mr. burgess, no. mr. collins, no. mr. byrne, no. mr. newhouse. mr. buck. ms. cheney, no. ms. slaughter, aye. mr. mcgovern, aye. mr. hastings, aye. mr. polis. mr. chairman, no. three yeas, six nays. mr. sessions: could you please tell me how mr. newhouse from washington, state of washington, is recorded on the slaughter amendment. the clerk: mr. newhouse is not recorded. mr. sessions: ok. does the gentleman wish to be recorded? mr. newhouse: i'd like to vote no. mr. sessions: the gentleman is requesting that he be recorded as a no vote on the slaughter amendment. could the clerk please re-provide the total. thank you very much. the clerk: three yays, seven nays. mr. sessions: the amendment is not agreed. to further amendment or discussion. ms. slaughter: yes, i have another amendment to the rule. i move the committee make in order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment to h.r. 38, by representative jackson lee, number 19, why which would prohibit a person from carrying a concealed firearm across state lines if the individual has been convicted of domestic violence or

mr. burgess, no. mr. collins, no. mr. byrne, no. mr. newhouse. mr. buck. ms. cheney, no. ms. slaughter, aye. mr. mcgovern, aye. mr. hastings, aye. mr. polis. mr. chairman, no. three yeas, six nays. mr. sessions: could you please ell me how mr. newhouse from washington, state of washington, is recorded on the slaughter amendment. the clerk: mr. newhouse is not recorded. mr. sessions: ok. does the gentleman wish to be recorded? mr. newhouse: i'd like to vote no. mr. sessions: the gentleman is requesting that he be recorded as a no vote on the slaughter amendment. could the clerk please re-provide the total. thank you very much. the clerk: three yeas, seven anyways. -- nays. mr. sessions: the amendment is not agreed. to further amendment or discussion. ms. slaughter: yes, i have another amendment to the rule. i move the committee make in order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment to h.r. 38, by representative jackson lee, number 19, why which would prohibit a person from carrying a concealed firearm across state lines if the individual has been convicted of domestic

mr. burgess aye. mr. byrne, aye. mr. new house? aye. mr. buck? mr. buck, aye. ms. cheney? aye. mr. mcgovern, no. mr. hastings, no. mr. polis? >> no. >> mr. chairman, aye. >> clerk will report the total, please. >> 8 yays, for ncaas. >> the motion is agreed to according to the gentleman. mr. woodall will be handling this for republicans. >> and i for the democrats. >> and ms. slaughter for democrats. before i ask the question, i'll answer it that we do not anticipate any more meetings this week. the committee is done with its work for the week. thank you very much. >> c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, washington republican congressman dan newhouse on fridays government funding deadline. in new york democratic congressman eliot engel talks about moving the u.s. embassy to jerusalem. call onditor of cq roll sexual misconduct on capitol hill. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" coming up at 7:00 a.m. this morning. join the discussion. documentaryvideo competition is underway. students across the c

mr. burgess: it's an offset we agreed to use before. ms. policy: it is a different offsets, but mr. urgess, thank you for your enthusiasm for chip and for this very productive exchange we're having now. thank you. mr. sessions: thank you very much for your time. as you know this committee has allowed you to engage us. i think you gave us a fair opportunity, although all the members would have wished that our time would have been longer. thank you very much. i know you've got to go. we appreciate your presence. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. session: merry christmas to paul. ok. you have had your fun. ms. pelosi: that's another way to describe this. yes sir, i did. mr. session: are you telling me you are leaving also? ms. lujan grisham: i can stay as long as you will have me. long as you want. mr. session: judge hastings. mr. hastings: we have been here a very long time. i do not want to prolong it. i do want to point out that by blocking the amendment that's also by ms. lujan grisham, in many respects we're offering a cold shoulder to the young people that many of

mr. burgess: it's an offset we agreed to use before. ms. pelosi: mr. burgess, thank you for your enthusiasm for chip and for this very productive exchange we're having now. thank you. mr. sessions: thank you very much for your time. as you know this committee has allowed you to engage us. i think you gave us a fair opportunity, although all the members would have wished that our time would have been longer. thank you very much. i know you've got to go. we appreciate your presence. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. session: merry christmas to paul. you have had your fun. ms. pelosi: that's another way to describe this. mr. session: are you telling me you are leaving also? miss lujan grisham: -- ms. lujan grisham: i can stay as long as you want. mr. session: judge hastings. mr. hastings: we have been here a very long time. i don't want to prolong t i do want to point out that by blocking the amendment that's also by miss lujan grisham, in many respects we're offering a cold shoulder to the young many of us have seen demonstrating here at

mr. burgess. >> no. >> mr. kol lynns. no. >> byrne. >> no. >> newhouse. >> no. buck.. >> no. >> miss cheney. no. no. abstain.oing to >> mr. mcgovern. >> aye. mr. hastings. >> aye. >> mr. chairman. no. >> mr. chairman. >> no. three yea, nine nay, one present. >> i'm not going to offer an i want to make an observation. critical and particularly his referring of the tax measure. would seem to me, not withstanding tradition seemingly with reference to conference on one hour of our debate. many think there are members in this congress that opportunity or to speak on this measure at such a critical time. i won't offer the amendment, but we really should have done three debate. general there's no reason we could not have. i just want to make the objector we should have. the gentle thank man. amount to allow greater of time, allows more people. believe part of the strength of this committee is allowing to express their ideas and opinions. that on y agree with the floor. let me say this. remember that. i do believe it. i have tried in the past merging bunch of things tha

mr. burgess? >> no. >> mr. collins, mr. byrne? >> no. >> mr. newhouse? >> no. >> ms. chaney?>> no. >> mr. hastings? >> aye. >> mr. pollis? >> aye. >> mr. chairman? >> no. >> four yeahs, eight nays. >> amendment not agreed to. now we'll now move as we remember the one rule those in favor -- i'm sorry did the gentleman announce the vote? >> yes, mr. chairman. >> i believe the gentleman did. okay. i need help. your help is welcome, that's okay. we're now going to vote on the motion from the gentleman gished young gentleman from oklahoma those in favor single by saying aye? >> aye. >> those oppose. >> no. >> mr. cole. >> aye. >> mr. woodall. >> aye. >> mr. collins, mr. byrne? mr. newhouse. >> aye. >> mr. chaney. >> aye. >> ms. slaughter? >> no. >> mr. mcgovern? >> no. >> mr. hastings? >> no. >> mr. pollis? >> no. >> mr. chairman? >> aye. >> clerk will report the total eight yeahs fourniers. >> the motion is agreed to. the gentleman will be handling this for democrats and mrs. slaughter for the democrats. the committee is done with this work for the week, thank you very much. >>>

mr. burgess. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. burgess: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, late in june of 2012, like many americans, i anxiously awaited the ruling by the supreme court of the united states while they were considering the constitutionality of the individual mandate. of course we were told during the run-up to that law, the affordable care act law, that mandate was not a tax. it was, inact, just a requirement that everyone should buy th insurance. seemed unreasonablender the commerce clause that that requirement, in fact, would be cotitutional. and then at the end of june the supreme court made the ruling. i was probably right that it was unconstitutional under the mmerce clause, but with some creative work, creative work, the supreme court said, you know, it's a tax. and the congress has the absolute power to tax. so it can stay in the law. the law stands. so here we're today considering tax reform for the first time in 31 years. and since the preme court told the individual ndate is a tax, it is appr

mr. burgess. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for three minutes. mr. burgess: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, late in june of 2012, like many americans, i anxiously awaited the ruling by the supreme court of the united states while they were considering the constitutionality of the individual mandate. of course we were told during the run-up to that law, the affordable care act law, that mandate was not a tax. it was, inact, just a requirement that everyone should buy th insurance. seemed unreasonablender the commerce clause that that requirement, in fact, would be cotitutional. and then at the end of june the supreme court made the ruling. i was probably right that it was unconstitutional under the mmerce clause, but with some creative work, creative work, the supreme court said, you know, it's a tax. and the congress has the absolute power to tax. so it can stay in the law. the law stands. so here we're today considering tax reform for the first time in 31 years. and since the preme court told the individual ndate is a tax, it is appr

mr. burgess up against mr. sean hannity. he'll tear him up. >> sean: was a threatening violence?ly, obama -- i'm kidding. he can't get over his obsession with fox news. this is what he had to say at a political summit overseas in india. really?? is obsessed. >> those who watch fox news, and those who read "the new york times" occupy completely different realities. i mean, if i watch fox news, i wouldn't vote for me. because there is this unrecognizable character. i remember when i was president, every once in a while i would watch it and i would say, who is that i? this character named barack obama. he is just portrayed in these weird ways, the selective clips that comee out, you know, where the sentences are not finished, and it's all edited and shaped to promote a certain story. >> sean: not true. pretty unbelievable. listen, you are now citizen barack obama. here's my advice to you, get over it. go give a speech, go write a book that leftists will buy. go right about acorn, reverend wright, bill ayres. go do it. as always, thank you for being with those. we'll be fair and bala

mr. burgess. you afford me an opportunity to make a distinction in a very clear way about why we opposed what was burgess, became walden when it came to the floor. you are quite correct in saying that in the past there has been a call on some of the prevention funds. but that was the -- the prevention funds that are additional. we had worked with mr. boehner, as you know. we had an historic agreement when we did the doc fix and c.h.i.p. and community health centers and all the rest a few years ago. that was a big accomplishment. and some funds were taken -- over time some funds had been taken from the additional funding that you correctly say comes into the account. what we're concerned about in the walden/burgess bill, let's put it on walden, is that it went to the base. it went to the basic money of the prevention fund. we did not think that that should be a place where children had to take money from children's inoculation, fighting a lead poisoning and those kinds of things, to pay the -- mind

mr burgess, i'm afraid we cannot hear you.n't this a blunt instrument? no it isn't. it is excellent news for consumers and for lease hold owners who have been ripped off by plc householders. it is a shame andrew got cut off, he was making the point that the ground rents are essential for the viability of some developments, which we have heard before and is complete rot. ground rents are not essential to any schemes. if they were lease hold houses would be cheaper than free hold houses. but land registry data shows they have been sold for more than free hold houses. they're not an important consideration for developers. ground rents will end and that is a good thing for anybody thinking of buying a house and good news for first time buyers. but surely they will be more relu cta nt but surely they will be more reluctant if there is less money to collect and therefore they will choose not to build as many properties at a time when we are in crises? you can tell that to the chief executive of one of the companies who is in line to

mr. burgess: i thank the chairman for yielding. i must confess, mr. speaker, i must confess, today i was astonished to read an article in one of the online magazines, house democratic leadership asked their members to vote against this stopgap funding bill because of the stalemate over the funding on the state children's health insurance program we just heard the chairman of the energy and commerce committee detail the work that has been done on this bill and let me assure this congress, there are probably people in here saying, what do you mean? we voted on this bill. we voted this bill out of the house weeks ago. it was offset, it was everything the senate asked for. they were delivered the five-year time frame, the funding levels the senate asked for, they got everything they wanted. yes it was offset in a responsible fashion but now we're told house democratic leadership says vote no on this continuing resolution because we don't like the stopgap funding for the state children's health insurance program. what in the devil do they want to happen? w

mr. burgess: i thank the chairman for yielding. i must confess, mr. speaker, i must confess, today i was astonished to read an article in one of the online magazines, house democratic leadership asked their members to vote against this stopgap funding bill because of the stalemate over the funding on the state children's health insurance program we just heard the chairman of the energy and commerce committee detail the work that has been done on this bill and let me assure this congress, there are probably people in here saying, what do you mean? we voted on this bill. we voted this bill out of the house weeks ago. it was offset, it was everything the senate asked for. they were delivered the five-year time frame, the funding levels the senate asked for, they got everything they wanted. yes it was offset in a responsible fashion but now we're told house democratic leadership says vote no on this continuing resolution because we don't like the stopgap funding for the state children's health insurance program. what in the devil do they want to happen? w

mr. burgess. >> no. >> mr. collins. >> no. >> mr. burn. >> no. >> mr. newhouse? >> no. >> ms. chainy. >> no. >> ms. slaughter. >> aye. >> mr. mcgovern? >> aye. >> mr. hastings. >> aye. >> mr. chairman? >> no. clerk will report the total. >> three -- eight yeahs, three nays. [ inaudible ]. io iowa -- ayes have it. >> mr. coal? >> aye. >> mr. collins. >> aye. >> mr. burn. >> aye. >> mr. newhouse? >> aye. >> ms. chainey. >> aye. >> mr. mcgovern? >> no. >> mr. hastings? >> no. >> mr. chairman? yeah. >> the motion is agreed to. mr. collins from georgia the gentleman will be handing this from republicans. >> mr. hastings for democrats. >> judge, you want to ask the question. >> what damage are we going to do tomorrow. >> thank you very much. tomorrow the committee will be meeting at 3:00. we're going hr 3971 the community institution mortgage relief act 27 the small business mergers acquisitions [ inaudible ] this completes our work for the day. thank you very much. >>> tomorrow here on c-span3. a senate judiciary committee hearing on firearm regulations and background checks. the c

burgess. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. bradie just feel compelled to ask you, it's been 31 years since major tax reform has been done. there is a reason why you take so long to do major tax re form? >> so, dr. burgess, this began as chairman ross said more than five years ago. we have had 40 public hearings inies and means committee on tax reform. on these very issues. we have the markup four full days in daylight where every amendment was offer and at the end we said there are anymore you want to offer? anymore? that you want to offer? in all have been offed. that is a fair and open process. i'll just close with this. your point is i think a great one. less talking, more doing, it really is time to change this tax code. that's what we're doing. >> thank you. >> might i? there were no hearings on this particular bill. mr. ross you heard mr. mcgorge's views and your furiously scribbling notes. do you have some observations you wanted to share? >> the irony is it was leader pelosi who when she was speaker said we have to pass

mr. chairman, dr. burgess, i have a belief that there are very few of us on the rules committee and perhaps in congress, that know as much as you do about healthcare, and i admire that, but i'm curious, when you say that all of the activity that took place on mr. ross' agreed with you that you all had task forces and you worked late into the night, after all of that, why then when you took the majority did you all not pass a healthcare measure? i just am curious. i ask you that, dr. burgess, and i know you tried and i know the former health and human services director tried, but you all had the benefit of the majority and you didn't pass a healthcare measure. you spent time trying to repeal the existing healthcare measure, the affordable care act. >> i yield -- >> the gentleman will recall the white house was not of a mind to accept anything that republicans were going offer and you remember those discussions. you remember we are were working with the senate that was controlled by democrats and mr. harry harry