the country. i commend the energy and

commerce committee for crafting this comprehensive water infrastructure package. lastly, i want to state my strong support for the member designated projects included in the invest in america act, and i want to thank chairman defazio for giving my colleagues and i on both sides of the aisle the opportunity to secure dedicated funding for important local projects in our districts and for instituting strong safeguards in this funding to prevent broad and a -- fraud and abuse. the member-designated projects process allowed us to work with our state and local transit agencies and local governments to highlight high-impact transportation projects in need of funding. i'm proud that $20 million for seven great projects in my district have been included in this bill, including redesign of dangerous rail crossings, upgrades to commuter transit stations, and perhaps most significantly, this bill includes a project i submitted with my pennsylvania colleague, representative dwight evans, to redesign cobbs creek parkway, one of the most dangerous corridors in our region and the sites of hundreds of crashes and

multiple fate talts -- fatalities year after year. it will make it safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. voting against this is voting against job. it's voting against economic growth. it's voting against safety. and voting against making sure people have clean drinking water. now is the time to tackle these issues, and so i urge all my colleagues to support this measure. mr. speaker, also included in this rule is the i.g. independence and empowerment act, a bill from the house oversight committee, to overhaul and reform the legal powers of our inspectors general. inspectors general are a vital part of our federal institutions, ensuring that taxpayers and officials have an independent source of oversight and information, to ensure the government employees from the interns to the president are following the law and properly administering their duties. for a government to function and be free of waste and corruption, to protect against fraud and impropriety, we need inspectors general who are empowered to act and who are protected from

arbitrary, capricious, our personal attacks. what we saw over the four years, we saw it was upon for an jd -- possible for an administration had unprecedented firings and denial to access to information. a little over a year ago, the former president fired five cabinet inspectors general over six weeks with the amendments often coming on friday nights when the nation's attention was elsewhere. the inspector general for health and human services was fired on the dire shortage of p.p.e. during the beginning of the pandemic. the state department inspector general was fired for investigating then secretary pompeo's use of government staff to run personal errands. and the transportation inspector general was fired for investigating suspicious grant awards to kentucky, the state represented by the former secretary's husband and senate majority -- then majority leader. in other words, these inspectors

generals were fired for doing their jobs. the i.g. independence and empowerment act will enact needed reforms to protect i.g.'s from political firings, give them -- and i strongly support the i.g. independence and empowerment act and call on my colleagues to do the same. mr. speaker, the last bill in today's rule is long overdue. the bill would replace the bust of roger brooke taney in the old supreme court chamber in the capitol with a bust of thurgood marshall and would remove the statues of individuals who voluntarily served in the confederate states of america from display in the capitol. you know, in philadelphia we have the street named after chief justice taney and we have a little league world series champion baseball team named after that street. in 2020, following conversations about race and inclusiveness in america, the taney dragons little league team decided to rename itself the philadelphia

dragons, saying they cannot ignore the very real negative feelings the name taney engenders among members of our community and the name will be inclusive, nondivisive and also speak to our league's geography. i say we follow the lead of our children on this issue. if they can do it so can we. as we seek to form that more perfect union and secure the blessings of liberty for all, we cannot accept the presidents in this capitol building icons, including the bust of the author of the dread scott legislation. symbols of the confederacy deserve to be in textbooks and museums, not ven rated in the capitol. . a select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the united states capitol building where we stand. i am, and i think most of the public is, disappointed that the senate failed to join in the establishment of a bipartisan

commission to establish once and for all the facts about what happened on that day. we had a bipartisan bill. chairman thompson and ranking member katko of homeland security, through good faith negotiations, were able to craft bipartisan legislation to create a commission to investigate the january 6 insurrection. our republican colleagues got everything they wanted in that bill. and yet their leadership withdrew its support at the last moment and couldn't take yes for an answer. since our colleagues refused to approve a bipartisan commission, the house must move ahead with an investigation of the january 6 events. and a select committee is our final avenue. we must investigate the causes and events that led to that attack. it's my sincere hope the committee can dive into the facts and produce a cohesive narrative around january 6 and the events that preceded it. and make recommendations that will prevent such horrors from ever being repeated again. the january 6 attack on our capitol was a crime.

a crime against our government, and a crime against the men and women who serve here. whether as elected officials, congressional staff, or law enforcement. period. an ugly, violent crime. and crimes need to be investigated. thousands participated, over 800 illegally entered the building. roughly 500 so far have been criminally charged by law enforcement. some have pled guilty. but the fact-finding is not yet done. we need to know how organized they were, what their level of coordination was, despite the claims of some in this chamber, we now know that many of these riots were armed. which means that every single one of us and all of our staffs were in very real danger. some of the rioters came here to abduct the vice president and the speaker of the house and put them on trial. some plan to take -- planned to take this building over and hold it until january 20 in an attempt to stave off president biden's inauguration. some just wanted to destroy things and they did. that too, the intentions of the

rioters, needs to be probed. something donald trump incite -- some think donald trump incrite this riot, some think he did not. wild claims have risen about who instigated the violence. let's investigate everything connected to this horrible event. honestly, unflinchingly, objectively, without passion or prejudice. but let us not leave this crime unexamined. if we're to come together as a nation to unite behind our shared constitutional values, to ensure domestic tranquility, and secure the blessings of democracy and liberty, we must do so from a shared understanding of reality. mr. speaker, i hope that every member of this chamber can find it in themselves to vote for this rule when it's considered on the floor. our country cannot afford to wait longer on infrastructure. if we continue with business as usual, our infrastructure deficit will continue to grow. our roads and bridges will continue to deteriorate, and our national economy will be left vibrant and competitive as a

result. we need to pass the invest in america act. full stop. we also need to pass the i.g. independence and empowerment act and we need to remove racist icons from the capitol. these repairs and reforms cannot wait. and so i hope the congress can -- find the political willing to expeditiously pass the bills considered under the rule today. mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from pennsylvania reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the distinguished gentlewoman from pennsylvania for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. and i would yield -- i would yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize. >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the rule before us today provides for consideration of four pieces of legislation. h.r. 2662, inspector general reform bill, h.r. 3005, which requires the removal of certain capitol statues, h.r. 3684, the

democrats' surface, transportation re-authorization bill, and then house res. 503, which establishes a select committee to investigate january 6. mr. reschenthaler: the first bill, h.r. 2662, reforms appointment requirements, authorities and oversight of federal inspeblingters general. republicans agree -- inspectors general. republicans agree that reforms are necessary. we agree it's necessary to ensure that i.g.'s have the tools they need to conduct robust investigation and oversight. in fact, there are several provisions in this bill that we introduced with republicans as co-leads. but unfortunately, mr. speaker, rather than working towards a bipartisan solution, the majority once again chooses a partisan approach and rejected good-faith efforts from republicans to craft a proposal that both sides agreed on. the bill before us today includes problematic language limiting a president's authority to remove an i.g., even when

that i.g. has committed dereliction of duty of an important act. further, h.r. 2662 requires the president to name the first assistant as acting i.g. without any exceptions, even when that assistant may be implicated in the very same misconduct that led to the removal of the previous i.g. lastly, the bill grants the authority to issue subpoenas for former federal officials without providing the necessary protections to prevent abuses of this authority. mr. speaker, without these problematic provisions, the i.g. reform bill could come to the floor with broad bipartisan support. it's just an absolute shame, though i must say it's not surprising, that my colleagues across the aisle once again threw away an opportunity for bipartisanship simply to score cheap political points with their radical liberal base.

in keeping with that theme, the rule makes in order h.r. 3684, the democrats' retread of last year's green new deal. only this time it's now disguys ared as infrastructure -- disguised as infrastructure. instead of working with republicans to provide desperately needed infrastructure investment, house democrats doubled down on the same mandates, the same restrictive policies, and the same social justice warrior priorities that failed to go anywhere last year. this partisan package spends nearly $548 billion on progressive priorities and programs, while actually restricting new road and bridge construction. that's right. it actually restricts new construction of roads and bridges. when we talk about the money, like i said, it's about $550 billion, that is an 11% funding increase over last year's bill. and a whopping 79% increase over

the bipartisan fast act, the last surface transportation re-authorization bill that was passed by this chamber. alarmingly, but not surprisingly, this bill was not paid for. so then where does the money come from? well, the answer is simple. deficit spending. deficit spending, which further fuels inflation and increasesth cost of things like gas -- increases the cost of things like gas and food that all americans need. simply put, every american will pay more for everything to meet the demands of the democrats' far left radical base. you would hope that with the price tag like this, with an impact on american families like this, that the bill would actually provide for massive investment to fix our nation's crumbling roads and bridges. but you'd be wrong. h.r. 3684 puts climate in the green -- and the green new deal above real infrastructure needs.

in fact, up to $1 out of every $2 spent in this bill is tied up in green new deal mandates. this bill puts up road blocks for transportation and also puts up road blocks for transporting clean burning, affordable l.n.g., liquefied natural gas, which is another blow to blue collar workers already devastated by joe biden's war on american energy and his war on blue collar workers. in focusing on this ready cal far-left priority -- on this radical far left priority, the majority has failed to include the normal reforms necessary to curb permitting delails. think about it, right now -- delays. think about it. right now it takes six years on average just to break ground on major public projects. six years. an average of 20% to 30% of infrastructure project costs are lost to red tape.

this costs real money. that means $164 billion in this bill will actually just be wasted on red tape and project delays. but that's not even the most egregious example of wasteful spending in this legislation. this bill lifts a bipartisan ban and alowls the federal transit administration -- alowls the federal transit administration to spend -- allows the federal transit administration to end -- to spend money on art. art is now infrastructure. america's taxpayer dollars are clearly hard at work. and clearly liberal new speak, orwellian new speak, on display, calling art infrastructure. finally, the bill favors big urban areas to the detriment of smaller, rural communities like the ones i represent in southwestern pennsylvania. h.r. 3684 prioritizes funding for urban transportation modes like transit and rail, over roads and bridges that everyday

americans use. in fact, more money is given to electric vehicle charging stations than to the entire rebuild rural grant program. i don't -- i'd also be remiss if i failed to point out that those very same electric vehicles cannot be built without critical minerals from china. china, of course, the world's number one polluter. so, where are the climate priorities? where are the environmental priorities that my colleagues on the liberal side of the aisle claim that they actually care about? at the end of the day, the democrats are prioritizing their fantasy of the green new deal over traditional concepts of actual infrastructure. my colleagues across this side of the aisle, the liberal party, has chosen to bough down to the woke -- bow down to the woke mob that they're terrified of. they've chosen to prioritize woke liberal upies over rural america and blue collar workers that actually work for a living.

mr. speaker, for this reason i urge my colleagues to owe knows rule and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania reserves. the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized. ms. scanlon: thank you, mr. speaker. you know, this bill is really straightforward. it increases money for surface transportation. it focuses on hard infrastructure. we need to fix the basics. and then we can improve and expand them. this bill does include money specifically directed to our rural areas and, you know, the crack about urban yuppies is kind of crazy. we know that in pennsylvania, which both the gentleman and i represent, we know that we have businesses in western pennsylvania that are losing money because the state of our roadways. if you build a turbine in western pennsylvania in order to get it to the port in eastern pennsylvania, right now, those companies have to take an 800-mile detour because our

roadways cannot support that turbine. so it's impacting their businesses, it's increasing energy costs. it's wasting time. but these kind of things affect businesses across our entire commonwealth and across our entire country. so these are much-needed overdue by decades by bipartisan neglect. this bill addresses some of those issues. with that, i would reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. reschenthaler: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to remind my colleagues across the aisle, some important facts. for one, you can't make solar panels without mining. because you have to mine critical minerals. you also can't make wind mills without steel, you can't make steel without mining coal. so just something to keep in mind. mr. speaker, last month c.b.p. encountered more than 180,000 illegal immigrants at our southern border. that's a new 21-year high.

think about it. last month in one month, almost 200,000 illegal immigrants at our southern border. many of these illegal immigrants are traveling from and through high-risk south and central american countries where covid-19 infection rates are skyrocketing. south america in particular has become a major covid-19 hot spot, with death rates eight times above the global average. and yet the biden administration is considering ending title 42, the public health authority, that allows customs and border patrol to quickly turn back my grants due to the -- migrants due to the dangers posed by highly contagious diseases. c.b.p. heavily relies on title 42 authority to expel adults and family units that illegally cross the border. in may of 2021, c.b.p. expelled more than 100,000 individuals under title 42.

mr. speaker, thanks to the draconian shutdown measures from far left governors, including pennsylvania's tom wolf, many states are still recovering from the covid-19 pandemic. ending title 42 puts that fragile recovery at risk, especially at a time when powerful variants continue to pop up across the globe. . that's why if we defeat the previous question i will personally offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider my good friend, congresswoman harrell's pause act. the pause act would provide for stringent enforcement of title 42. it would prohibit h.h.s. and d.h.s. from weakening title 42's implementation. mr. speaker, i ask for unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the record along with any extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

without objection, so ordered. mr. reschenthaler: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, here to explain the amendment is the bill's author, my good friend, congresswoman harrell, i yield her five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. herrell: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, if the previous question is defeated, we will amend the rule to immediately consider my bill, h.r. 471, the pause act, which will preserve and protect title 42 health restrictions at the border. the border is in flames. and this crisis is cruel, it's costly, and it's cowardice. biden's border crisis is harming my constituents and all americans. the ranchers and the people that live in and around the border cannot let their children play outside for fear of cartel gunmen. in the past, people along the border on the american side in my district have been held at gun point. they have had vehicles stolen. some have even been kidnapped. the first duty of our nation is to defend its border and its

people. president biden has been derelict in this duty. whether it be from the pandemic that continues or the violent criminals that cross our border in the dark of night. sheriff's are reaching out to me. just like the border patrol, they, too, are overwhelmed. they are seizing record amounts of guns, drugs, smuggled people, and untold numbers of other illicit materials are get passed them all because president biden has put politics over the american people. president obama's secretary of homeland security, jeh johnson, stated that 1,000 migrants a day was a crisis. just in may u.s. customs and border protection encountered 180,034 illegal immigrants along the southwest border, a 20-year monthly high. that amounts to 5,807 illegal immigrants per day in may. this is a crisis nearly six times greater than the threshold established by president obama's

secretary of homeland security. title 42 is the only major trump-era border policy left in place under the administration as it allowed the border patrol to quickly expel illegal immigrants sending them back across the border instead of placing them in congre gatt facilities where outbreaks of covid-19 and other variants are all but guaranteed. ending title 42 would turn what is already a crisis into an unmitigated, uncontrollable, and undeniable catastrophe. the pandemic continues to rage in latin america, and guatemala and brazil are both currently about 90% of their peak weekly infection rates. in the past eight months c.b.p. has encountered more than 170,000 migrants from those two countries alone. ending title 42 now while newer than half of the american citizens -- few than half of the american citizens are vaccinated sends the message all illegal immigration is more important

than protecting americans. despite the fact that biden wants to allow a flood of illegal immigrants in the country, he believes a health emergency still exists. he has placed several covid-19 travel bans on dozens of countries, and these bans remain in place indicating he thinks the public health emergency ongoing. speaker pelosi has extended proxy voting in the house stating there is an ongoing public health emergency due to covid. mr. speaker, if vice president hafereries had taken the time to listen to my constituents last week instead of just talking to immigration activists at the el paso airport, this administration would learn the effects of their failed policies on our border communities. that is why i invited her twice to visit my district. if she cared to respond she could have heard from the farmers, ranchers, community leaders, and residents of our border communities. she could have heard how the crisis is different between the gaps in the border wall than it is in major cities like el paso. she could have heard from the five county sheriffs in my district who wrote to me in

support of keeping title 42 in place. this crisis is a double threat and places the security of our nation and the safety of the american people at risk. at minimum, however, we need to keep at least -- at minimum we need to keep the last administration's appropriate use of title 42 in place. that's why -- that's what we could do today if the previous question is defeated. we must preserve title 42 border restrictions until all local, state, and federal government restickses end, until state and federal public health emergencies end and centers for disease control and prevention, c.d.c., covid-19 travel risk levels for canada, mexico have been reduced to level 1. i urge a no vote on the previous question. please don't make the american people pay for the mistakes made at our border because of the failed policies of this administration. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman reserves. members are reminded to refrain

from engaging in personalities toward the president. the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized. ms. scanlon: thank you. does the gentleman from pennsylvania have further speakers? mr. reschenthaler: yes, i do. ms. scanlon: then i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. reschenthaler: thank you, mr. speaker. just another fact of life now. we cannot make an electronic vehicle without critical minerals. unfortunately, due to the red tape that's put upon the mining industry by liberals across the aisle, we are now dependent on china for roughly 80% of our critical minerals. simply put, we now cannot make an electric car without china. here to talk about another predicament the liberals across the aisle put us in is my good friend from texas. i yield the gentleman from texas, my good friend, chip roy, five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. roy: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my friend from pennsylvania. i thank the gentlelady from new

mexico for articulating so well the state of our southern border, which is the direct result and consequence of the roethlisberger incompetence of the current administration and my democratic colleagues on the other side of the aisle. it's the best i can put it. or frankly it's the purposeful use of the border for political purposes. there is nothing else to explain what's happening at our border that a political party would say having cartels having operational control to our border to the detriment of the well-being of the united states and its citizens or the migrants who seek to come here getting put into human and sex traffic being trade that somehow that should be seemed as a compassionate position by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. i'll tell you that it is a policy that is in the false name of compassion. i note that vice president harris finally found her way to the border, although it was in a pit stop on her way to los angeles. taking four hours to stop in el paso for a photo-op to go say hi to border patrol en route to los angeles. that's not the kind of visit that we have been talking about

that is required of the president of the united states or his appointee, the vice president, who is supposedly in charge of securing the border of the united states. and i would note that this is real. for those of us who go an spend time on the border and talk to ranchers getting overrun, talking to people getting harmed, getting broken into, high-speed chases in communities in south texas, the massive amounts of opioids flowing into texas and throughout the rest of our country, the number of migrants being abused in the human sex trafficking trade, it's real. to the little girls i have spoken to on the border and visitsed with at midnight, coming across the river, and the dangers that they have been put into, i would ask my democrat colleagues why they don't care. why don't my democratic colleagues care about these migrants being abused and exploited by cartels. today, right now, as we speak, a child is on an interstate in texas heading to be put into child pornography and the sex

trafficking trade as we speak in the people's house. it's happening. literally at this moment. some amount of opioids is going into i-10 flowing over flue houston throughout the rest of the southeast to be distributed throughout our country. heading west on i-10 to go out to the west coast. why did governor desantis send resources to texas? his state is getting overrun by opioid abuse coming through the southwest border. we have a massively wide open border that is being exploited. and the reality of the situation is that as my democratic colleagues who refuse to enforce the law. it is simply -- it is that simple. think from october to december of 2020, in the previous administration, there were 185,000 expulsions made under title 42 which the gentlelady from new mexico just discussed. that was 85% of all encounters. think about that. 85% of the encounters we were able to expel under title 42. compared to the biden

administration since relaxes title 42, not yet eliminating it, although that's allegedly coming, relaxing it only 64% of encounters were enforced between february to april of 2021, leaving 289,000 expulsions under title 42. what will happen when that additional 60% of people are taken in? border patrol can't do their job, you you will. they can't. -- you-all. they can't. border patrol is overrun. our board certificate wide open because the border patrol is processing people at processing kenters in mcallen. the vice president would know that if she hadn't missed the park by 750 miles. landing her plane in el paso instead of mcallen. tomorrow 30 to 40 of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, unfortunately, zero to the best of my knowledge on the other side of the aisle, are going to the border to meet with governor abbott, former president trump to talk about what's happening in mcallen. where the actual crisis exists.

my friend from pennsylvania rightly noted that covid still remains a major public health issue at the border. a risk for americans and migrants. latin america, the caribbean have the hoe hiest death toll from covid-19 individual. with 32 million infections. brazil leads the region, it leads the world in a daily average number in new infections reported. colombia is reporting the highest rate in south america. honduras is 86% of peak. border patrol 32 c.b.p. employees have died. march, 7.4% of tests turned out to be passivity. and multiple facilities have had a positive rate of 10% or higher. that's the reality. title 42, the health code provisions that allow us to secure a border during the pandemic, during the spread of communicable diseases is about to be jettisoned by the biden administration, endangering the american people and our border patrol. we need to enforce the full

title 42 authority and imperative for border and public health security and defeat the previous question, amend the rule to immediate consideration of my friend from new mexico's bill, h.r. 471 as amended that will preserve existing border health measures to safeguard the citizens of f of our country. mr. reschenthaler: i yield my good friend from texas as much time as he needs to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roy: i thank the gentleman from pennsylvania. if my democrat colleagues vote for the previous question, which i expect they will do, they are choosing to pursue a radical leftist environmental agenda that will harm americans, that will harm americans rather than secure our border which we are presenting as an option. for us to do our job in the people's house, to actually do our duty as the people's house to secure the border of a sovereign nation to the benefit of our people, to the state of texas, our entire nation as a whole, and the migrants who seek to come here. that's the choice right now, ladies and gentlemen. it is a choice for this body, choose to secure the border of

the united states and make our country stronger, or secure a political agenda which has no hope of uniting this country and benefiting the american people. the small businesses that the gentlelady from pennsylvania was talking about. let's talk about the small businesses that got crushed under covid. crushed by the policies of this body and others that were shutting businesses down to the tune of 100,000 businesses, forcing them to close. let's talk about the impact of our kids and schools and the masks being worn and the mental health issues and cancer screenings that didn't occur because we locked down and shut down our economy. right now let's talk about the damage being done to this country because of wide open borders with empowered cartels. we should right now defeat the previous question so that we can amend it to do the work of the american people. i yield back to the gentleman from pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. reschenthaler: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized. ms. scanlon: does the gentleman have additional speakers? mr. reschenthaler: we are prepared to close. ms. scanlon: i think we have one more speaker. i am finding the argument a little bit hard to follow from

my colleagues across the aisle as i understand it it was a bad thing to shut down businesses in the u.s. to protect people when there was a vie rass rampant here but we have to shut down the border because there is a virus rampant here. it's a little hard to follow the logic sometimes. i think i have -- or not. waiting for godot. ok. i think if the gentleman is prepared to close then i would reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. reschenthaler: thank you, mr. speaker. i am, indeed, prepared to close. i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: so ordered. mr. reschenthaler: thank you, mr. speaker. once again this chamber's considering legislation that could easily have passed with bipartisan support. if democrats would stop appeasing the radical progressive base, they would stop worrying about what whiny

spoiled millennials are saying on twitter, if they decided they would finally try to approach their work here in some kind of bipartisan manner, then we could work for real solutions, for real americans, that would help the country. . i urge my colleagues to vote no on the previous question and no on the rule. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman from pennsylvania yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized. ms. scanlon: mr. speaker, i'd like it thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for the livelyly debate today. i understand -- lively debate today. i'm i understand there are some who have concern -- i understand there are some who have concerns with the underlying bill. these things would greatly benefit all of us. we should be able to support robust infrastructure spending that meets our nation's current needs. we should all support a vigorous corps of inspectors general who can weed out fraud, waste and corruption in the federal

government. we should all support removing symbols of hate from the capitol. these should be easy bills for us all to get behind. lastly, i strongly support the creation of a select committee to investigate the january 6 insurrection and debunk the absurd theories and falsehoods that have infected our collective understanding of that day. while some of our colleagues may continue that denial, those of us in this chamber who are committed to transparency and accountability and the well-being of the nation can no longer afford to be held back by the sensitivities of those who put their feelty to the former president over their duty or obligation to the country. so, mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote for the rule in previous -- and previous question. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. mr. reschenthaler: mr. speaker, on that i ask for the yeas and

nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania asks for the yeas and nays. 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 arizona seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes on the previous question. and as the member designated by mr. grijalva, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. grijalva will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by representative carl of alabama, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that representative carl will vote no on the previous question.

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

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. jacobs, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. jacobs will vote nay on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. desjarlais of tennessee, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. desjarlais will vote nay on the previous question. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from sbling something seek recognition? -- for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. timmons of south carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. timmons will vote nay. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. connolly: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. kind of wisconsin, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. kind will vote aye on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by mr. burgess owens of utah, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. owens will vote nay on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jeffries: chairwoman eddie

bernice johnson, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that chairwoman johnson will vote yea on the previous question. as the member designated by congresswoman grace meng, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congresswoman meng will vote yea on the previous question. as the member designated by congressman steven horsford, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congressman horsford will vote yea on the previous question. as the member designated by congresswoman sylvia garcia, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congresswoman garcia will vote yea on the previous question. as the member designated by congressman ritchie torres, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congressman torres will vote yea on the previous question. 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 yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. gaetz of florida -- mr. steube of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. steube will vote no on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. leger fernandez, nouse i inform the house that ms. leger fernandez will vote yes on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. fallon, the great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. fallon will vote no on the previous question. as the member designated by by mr. babin from the great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. babin will vote no on the previous question. as the member designated by mr. cawthorn, great state of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote no

on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady 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 the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? mr. lucas: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. mullin of oklahoma, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mullin will vote no on the previous question. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. sewell, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. sewell will vote yes on the

previous question. miss dell ben as the member designated by, ms. strickland, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. strickland 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. gallego, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will votey on the previous question. as the member designated by mr. caras, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cardenas will votey on the previous question. as the member designated by mr. garcia, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. garcia will votey on the previous question. -- will vote aye on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek

recognition? >> thank you, mr. speaker. mr. evans: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. lawson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lawson will vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by miss rice of new york, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss rice 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. vince gonzalez, pursuant to

house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gonzalez will vote yes on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. donald payne, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. payne will vote yes on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. hoyer, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. hoyer will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. butterfield: as the member designated by ms. jackson lee of of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. jackson lee will vote yes, she will vote yes on the previous question. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. wilson, pursuant to house resolution 8, 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 virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr.on, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cohen will vote yes on 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 the previous question. as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by -- mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. young from the great state of alaska, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house

that mr. young will vote nay on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? ms. kuster: as the member designated by ms. clark of massachusetts, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. clark will vote yes on the previous question. as the member designated by by ms. bourdeaux, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. bourdeaux will vote yes on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are --

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the memr designated by mrs. mcclain of michigan, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote no on the previous question.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 213, the nays are 195.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 214, the nays are -- the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 214, the nays are 195. the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from pennsylvania requests the yeas and nays. 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 texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. fallon from the great state of texas, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. fallon will vote

no on the rule. as the member designated by mr. babin from the great state of texas, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. babin will vote no on the rule. as the member designated by mr. cawthorn, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote no on the rule. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes on h.res. 504. as the member designated by mr. grijalva, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. grijalva will vote yes on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. owens, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. owens will vote no on the rule.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. correa: as the member designated by -- >> as the member designated by mr. chuy garcia, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. garcia will vote aye on h.res. 504. as the member designated by mr. cardenas, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. cardenas will vote aye on h.res. 504. as the member designated by mr. gallego, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote aye on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. desjarlais of tennessee, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. desjarlais will vote nay on the rule. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. sewell, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. sewell will vote yes on h.res. 504. as the member designated by ms. strickland, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. strickland will vote yes on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. mullin of

oklahoma, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. mullin will vote no on the rule. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. vince gonzalez, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. gonzalez will vote yes on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. mcclabe of -- mrs. mcclain of michigan,

pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote no on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. cohen, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. cohen will vote yes on h.res. 504. as the member designated by mr. lieu, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. lieu will vote yes on h.res. 504. as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yes on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? russell wilson -- mr. wilson: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. timmons of south carolina, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. timmons will vote nay on the rule. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. butterfield: as the member designated by ms. jackson lee of texas, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. jackson lee will vote yes on

h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. steube of florida, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. steube will vote no on the rule. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member

designated by miss rice of new york, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that miss rice will vote yes on h.res. 504. >> as the member designated by mr. young, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. young will vote nay on the rule. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? ms. kuster: as the member designated by ms. clark of massachusetts, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. clark will vote yes on h.res. 504. as the member designated by ms. boudreau, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. boudreau will vote yes on h.res. 504.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. donald payne, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. payne will vote yes on h.res. 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. correa: mr. speaker, as the member designated by congress member napolitano, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that congress member napolitano will vote yes on h.res. 504.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> hi, madam speaker. as the member designated by mr. ruiz, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote yes on house resolution 504. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? mrs. hayes: as the member designated by ms. wilson, pursuant to h.r. 8, i inform the house that ms. wilson will vote yes on h.res. 504.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house i inform the house that -- will vote no on the rule.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. jacobs of new york, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. jacobs will vote nay on the rule. the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 218.

the nays 197. does any member wish to change a vote? on this vote the yeas are 218. the nays are 197. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from massachusetts seek recognition? mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, pursuant to section 8 of house resolution 504, i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1500, h.r. 2471, h.r. 3261, h.r. 3283, and h.r. 3385 and agree to

h.res. 186 and h.res. 402. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: h.r. 1500, a bill to direct the administrator of the united states international development to submit to congress a report on the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on global basic education programs. h.r. 2471, a bill to measure the progress of post disaster recovery and efforts to address corruption, governance, rule of law, and freedoms in haiti. h.r. 3261, a bill to repeal the authorization for use of military force against iraq resolution. h.r. 3283, a bill to repeal the joint resolution entitled a joint resolution to promote peace and civility in the middle east. h.r. 3385, a bill to wave the

requirement to undergo a medical examine for aliens who are otherwise eligible for immigrant status in the protection act of 2009 and for other purposes. house resolution 186, house resolution calling for the immediate release of trevor reed, united states citizen, who was unjustly found guilty and sentenced to nine years in a russian prison. house resolution 402, resolution urging the administration to facilitate assistance in response to the devastating impact of covid-19 in india. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 504 ordering the yeas and nays on the post opponented motions to suspend the rules with respect to such measures is vacated to end that all such motions are considered as withdrawn. .

the gentleman from maryland. >> madam chair, on this motion i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the section 3 of the 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 california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by miss rice of new york, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that miss rice will vote yes on the suspension en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. wilson: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. timmons of south carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. timmons will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? mrs. hayes: as the member designated by ms. wilson, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. wilson will

vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. mcclain of michigan, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote yes on the en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. lawson of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. lawson will vote yes on this en bloc. also, madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. mfume of maryland, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mfume will vote yes, too. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition?

mr. fleischmann: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. desjarlais of tennessee, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. desjarlais will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. vince gonzalez, pursuant to h.res. 8, i will inform the house that will gonzalez will vote yes on the suspension en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition?

meb -- as the member designated by representative carl, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that representative carl will vote yes to the suspension en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. aguilar: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. ruiz, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote yes to the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. burgess owens, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. owens will vote yea to the suspension en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. hoyer, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. hoyer will vote yes to the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. steube, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. steube will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. stanton: madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes to the suspensions en bloc. and as the member designated by mr. grijalva, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. grijalva will vote yes to the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? mr. lucas: madam speaker, as the member designated by representative mullin of oklahoma, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mullin will vote yes. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. correa: 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 the suspension en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> the lovely madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. young from the great state of alaska, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. young will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. donald payne, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. payne will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from washington seek recognition? ms. delbene: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. sewell, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. sewell will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. and as the member designated by ms. strickland, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. strickland will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jeffries: as the member designated by chairwoman eddie bernice johnson, pursuant to

h.res. 8, i inform the house that chairwoman johnson will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. snait snait congress -- as the member designated by congresswoman grace meng, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congresswoman meng will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by congressman steven horsford, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congressman horsford will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by congresswoman sylvia garcia, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congresswoman garcia will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by congressman richie torres, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congressman torres will vote yea on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. jacobs of new york, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. jacobs will vote yea to the

suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. cohen, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. cohen will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by mr. lieu, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lieu will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yea to the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. jacobs: as the member designated by ms. leger fernandez, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. leger fernandez will vote yes to the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? ms. kuster: mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. clark of massachusetts, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss clark will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by by ms. bourdeaux, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. bourdeaux will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady 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 the suspensions en bloc. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas -- >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. fallon of the great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. fallon will vote no on the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by mr. babin from the great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. babin will vote no on the suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by mr. cawthorn great state of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote yes on the suspensions en bloc. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. garcia, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. garcia will vote aye on suspensions en bloc. as the member designated by mr. cardenas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that cardenas will vote aye on suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. gallego, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote aye on the suspensions en bloc.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote 3 -- the yeas are 366. the nays are 46. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and the resolutions are agreed to and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. without objection, the title of h.r. 1500 is amended. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20rks the unfinished business -- 20, the unfinished business of the vote on the motion of the gentleman from new york. mr. meeks, to suspend the rules,

pass h.r. 567 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title. the clerk: h.r. 567, bill abill to establish an interagency program to assist countries in north and west africa to improve immediate long-term capabilities and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. as amended. 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 california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by miss rice of new york, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss rice will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. timmons of

south carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. timmons will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. gomez: as the member designated by mr. cardenas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cardenas will vote aye on h.r. 567. as the member designated by mr. garcia, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. garcia will vote aye on h.r. 567. as the member designated by mr. gallego, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote aye on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by representative carl of alabama, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that representative carl will vote yes on h.r. 567.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from washington seek recognition? ms. delbene: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. sewell, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. sewell will vote yes on h.r. 567. as the member designated by strickland, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss strictland will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. steube of florida, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. steube will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by vince gonzalez, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. gonzalez will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition?

>> madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. mcclain of michigan, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mrs. mcclain will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. trone: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. hoyer pursuant to h.r. 8, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. higher will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma seek recognition? mr. lucas: madam speaker as the member designated by mr. mullin of oklahoma, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. mullin are vote yes, thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? ms. kuster: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. clark of massachusetts, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. clark will vote yes on h.r. 567. as the member designated by ms.

bourdeaux, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. bourdeaux will vote yes on h.r. 567.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. falin, great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. fallon will vote yes on h.r. 567. as the member designated by mr. babin from the great state of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. babin will vote yes on h.r. 567. as the member designated by mr. cawthorn from the great state of north carolina, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. cawthorn will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. ruiz, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. ruiz will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. desjarlais of

tennessee, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. desjarlais will vote yea on h.r. 567. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? mr. butterfield: as the member designated by ms. jackson lee of texas, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. jackson lee will vote yes, she will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. young from the great state of alaska, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. young will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. correa: 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 h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman

from arizona seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by miss boebert from colorado, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that miss boebert will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by, ms. leger fernandez, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that ms. leger fernandez will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. jacobs of new york, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. jacobs will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. connolly: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. kind of wisconsin, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. kind will vote aye on h.r. 567. .

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? mrs. hayes: as the member designated by ms. wilson, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that ms. wilson will vote yes to h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. lowenthal, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lowenthal will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition?

mr. curtis: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. burgess owens, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. owens will vote yes on h.r. 567. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. 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.r. 567. and as the member designated by mr. grijalva, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. grijalva will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition? ms. underwood: as the member designated by mr. rush, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. rush will vote yes on h.r. 567.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jeffries: thank you, madam speaker. as the member designated by chairwoman eddie bernice johnson, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that chairwoman johnson will vote yea on h.r. 567. as the member designated by congresswoman grace meng, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congresswoman meng will vote yea on h.r. 567. as the member designated by congressman horsford, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congressman horsford will vote yea on h.r. 567. as the member designated by congresswoman sylvia garcia,

pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congresswoman garcia will vote yea on h.r. 567. and as the member designated by congressman richie torres, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congressman torres will vote yea on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. pallone: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. donald payne, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. payne will vote yes on h.r. 567. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. evans: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. lawson of florida, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr.

lawson will vote yes -- vote yes. madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. mfume of maryland, mr. mfume votes yes. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the arizona are 395, the nays are 15. -- the yeas are 395rk the nays are 15.

without objection the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california, ms.-green, seek recognition? ms. lofgren: pursuant to h.res. 504, i call up h.r. 3005. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the titetholve ebill. the clerk: h.r. 3005, a bill to direct the joint committee on the library to replace the bust of roger buntawney with a bust of thurgood marshall and to remove certain statues from areas of the capitol to remove all statues of all individuals who voluntarily served the confederate states of the united states from display in the united states capitol and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 504, the bill is considered

read. the bill shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on house administration or their respective designees. the gentlewoman from kale, ms. lofgren, and the gentleman from georgia, mr. lauder milk, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. lofgren. ms. lofgren: i ask unanimous consent that all members have -- be permitted to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. lofgren: i yield myself such time as i may consume. rye -- i rise in support of this bill. it directs the joint committee on the library to replace the bust of chief justice roger tawney in the old supreme court chamber with a bust of justice thurgood marshall and directs the removal of statues an busts of individuals who served the confederacy and other white

supremacists. the united states capitol is a beacon of democracy, freedom and equality. visited by millions of people each year before covid hit and soon, we hope, to be visited by millions of people again. what and who we choose to honor must refrequent our values. chief justice tawney declared the african-americans cowl never be citizens of the united states and had no constitutional rights does not meet this standard and neither do the white supremacists and confederates we continue to honor with statues today. justice tawney's decision continued and permitted the expansion of slavery. those who founded, served, and fought for the con federalcy were willing to spill american blood in defense of it. in his infamous cornerstone speech, confederate vice

president alexander stevens said slavery and white supremacy were the cornerstone of the confederacy. there are no shortage of figures like justice thurgood marshall, the first african-american to serve on the supreme court, more deserving of the honor of being displayed in our capitol. there are some who argue that this action is an attempt to erase and forget our history. nothing could be further from the truth. we must never forget our nation's shameful periods of slavery, segregation, racism. this is instead about who we choose to honor. who we choose to literally put on a pedestal and display as emblematic of our values. we're just months removed from january 6, when a mob of insurrectionists looking to violently overturn a presidential election stormed this very building. during that awful attack, the

same confederate flag carried into battle against the united states in the 19th century was again carried into battle against the united states and into this very capitol. it is long past time to remove from a place of honor in our nation's capitol the statues and busts of those who favored war against the united states in support of the so-called government founded on a cornerstone of racism and white supremacy. outside the old supreme court chamber, before you get to the tawney bust, you pass another sculpture which depicts the figures of history and justice. today we can demonstrate to the nation and the world that we have learned from our history and we continue to pursue justice. put another way, we can follow the advice of the great american poet and civil rights activist, maya angelo. this is what she said. do the best you can until you

know better. then, when you know better, do better. let us now show ourselves and the world that we are who we claim to be. let us do better. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting h.r. 3005 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague, the chair of of the house administration committee, for the opportunity to be here today. i rise in opposition to h.r. 3005. not because of the goals that it attempts to achieve. many of us have been fighting for those same things, in fact, some of the comments that she made you'll find in my remarks about some of the people whose statues are here that i do not believe should be in this honored building and i have fought for a long time to remove

those. but i am in opposition to the process of which we're trying to impose to do this. with that, i'd like to yield three minutes to my good friend, the gentlewoman from north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman from georgia for yielding. madam speaker, republicans and democrats agree that racism, in any shape or form, is repugnant and must be denounced. i do intend to vote for this bill as i did last summer when congress considered a similar measure. it is interesting, however, that our colleagues across the aisle have only recently deemed the cause of removing statues worthy of immediate action. when you look at the facts, it's even more puzzling. since 1870, statues have been present in the united states capitol and democrats retained a

majority in the house 40 times since then. they've had ample opportunities to remove the statues that members of their own party are responsible for placing in the capitol in the first place, but have done nothing. again, the timing here is rather peculiar. after retaining the majority 40 times, one would think that if this were truly a pressing issue they would have acted sooner. for many years, i've advocated that north carolina's statues of charles acook and zebulin advance be removed based their ties to the confederacy. i suggested two statues of people that all north carolinians and all americans can be proud of be put in their place. i'm proud that the first republican majority in north carolina's legislature in 140

years voted in 2015 to replace the acook statue with the statue of reverend billy graham. yet this request has been awaiting action by the democrat-chaired joint committee on the library for months. if they were truly concerned about removing these statues, they might be quicker to act on the request to replace some of the very same statues. i'll look past the times the north carolina democrat party used governor acook's name in fundraising materials. and the meetings they held in buildings that sported his name. maybe today's vote is to compensate for the decades of inaction under democrat-controlled house of representatives. we'll let the american people decide.

republicans are always open for a spirited debate on this issue. and i'm confident that we can find common ground. while i plan to support this legislation and recognize its underlying intent, this is an issue that is way past its due date. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the chair -- ms. lofgren: before yielding to the gentleman from north carolina i would like to note, correct the record, that the joint committee on the library organized last wednesday and until last wednesday the joint committee was chaired by senator roy blunt of missouri, republican senator, and i have new been chair for six days and hope to act promptly on the north carolina matter. with that, i would yield four

minutes to the distinguished chair of the elections subcommittee in the house administration committee, mr. g.k. butterfield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. butterfield: let me first thank the chair for her friendship and leadership on our committee an thank you for yielding time this afternoon. madam speaker, just a little bit of history. i want to take you back to 1860, president lincoln won the general election in 1860 by winning 18 of 29 states. madam speaker, the 11 states lincoln failed to carry were slaveholding states. these states were fearful that lincoln would find a way to end slavery and deprive slave owners of their free labor. 11 southern states immediately seceded from the uniforming the confederate states of america. they printed a currency and set up a military. at fort sumter on april 12,

1861, c.s.a. took military action against the united states of america. following -- for the following four years more than 600,000 americans lost their lives on the battlefield, including black union soldiers. this was not a war between the states. it was a war against the united states by 11 southern states including my state. when the union finally won the war, both sides buried their dead, four million slaves were granted their freedom by the passage and ratification of the 13th amendment. in 1864, each state was granted the privilege to donate two statues of deceased persons to be displayed in this capitol that depict the history of their state. these statues are now known as the national statuary hall collection. approximately 10 of these depict men who volunteered to fight against the united states in the civil war. all of these statues were donated, many decades after the war. like many other statues around

the country honoring members of the cop fed rat states of america, particularly those erected in the south, these were not donated and installed in the capitol until the 1900's. during the height of the jim crow era. many americans see the timing of their placement to intimidate african-americans. we must not continue to honor these combatants by allowing their images to be displayed in this capitol. the bill before us today identifies several other statues for removal that are not part of the cleck including the bust of chief justice roger tawney who authored the 1857 supreme court decision of dred scott that said slaves couldn't be considered citizens and congress didn't have the ability to ban slavery. this is regarded as possibly the supreme court's worst decision of all time. and the 7-2 decision was a major exactor contributing to the civil war.

another bust, and i'll conclude with this. another bust, not part of the statuary hall collection is for vice president. vice president john breckenridge, 1856 to 1859. in 186 0 he ran for president on the southern democratic ticket and he lost. during the civil war, breckenridge served in the united states senate from kentucky. but became a traitor, became a traitor and enlisted in the confederate military and assigned to the army of mississippi achieving the rank of major general. and it gets worse. he was expelled from the united states senate. jefferson davis then appointed him as secretary of war. after the war, he fled the country. he fled the country for several years, madam speaker, this statue must also be removed. i asked my colleagues to answer the summonses of our time by voting to remove these statue fless capitol of the united states of america. thank you and i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, again, ma'am chair. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. as i stated earlier, you'll find that many, if not all, on this side of the aisle will agree with most of the comments, if not all the comments made by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. i think we need to go back and look at where we've been as a nation and where we're going and a lot of what we put into this building should reflect not only our history but our values as a nation. that's why i in the past have advocated strongly for certain statues to be removed. i think it's important now that we have both parties looking at this. .

it can't be overstated how this institution condemns slavery. i believe this nation has done that and continues to do that. in fact, when i was in the georgia legislature, i realized that georgia was the sole state of the former confederacy that had not officially condemned the act of slavery nor had condemned its participation in slavery during the -- these dark periods of our nation. so i introduced legislation called the freedom resolution, which would formally acknowledge the ills and the hatred and this dark period of our nation that our government, our state government, the state that i love, was actually engaged in. that was a very painful time in our history, but we learned from that history. i don't think anyone wants to forget that time period. or we'll repeat that in some shape, form, or fashion. it's important the statue we

have here reflect the values of this nation. in fact, i was very vocal many times in the past of georgia's one of two statue here, alexander stevens. to say he was a racist was an understatement. as mentioned his cornerstone address. it is wrought with the ideas that all men are not created equal. in fact, he was very condemning of thomas jefferson and george washington. even went as far as illustrating they were insane because of our founding documents being built upon a false premise and that false premise was the idea that god created all of us equal because he went on to say that god didn't create us equal. he went on to say that white people were superior and that that is why we have the institution of slavery and it should be preserved. those are not ideas that are commensurate with what we believe in this nation.

that it was -- but it was during a time period where many of the old south, democrat-led houses and senate and commissions were trying to hold on to those old ideas and principles. that our party, party of emancipation, brought up, abraham lincoln, we had been opposed to these ideas and we totally wrapped our arms around this idea that all men are created equal. that we are all given equal opportunity. that all life is important. that everyone is created in the eyes of god. and that this government exists to protect those freedoms and those liberties. but there are those in the democrat-controlled southern states that wanted to hold onto the old ideas. those ideas that alexander stevensess spoused. so -- stevens espoused. so that's in georgia, democratic-led commission, wanted to poke their eyes in the federal government and they nominated or they placed as statues these people that held ideas different than what we

hold. we hold as a party over here, we hold as a nation today. my opposition to this bill isn't because of the goal that we're trying to achieve. but it's the way that the majority continues to skirt procedure in this body. for the second consecutive congress. this bill was rushed to the floor without a hearing and markup in the committee on house administration. i'm sure we'll hear from my colleagues on the other side say that republicans are insincere and our opposition to slavery and dragging our feet when it comes to removing these statues. in fact, it was a republican, a good friend of mine in the state legislature, scott turner, that introduced legislation that he knew i supported and i came out wanting to replace stevens' statue with the statute of martin luther king jr. we talk about north carolina has already taken action to remove their statue and replace them.

but i'm very concerned over this committee. the joint committee on the library, the committee that is responsible for facilitating the removal of statue, was only organized last week. this is six months from the start of the 117th congress. now, i believe i've been on the joint committee of library and i was very excited the first year i was appointed to the joint committee on the library because, as a fan of the library of congress, i thought this would be a great opportunity to participate in preserving history and heritage of this nation. but of the three terms that i have been on that committee, from my recollection, the committee has only met three times. that was an organizational meeting each time. so it's -- it's hard to do your work when you don't even get together to do the work. the lack of urgency to organize a committee is a concern.

even as our failure to deal with replacement requests from state legislatures. the state of north carolina began the process of switching out the statue of charles brantley acot with the reverend billy graham. this past, the north carolina house, 72-28, a bipartisan vote, in the senate, 44-0, unanimous vote in the north carolina house. but yet, we still have not taken action on approving that for a man who definitely had a very strong impact, not only on civil rights, but as our nation as a whole, who we so respect him his body laid in the rotunda not too long ago. yet, we still have not been able to move on getting that done. as well as several other states. i believe that we need to focus our efforts on changing this process, because i think it will mean a whole lot more, whole lot more to this body as well as to

the american people if the states who originally put those statues in here were the ones who now ask they would be removed. i think that will be much more appropriate than this body taking action. if we reformed our process to make it where the states could actually do it, it would mean a whole lot more to the future of our nation. with that, madam chair, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, before yielding, i just want to note for purposes of clarifying the historical record, that the republicans in the 19th century and early 20th century bear almost no resemblance to the republican party today. the democratic party today bears no resimilar yens to the democratic -- resimilar ambulance to the democratic party of the 19th and 20th century. the republicans were generally

the party of the northerners and the democrats were the party of the south. that has switched. at this point, i would be pleased to yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, the speaker of the house. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes madam speaker from california her special minute. the speaker: thank you very much, madam speaker. i thank, madam chair, for yielding and for her leadership on this very important issue. and the point she makes is interesting because actually in terms of the 14th amendment when black americans were given the right to vote, it was the republicans who were the votes to make that happen and the democrats to a person voted against it. so your point is well taken. now we're in a fight to protect that right to vote. we'll have that conversation another day. today, we are here for a very specific purpose.

madam speaker, this weekend we observe the birth of our nation, the fourth of july, when americans joyfully celebrate the birth of america's independence and the blessings of liberty. as we do so, we solemnly recognize that those blessings have been denied to so many throughout our nation's history out of sheer bigotry and racism. this holiday, while a celebration, is also an opportunity to take steps to right the wrongs of history starting here, right here in the u.s. capitol. that is why today we're again passing legislation to remove statues of confederate officials and other advocacies of bigotry and removing them from the u.s. capitol. as i have said before, the halls of congress are the very heart of our democracy. the statues that are display

should embrace our highest ideals as americans, expressing who we are and who we aspire to be as a nation. monuments to men or people who advocated cruelty and barbarrism to achieve such a -- barbarism to achieve such a grotesque end is an affront to those ideals. they're homage to hate, not heritage. they must be removed. thank you to leader steny hoyer, who has been advocating this for a long time. it took charge and worked with whip jim clyburn, congressional black caucus chair joyce beatty, chair benny thompson, congresswoman barbara lee, congressman g.k. butterfield, whom we just heard from, and you, madam chair, you and others for your leadership. this action builds on action taken last juneteenth when using my authority as house speaker, i ordered the removal of four

portraits of past speakers from the capitol who trait ousley served -- traitor ousley served among the confederacy. among those we are addressing today are jefferson davis and alexander stevens, president and vice president of the confederacy. respectfully, both of whom were charged with treason against america. this legislation also removes from the old supreme court chamber in the capitol the bust of justice roger taney, a defender of slavery and author of the 1857 dread scott ruling, one of the most horrific stains on our nation and our court's history. mr. hoyer has been particularly in removing justice taney. removing these statues will not erase the stain and that of other racist acts in our history, nor will erase racism

that exists in our country today. but it is an important and necessary step. how can we seek to end the scourge of racism, including the passing the george -- if we can do so -- by passing the george floyd justice in policing act, which you have championed, madam speaker, when we allow the worst perpetrators of that racism should be lauded in the halls of congress? congress has the opportunity and the obligation to make meaningful change that must lead by example. the taney bust will be replaced by a tribute to u.s. supreme court justice thurgood marshall, an icon of equality and justice and champion of justice in america. i'm very proud of justice marshall's baltimore roots, as a native baltimorean, and i'm happy that our baltimore airport is named for him. his words -- justice thurgood

marshall's words, uttered nearly 30 years ago, must be or inspiration. he said, america must get to work. we must descend from the difference, apathy, we must descent from the fear, the hatred, the mistrust. he said, we must descent because america -- dissent because america can do better, because america has no choice but to do better. it is echoed by our baltimore brother, elijah cummings, who said we are better than this. we can do better for the children. i urge a strong bipartisan vote on this important step to do better, to do right the wrongs of history, and to move our nation toward a future of justice. and i do so with gratitude for all of the champions who have brought us to this important day. i urge a strong bipartisan vote

and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: thank you. i yield to the leader of the republicans here in the house, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. mccarthy: thank you, madam chair. madam speaker, you've been a dear friend for a long time. you've been to my office. you sat on the couch, sat across the chair and you know the portrait that hangs in my office. portrait of abraham lincoln. i am proud he was the first republican president of the united states. i'm proud of the acts that he took during a defining time of our nation. the greatest challenge ever to our constitution was the civil war. long and by far. the bill we're voting on today

we voted before. and i supported it. i support it now. but let me state a simple fact. all the statues being removed by this bill are statues of democrats. madam speaker, as i heard the speaker talk earlier about removing other four portraits of speakers in the hall, same answer goes to that as well. they were all democrats. . the statues were sent to the house that were majority controlled of democrats accepting of these statues. i think the bill should go further. . maybe it's time the democrats change the name of their party.

maybe desperate to pretend their party has progressed from their days of supporting slavery, pushing jim crow laws or supporting -- but let's be honest. at anyplace, anytime, if those fundamentals rests somewhere, we cannot let them. . let's go through some of the words and actions of a few democrats. just a few years ago, then-vice president joe biden praised democrat senator robert byrd. he was the exalted head of the ku klux klan. in 4izz eulogy for byrd he said, for a lot of us he was a friend, a mentor and a guide. another leading democrat who

praised byrd was speaker pelosi who called him a friend, a great person, a great american patriot. madam speaker, today, the democratic party doubled down on what i consider the shameful history by replacing the racism of the past with the racism of the critical race theory. they continue to look at race as a primary means of judges a person's character. we saw this just last week. senate democrats voted to confirm one of president biden's appointees who said, let me quote, we must do everything in our collective power to realize dr. kennedy's vision for america. let me be clear about what that vision is. kennedy, the author of "how to be an anti-racist" proposed in his book that the solution to past discrimination is present

discrimination. now that's what the person who is now in charge of the personnel of the entire federal government is endorsing. this division isn't confined to just one person or department. the navy included kennedy's book on its official reading list for sailors in the department of education. has praised the debunked 1619 project. citing it as an example of what should be taught to our children. critical race theory is the governing ideology of a -- of the biden administration. by advocating for it, democrats can't to fuel hatred and division across the country. i agree with senator scott, america is not a racist country. america must reject critical race theory for the simple

reason state-sponsored racism is wrong and always will be. it was wrong when it was segregated lunch counters of jim crow. it was wrong when it was segregated class roovepls critical race theory. madam speaker, many times i wonder. what would america have looked like had abraham lincoln not been assassinated? malice toward none. but what would america have looked like had the agreement to remove the federal troops from the south because joseph rainey was elected to congress. jim crow laws were passed by democrat-controlled offices in the south. our nation was built on the unifying vision from the beginning. -- from the beginning. as lincoln said, we are conceived in liberty the

dedicated proposition that we are all equal. i'll vote for this bill today just as i voted for it before. but madam speaker, if we have not learned anything we should not divide our nation based on race. i applaud the democrats for standing up, removing democrat statues from democrat-controlled majorities sent to a democrat majority house who accepted them. it is about time. but madam speaker, to continue along in a critical race theory where you would teach an individual that they're right or wrong based on the color of their skin goes against everything we're voting on today. madam speaker, you know my heart. and i know yours. at times we might disagrea on philosophy. or how best to run a government.

but we never disagreed about judging somebody by the color of their skin. and i hope we take this moment and this opportunity as we promised before to strive to be a more perfect union. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlelady from california. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, we are so lucky to have as our whip someone who started his public service as a fighter for civil rights. like our colleague, the late john lewis, our whip put his life on the line for civil rights and for voting rights and i yield to him five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the majority whip.

mr. clyburn: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlelady for yielding me the time. i listened pretty intently to the minority leader. talking about theory. a principal. -- a principle upon which a set of practices are made. that's what a theory is. we're not here today to talk about theory. today, we are talking about some actions. some practices that were made. we're talking about moving to make this nation more perfect. one of the ways to do that is by recognizing and admitting that we have a very spotty history when it comes to race. i met my late wife in jail. protesting practices that were

based upon our skin color. racial inequities. that's what this is all about. one of the statues in this building, sent up here by my state, south carolina, is a statue of john c. calhoun. john c. calhoun is not here because he defended the southern states. during the civil war. we talk about those generals, all over this place. john c. calhoun died in 1850. more than a decade before the civil war started. so why is he here? why is south carolina -- why did south carolina send this statue up here for us to honor. simply because he was this

nation's foremost proponent of slavery. so much so until yale university from which he graduated took his name off the college that they celebrated him with. princeton university, he was one of the founders of, took his name off of its honors college. charleston, south carolina, where he is buried, took his statue down overnight. people went to bed around 11:00 at night look at the statue and got up at 6:00 the next morning, it was gone. because south carolina has done everything they can to get beyond those principles advocated by john c. calhoun. but his statue is here. i want to thank the speaker for

moving that statue someplace out of the eyesight of any school child coming up here. this hall, america's classroom. we ought to be teaching in this hall that which is wholesome about this country. that is a great country. nobody denies that. i don't call this a racist country, i do say this country has on occasion, too often for my taste, tolerated racism. that's a fact. and nobody can deny that fact. last time this bill came before this body, over 70 of my republican friends voted for it. i would hope we could do a little better today. and let me close by reminding my friend, you know, most of us who study history, we know. when the republican party came

into being. we know when the democratic party came into being. happens to be an older party than the republican party. but we also know that in 1948, hubert humphries spoke at the 1948 democratic convention against segregation, strom thurmond, a democrat, left the party. came back in 1964, when democrats came together and decided that they were going to pass the civil rights act of 1964, strom thurmond, the democrat, left the democratic party, became a republican and took all of those segregationists with him into the south carolina republican party. south carolina republican party built itself on the confederate battle flag. those are facts of history. can't deny those facts, don't

try to. we try to do whatever we can to do what george isn't aa in a admonished us to do. learn the history. and gather lessons from that history. or we run the risk of repeating that history. what we should do today is relegate these statues to the dust bin of history. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the very passionate words we have heard here today. and as i said in the beginning, we on this side of the aisle not only agree but we have been advocating for these very things for quite some time. in fact, as georgia's statue, as i had advocated in times past for the removal of alexander

stevens' statue, has been on several occasions that i've spoken about this and let me just share with you this one idea, this principle, that the criticism that he made of our founders because he believed that our founding documents, the declaration of independence and the constitution, were inherently flawed. this is what stevens said. the prevailing ideas entertained by him, meaning jefferson, and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the constitution, talking about the constitution we had today because he was advocating for the confederate constitution, says with the enslavement of the african was in violation of the laws of nature, that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally and politically. we agree with that. what he's saying is the flaw of our founders was that they believed this idea that all men are created equal and put put that in our founding documents. the reason i bring that up today is because of something the

minority leader said. is that under critical race theory, they are teaching that our founding documents were the opposite, that more, they were what alexander stevens is saying they were. that they were flawed. that they teach racism. but stevens said they weren't teaching racism, that's why they're flawed. this is why i advo kayed far long time for the removal of stevens' statue. in fact, as i was speaking about this at one time i received a threat, me and my family received a threat from the ku klux klan in georgia at the time because i adamantly believe that we are all create equal and we're all given the same opportunities in this nation. madam speaker, i'd like to yield four minutes to the gentleman from arkansas, mr. westerman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. westerman: thank you, madam speaker. the gentlelady in her opening remarks quoted mayaing an lou --

angelou, and i would agree with her words that we can do better. but i'm not convinced h.r. 3005 is actually doing better. this bill would remove all statues from the u.s. capitol of individuals who voluntarily served in the confederate army or it appears who are now otherwise deemed by democrats as racist and unfit for any type of honor. one of the statues named for removal is james paul clark. a democrat from arkansas. who served as a u.s. senator and the 18th governor of arkansas. his statue was placed in the capitol by democrat majorities in both the arkansas house and senate. the speaker might be interested to learn, the arkansas -- the republican arkansas state legislature voted in 2019 to replace james paul clark and the

statue that depicts uriah rose. last year on june 10, speaker pelosi sent a letter to the joint committee on the library requesting it removed, 11 statues which depict confederate soldiers and officials which he said includes uriah rose. uriah rose was an arkansas attorney who was a founder and two-time president of the american bar association. uriah rose founded the rose law firm in little rock at which hillary clinton began her legal career and became the firm's first female partner. the speaker the speaker will be pleased to know that nor uriah rose nor james paul clarke was never part of the confederate army. clarke was 7 years old when it

began. however, following procedures for placing statues in the capitol, arkansas has recognized racist beliefs held at least by the governor and senator james clarke and began replacing our two statues with those who have made significant, meaningful contributions to arkansas and our nation. country music legend johnny cash and civil rights activist daisy base. madam speaker, every state can follow that process. many have and many are. daisy bates was a civil rights activist who was a nonstopable force during the desegregation of arkansas and i'm proud that arkansas chose her as one of the statues to replace john paul clarke and uriah rose. daisy bates was instrumental in securing safe entry into little rock central high school for the little rock nine in september, 1957. one of the first high schools in arkansas to integrate following

the brown v. board of education. we have been working to replace these statues for 2 1/2 years. complying with every step in the process. h.r. 3005 also names other statues. it was mentioned charles brantley aycock, who did not serve in the confederate army, who north carolina was trying to replace with reverend billy graham since 2015. this bill naming statues that are in the process of being replaced is nothing more than what i believe is an attempt by democrats to prematurely thwart the authority of states in order to claim the moral high ground for themselves. if democrats were serious about cleansing the capitol, speaker pelosi would insist the joint committee on the library make a top priority to work with

arkansas and north carolina with the replacement of these statues. i am glad to see that billy graham's statue will be quickly added. mr. loudermilk: i yield 30 seconds. mr. westerman: i'd like to do the same -- ask she do the same for arkansas's statues of johnny and daisy. madam speaker, we don't need a do-nothing messaging bill from democrats. we don't need to tell states what we need to do. what we need is a get-something-done attitude and real leadership and these statues will be gone out of the capitol. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: just a note of the process. in fact, arkansas is now selecting an artist to develop the little statue that has to be approved before we can proceed. meanwhile, even though they want to get rid of that statue, it

stays here. if we pass this bill, the statue will be gone while arkansas per sues a replacement. and with that, i'd love to yield to the gentleman from maryland, a member of the house administration committee, and a scholar and constitutional -- former constitutional law professor, my colleague, jamie raskin, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland. mr. raskin: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to the chair for your great leadership on this. it's one thing to remember the nation's confederate traitors. it's another thing to glorify them. it's time to stop glorifying white supremacists in black robes and confederate traitors that defected -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the gentlewoman from california, how much time? ms. lofgren: one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman shall proceed. mr. raskin: thank you very much. it's time to stop glorifying white supremacists in black robes and confederate traitors

who defected from the union and took up arms against the united states. the city of fedderic five years ago took down their statue of the man who wrote the dred scott opinion, which found that an african-american could never be a citizen within the meaning of article 3 of the constitution. and in which he wrote, blacks have no rights which the white man have the bound to respect. in the name of original intent, justice taney disgraced the supreme court. it would take the civil war, the reconstruction amendments and the civil rights movement to dismantle the white supremacist constitution. we're going to replace him with a great marylander who has stood the test of time, justice thurgood marshall, who was one of the architects of the legal strategy to dismantle jim crow and to replace plessy vs. ferguson. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. ms. lofgren: i'd yield an additional 30 seconds. mr. raskin: justice marshall argued smith vs. allred. he argued brown vs. board. he became the first african-american supreme court justice. as for all the other federal office holders who swore an oath to support our constitution but then defected to the confederacy and waged insurrection and rebellion against the united states, they were banned by section 3 of the 14th amendment from ever serving in public office again at the federal level, at the state level, or at the local level. why should they occupy a position of honor and reverence in this building? i yield back. ms. lofgren: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: madam chair, can i inquire how much time remains? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia has 11 1/2 minutes. the gentlewoman from california has 12 1/2 minutes. mr. loudermilk: thank you, madam speaker. you know, prior to the organizing of the current joint committee on the library,

ranking member rodney davis and i sent a letter to the joint committee on the library to demand immediate action on north carolina's pending request to replace the statue of charles brantley aycock with the reverend billy graham. so far the request has been ignored. i can only assume because it would impede the ability to do what we're doing here today. but i'm encouraged by the chair's commitment to act on that very quickly. i would also say that this is an isolated case. there are currently eight states with pending requests, including arkansas, florida, missouri, kansas, north carolina, nebraska, utah, and virginia. in fact, georgia has just introduced in this last session a new piece of legislation to remove stevens' statue with that of the late representative john lewis. which is receiving bipartisan support. in fact, the republican speaker

of the house is the top co-sponsor of that legislation. with that, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. grothman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. grothman: thank you. i will have to admit that when i first got this job and walked through statutory hall, i was kind of surprised at some of the people who were honored there. in particular, alexander stevens was one that jumped out at me. right before the end of the civil war, abraham lincoln talked about malice towards noncharity for all and i think that charity for all was being a little bit abused from people like alexander hamilton got their statue down there. be that as it may, there is another part of the bill. dred scott decision. i will talk a bit about roe v. wade and history that people don't know about. i got this from an article put out by planned parenthood and in part from a book written by bob

woodward. obviously roe v. wade could be described as the most significant court decision in that it legalized abortion and we have 60 million fewer americans who would have if this decision would not happen. however, there were a little bit -- a change was made in that decision as they were debating it, upping that 60 million figure a little bit higher because a decision was made at the end to go from allowing abortion at three months to allowing abortion all the way until viability, late-term abortion. the author of that decision, justice blackman, was just going to go three months. he got a letter put out by thurgood marshall who wanted it to be much higher. i can't tell you exactly how many abortions in the past we

had in this country buts probably over five million. that was because thurgood marshall was in the right, the wrong position, however you want to look at it, to go from three months to making america one of seven countries in the world where they allow abortions so late. of those countries include north korea, vietnam, red china. not countries you want to be associated with. if this bill becomes law and we walk through there we'll see thurgood marshall. at least i will always look at him as the guy who weighed in and felt after abortion was largely -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. loudermilk: i yield another 30 seconds. mr. grothman: the guy who kind of put the foot on the gas and legalized late-term abortion, put the united states in with those other six countries. so for that reason, i'm going to vote against this bill today and hopefully someday america that decision, the roe v. wade

decision, and putting the united states in position which even six or seven-month-old babies can have their lives taken away, hopefully that will eventually be changed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. grothman: thank you. mr. loudermilk: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. al green. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. green: thank you very much, madam speaker. and i thank the chairlady. madam speaker, the great thurgood marshall won 29 of 32 cases before the supreme court of the united states of america. he was imminently qualified now and is now and this is a proper thing for us to do. i will close with this. if judge taney and his co-horts had their -- cohorts had their way, there would be no person of color in this building today.

if they had their way, madam speaker, you would not be at that podium. i stand with mr. hoyer. i'm grateful for what he's done. and i will vote for this legislation. its time has long since come, and we are doing the right thing. and dr. king reminded us that time is always right to dothat which is right -- to do that which is right. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: madam chair, how much time do we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has eight minutes left. mr. loudermilk: eight minutes. thank you, madam chair. it's refreshing to know there's so much we actually do agree on in this chamber. the things that my good friend from texas just said, we agree on, and we've agreed on since abraham lincoln was the president. i'd now like to yield five -- four minutes to the gentleman from illinois, my good friend, mr. davis, who is also the ranking member of the committee on house administration.

mr. davis: well, thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized. mr. davis: thank you, madam speaker. thank you to my colleague and my friend on house administration committee for running this debate for our side. madam speaker, despite its flaws, i intend to vote for the underlying bill. but nevertheless, i rise to highlight several points the majority has failed to address. it's been six years, six years since the people of north carolina, through their elected state legislature, requested on a bipartisan basis to replace the state statue of charles brantley aycock, a former democrat governor of that state, who supported segregation and white supremacy. the people of north carolina have requested to replace this statue with a sculpture of the late reverend billy graham, a late north carolinian, respected and beloved by millions. even the speaker of the house has had many kind words for reverend graham. only the fourth american ever to lie in honor in the u.s. capitol.

in a press release dated february 21, 2018, the speaker said in part the following -- reverend graham's leadership and firm partnership with the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. were vital in the fight for civil rights in the south. he counseled the u.s. president regardless of party, brought grace and humility into our politics. i ask unanimous consent that the entire release be entered in the record, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: and madam speaker, i agree with the speaker's remarks. reverend graham was vital in the fight for civil rights in the south. . so today i ask, why are we still having this conversation six years later? why do the democrats continue to delay states' efforts like north carolina and like arkansas to replace statues in question that are currently at the capitol? why do democrats delay action keeping these statues of known racist democrats in this building? democrats have done nothing on any statue for the past six

months, leaving statues of segregationists, known racists and other confederate democrats in our capitol. as an aside, we know this process shouldn't take this long. kansas, which has no statues in question in the underlying bill, has been waiting 22 years to put a statue of amelia earhart in the capitol. and just yesterday the chair of the joint committee on library, a democrat, signed the paperwork in about 30 seconds when pressed on it, despite waiting over six months to organize the joint committee on library this congress. so it's clear that the democrats can move these requests along at any time but instead are actively continuing to delay the process. in an effort to speed up this process, i offered an amendment yesterday at the rules committee that very reasonably would have addressed these delays and would have required the joint committee on library to act within 30 days of receiving any actionable items on statue replacement. 30 days. come on. democrats ruled it out of order. i believe that's because they

wanted to vote on this bill. each of the statues in question represents a known racist who was a democrat from the past. and the majority party is anxious to erase their discriminatory history from the capitol with this action. so let's have the vote. let's have a vote on this democrat bill. intending to remove democrat statues. madam speaker, my constituent, abraham lincoln, who's buried in my district, 13th district of illinois, the first republican president of our great nation, i'm proud to represent that history. i stood on this floor debating and supporting this bill in the last congress. and i will support it again. but please, madam speaker, please, please encourage the democratic majority to help us reform this broken process that has delayed and delayed and kept , kept statues of known

confederates, known racists, who happened to be democrats in the past, in this capitol. let's work together, let's get this done. let's stop playing games and let's actually open the capitol again. it's kind of interesting and ironic, no one can see these statues right now because the capitol is closed. what are we doing to establish a plan to reopen our capitol for our nation to actually share in this history, to share in the history of abraham lincoln, to share in the history of our country, to share in the special building that we get a chance to walk in and work in while it remains closed? with that, madam speaker, i look forward to working in a bipartisan way to reform this broken process. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. i intend to vote for this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia reserves. the gentlewoman from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: may i ask how much time remains on both sides?

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady has 11 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from georgia has three minutes remaining. ms. lofgren: thank you. i would be happy to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. karen bass. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mr. bass: thank you, madam speaker. i -- ms. bass: thank you, mike:. i rise to support h.r. 3005, to remove statues from public displays in the u.s. capitol building. the people's house can never truly be for the people if it is lined with tributes to those who fought to continue the enslavement of black people in this country. my ancestors built this building. imagine how they would feel knowing that more than 100 years after slavery was abolished in this country, we still pay homage to the very people that betrayed this country in order to keep my ancestors enslaved, and imagine how i feel and other

african-americans and people of color feel walking through statuary hall and knowing that there are monuments to people who supported, embraced and fought for the break-up of our country. we are not trying to erase our history, we must confront our past when we talk about who we should honor in this building. should we honor the man who wrote the supreme court ruling that african-americans can't be citizens? or should we honor the man who got the supreme court to rule that separate but equal cannot be equal? should we honor a legal architect of slavery, or should we honor a legal architect of the civil rights movement? when i hear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle talk about the democratic party, i wonder if you are aware of the whole history of the civil rights movement, where black people and other people of color fought to enter the democratic party, and when people objected to our participation and when

people objected to our right to vote, those people left the democratic party and joined the republican party. so we are extremely aware of our history of racism in the democratic party. and part of our history of americans is that we criticize our country, we don't just honor the nice stories of our history, but we honor and embrace all of our history and we fight for a more perfect union. so fighting for a more perfect union for people of color meant fighting to enter the democratic party and it is my hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will go back to the history of the republican party that you honor and fight for the right for all americans to vote. thank you. i yield. ms. lofgren: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. loudermilk: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: i am very pleased to -- that the majority leader is here with us this afternoon. and i would be honored to yield to mr. hoyer one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognizes -- is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentlelady for yielding. i'm glad to be back. i've been out for two weeks with -- now that i have a new knee, i'm good for another 20 years. that's what they tell me. they guaranteed me that. madam speaker, when i brought this bill to the floor just about a year ago, i referred to our capitol building as a sacred space for democracy. a symbol around the world of democracy. the intervening months have shown us in ways we could not have imagined then just how true

that statement was and is. sadly, we in this house, our colleagues in the senate, all who work here, experienced on january 6 a wrenching reminder of how democracy demands our eternal defense and vigilance. we watched our temple of democracy defiled by a violent mob of insurrectionists. but many of us here -- for many of us here, that was a watershed moment. seeing such evils pervade the halls of the american capitol. however, madam speaker, for african-americans who have been serving here, working here and visiting here for many decades,

that sense of defilement of this sacred space is all too familiar for them. our colleague, the former speaker of the california assembly, karen bass, made that clear when she spoke. because the individuals like john calhoun and john paul clark , celebrated in stone and bronze in these hall, they are reminded that for so much of our history, the leaders and leading institutions of our government and our country did not view them as equal or, at times, even human. when they enter the solemn old supreme court chamber and stare into the cold marble eyes of roger brooke taney, they are reminded that at one time the highest court in our land, the

highest court in our land, declared that black lives did not matter. so, mr. speaker, we ought not be surprised when our fellow citizens of color raise signs that say, no, america, black lives do matter. that's somewhat what this debate is about. in the infamous 1857 dred scott decision, written by justice taney, a distinguished citizen of maryland, revered in his time, -- in his time for his

intellect and his accomplishments, taney in this terrible decision quoted the declaration of independence, which all of us quote so often. we hold these truths to be self-evident. that all men are created equal. today we would say all men and women are equal. irrespective of color. but this dred scott decision ought to teach us a lesson today. and it ought to humble us today. when people around us say, boy, that's the right decision, because it happens to be the decision of the moment, not a decision of history.

beneath those lines taney wrote these. the general words, that is that all men are created equal, the general words above quoted would seem, he said, to embrace the whole human family. hear me, colleagues. this is trainy speaking in a decision -- taney speaking in a decision that he was about to say black live it's do not matter -- lives do not matter. he said, however, that it would seem to embrace the whole human family. not divided by color or gender or nationality or religion, the whole human race. he went on to say, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be

so understood. i want you to think about that. i want you to think about it, colleagues, with humility. and, frankly, i want those who argue for the originalist point of view to think of that. taney thought of that. and he thought in his day, in 1857, the whole human family would be covered by all men are created equal. but notwithstanding that belief, he did not so rule. because he was meyered in the past. -- mired in the past. and the progress of those some many years had alluded him because -- eluded him because he went on to say, but the enslaved

african race were not intended to be included and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration. an originalist. the founders were human. they were extraordinary human, but they were human -- humans, but they were human. and their environment shaped their thoughts as they do ours. taney's word were used by the confederacy during the civil war to justify the creation of a regime built to sustain the enslavement of african-americans in perpetuity. with no possibility of recognizing their humanity. even though taney said in 1857 that would have been the popular

definition of all men are created equal. blacks and whites alike. it may have been used ever since by bigots and white is you premmists to justify -- bhitewhithe is you premmists to justify -- white supremisists to justify big oit are -- bigotry. that's why i introduced this that's why i introduced this legislation with barbara lee and karen bass, james clyburn, beeney thompson from mississippi and representative butterfield. and the presence of the

congressional plaque caucus. because this building, this sacred space, this temple of democracy has been proud for too long. we ought not to forget history. we must learn from history. but aought not to honor that which defiled the principles for which we stand and for which i think we do stand. it's time, mr. speaker, to remove those symbols. slavery, sedition and segregation from these halls. how recently we saw the savage

genocide in tulsa just a few weeks ago. justified in the minds of many i'm sure that these were not men who were created equal. they were not children created in the image of god. and some have rationalized that the taking of their lives because after all, their lives did not matter. and therefore no one was pld. no one was held accountable. as i said, roger brooke taney was from my state of maryland. and i acknowledge as i was growing up as a kid in the late 1950's and in college in the

1960's, my party was the segregationist party. and my party decided we did not want to be that party. and that there was not a home for segregationists in the democratic party. that is a decision we made knowing full well the cost and president johnson, when he said -- signed the civil rights bills. in our state capital of annapolis, we removed chief justice taney, the highest ranking member of maryland. it stood there and stood there when i was a member of the state

senate and listened to governor agnew give his state of the union, it was in the sight of the roger brooke taney statue on the east front of our capital. and if you turn and walk west through the capital of maryland, you will come out on a park. it is the thurgood marshall park , a testament to the progress and enlightenment that occurred from taney to marshall in our state. the decision to remove taney statue was long overdue. but as the gentleman from texas, martin luther king said, it is never too late to do the right thing.

and this, today, is the right thing. it reflects our growth as a state, as we have conferred the difficult parts of our history and reflect our growth, as we recognize it here as we did overwhelmingly when we passed this last year. over a third of my republican colleagues joining the democratic colleagues in saying black lives do, in fact, matter. those who say we shouldn't teach about slavery or sweep it under the rug do a disservice to our understanding of america's greatness. jim clyburn, our whip, civil rights hero in his right own right says, america's greatness is not that it always does the

right thin. america's greatness is that it is willing to correct these wrongs. we are great because we approach our past with humility and openness and we are grateful because we profess our democracy through more inclusion, more tolerance, more justice, more quality -- equality, that all men and women, irrespective of artificial distinctions or real distinctions, are equal in the eyes of our constitution and of our laws. that's why democrats and republicans came together earlier this month to make juneteenth a national holiday. overwhelmingly, but a handful voting against that. in arctic can you lation of our principles today, not yesterday,

that was roger brooke's lameness. i believe we can take this important step together today. so, mr. speaker, i ask the house once again to join me in passing this legislation to remove these stat tus of chief justice taney from the capitol. not to forget them or not part of history, but they are not deserving of our honor. not because we want to erase history, but because we are determined to confront it. and as a marylander, proud of steps we have taken in annapolis, i believe justice thurgood marshall would be a far better ambassador for the democracy and state of maryland than roger brooke taney.

where taney represents the worst, thurgood marshall represents the best of american justice and deserves to be honored in his dedication to civil rights and equal justice for all. i hope all of my colleagues, not as republicans and democrats, but as americans who believe we are an exceptional country, because we lift up the individual and we protect the one against the 99 if the one is right. that is the essence of america. and even though they did not live it out perfectly, they articulated the perfection of all men are created equal and endowed not just by the con stution or the laws of congress, not by the majority, endowed by their creator with certain

inalienable rights. that's what this vote is about today. i urge my colleagues to vote yes for america. vote yes for its principles that are so respected properly around the world. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from california reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. loudermilk: thank you to the chair and gentlelady. i am prepared to close if you are. ms. lofgren: the other speakers we are expecting are in a long appropriations markup. we are prepared to close and you may proceed. mr. loudermilk: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into a record a

member from the members of the north carolina delegation that was written to the joint committee of library encouraging them to replace the akock statue with billy graham. and the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: this process was established in the omnibus and requires coordination between state, the architect of the capitol and joint committee of the library. this would begin in state legislatures and communicated to the architect of the capitol and requires approval. i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the charter of every state's request that is in the process of getting the statue replaced. i ask unanimous consent to enter

a time line on the joint committee organization of this congress and minutes of the first organizing meeting. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: and i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter to the joint committee on the library chair lofgren requesting organization of north carolina statue and reopening of the u.s. botanic garden. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a readout from the house rules meeting recorded june 28 at which time joint committee on library lofgren announced her approval of kansas to update their -- to be a statue of emilia airhart. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the record the official collection of

correspondence from the state of kansas to the architect of the capitol and 10-step replacement process and that process began at 22 years ago in 1999. and i thank you for your in dullingens with that. there is much that was said here today that we are in agreement with, something that the esteemed majority leader said that needs to be re-emphasized and reason why i have fought to replace the statue, georgia statue of alexander stevens because of his criticism of our founders and his criticism was that they truly believed those ideas that were written in our declaration of independence, that all men are created equal and he said that that was the flaw of our nation. that's why they rebeled against this nation, that we should go

back to those original principles and have people here that honor the idea that god in his infinite ability created all of us and created us with equal value regardless of skin color, regardless of age, regardless of any other factor that we are created in his divine wisdom and given life and life can be so abundant if we hold on to those ideals and principles and those of us should reflect those values and i can think of no one that reflects those values than reverend billy graham. madam speaker, one more to enter into the record is the house bill from north carolina

requesting that the statues be replaced. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. loudermilk: with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. lofgren: i yield myself. just a couple of clarifications where it may be confusing to the general public hearing about what is a rather arcane states to add and remove statues. the joint committee on the library ultimately approves it but the process is driven by the states, the architect of the capitol, looking at the statues and making sure that it meets the engineering requirements and the like, i would like to note that are until last wednesday senator roy blunt was chair of

the joint committee on the library and i have been chair for six days. in that time, i actually have approved the reopening of the botanical gardens. i have approved the replacement of the can sasse statue that i received a letter friday and i hope i just received the information on north carolina and i plan to work on that very hard very promptly and get a decision. so i don't think that speaks to undue delay in the six days that i have been chair of the joint library committee. . . i do think it's important that we take the step to remove these confederates and segregationists from our statuary hall. in some cases states either started the steps to remove them, buwh