mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. speaker, : mr. obviously each of us had our own reaction to the speech that was president last night. every right, under the first amendment, to say what he believed, what he was going to do, what he wanted us to do. to you that, if i took this card and tore it up because i didn't like what was on the ard, i am protected by the first amendment in doing that. hat is a form of if the effort is to shut one another up, perhaps we'll go down that road. but clearly, most of you on this -- in this house, or at least some of you in this house, have said, an act of destroying things that the leader alleges are property of the house, i will ask for a ruling on that, mr. speaker, in just a minute. but is an act of disagreement. it's not assertion, per se, that what was said was wrong. disagreed with or anything else. it was not an outcry to the president of the united states that you lie. bu

mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, on monday, the trump administration released its budget proposal for fiscal year 2021. it was titled a budget for america's future. but its vision for that future is bleak. its vision of the future is the true american carnage that president trump described in his inaugural address. it envisions an america that is less than it can or should be. it envisions an america where working families are left to struggle while the wealthy continue to prosper. rather than expanding economic opportunity to all, it would force families to choose between food and other essentials by cutting nutrition assistance by $182 billion. so the more children and more people would go hungry in america. the richest nation on the face of the earth. it would completely eliminate the community development block grant, which helps local communities keep can millions out of poverty. rather than

mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. speaker, : mr. obviously each of us had our own reaction to the speech that was president last night. every right, under the first amendment, to say what he believed, what he was going to do, what he wanted us to do. to you that, if i took this card and tore it up because i didn't like what was on the ard, i am protected by the first amendment in doing that. hat is a form of if the effort is to shut one another up, perhaps we'll go down that road. but clearly, most of you on this -- in this house, or at least some of you in this house, have said, an act of destroying things that the leader alleges are property of the house, i will ask for a ruling on that, mr. speaker, in just a minute. but is an act of disagreement. it's not assertion, per se, that what was said was wrong. disagreed with or anything else. it was not an outcry to the president of the united states that you lie. bu

mr. hoyer. the chair: the majority leader one minute.d for mr. hoyer: i thank the from the virgin islands, ms. plaskett, for yielding. lament that as miss colon will not be she able to vote on the final passage of this bill. puerto rico is not a state. the were a state or if virgin islands were a state, they would have already been helped, consistent ith what we have done for states. madam speaker, history will emember this generation of puerto ricans for their perseverance, their courage, and their strength. endured two devastating hurricanes in 2017, they've had their heartbreaking aftermath. characterized by the trump failure to on's allocate resources properly, effectively, and timely. now, a series of powerful have struck the island, causing additional life. and, sadly, loss of we've heard reports that while transmission r infrastructure that was rebuilt stronger after the hurricanes, hold up the to aging power plants they served damage.d substantial i remind my colleagues that the people

mr. hoyer: -day. the speaker pro tempore: -- e mr. hoyer: i do. the speaker pro tempore: those favoring a vote by the yeas and will rise. in the opinion of the chair, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on the followed table will be by five-minute votes on ordering the previous question on house 833 and adoption of house resolution 833, if ordered. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 224. the nays are 193. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. 20,uant to clause 8 of rule the unfinished business is the vote on ordering the previous 833tion on house resolution

mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. speaker, mr. green from texas, said it's time, it's time, but it's never too thing. do the right a m pleased this will be bipartisan vote. emmett till. lynching. it's about violence. it's about hate. in a larger sense, this is about a country, who we are as a country that said we old these truths to be self-evident that all men are equal. surely our founders today would men and women are equal. ut in the eyes of two urderers, emmett till was neither equal nor fellow human dehumanized being, protection or of decency. to the surprise, i think, of americans, madam lynching has not been described as a hate crime. we will do that today. collins.r. i thanker for the floor.is bill to he house will make that determination today. i'm proud to bring this egislation to the floor as majority leader. broadcaster in our area, joe madison, came up to me some year half ago and said, why an't you pass lynching legislation? no answer. the chair of the congressional black caucus who spoke just earlier, karen bass, f

mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous extend. to revise and the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, irst, let me thank representative speier, representative maloney, and all hose who have been such warriors on this issue for such a long period of time. the faith.eping constitutional amendment was proposed in -- and passed in 1972. to be specifically, in the early part of 1972. member of the maryland state senate in 1972. honor of shortly after 1972, juste spring of months after the e.r.a. had been ratify of voting to that. now, the previous speaker said, states -- that's 70% of in a ates ratified that timely fashion. imely in the sense we set in a resolution, as the chairman date.d out, a 70% of the states of this nation. . it need ed three more states. it has now received three more states. so i have been an advocate for the equal rights amendment for essentially four decades. actually longer. i will be proud to vote for it today. just a few months as i said after congress adopted the e.r.a., maryland voted for ratification. i thought that it was long overdue e

mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i have not been on the floor to hear all the debate, but it was interesting to hear how pro worker the debate is from a party that has been responsible or opposing workers' protections, workers' wages, mages -- minimum wages, and almost every other thing that lifted workers up. i will remind my friends on the other side of the aisle that the best times for the middle class were when the unions had the largest number of members. why? because employers could not just tell them you are going to get this. no, there had to be a bargaining. saying, look, we are making a lot of profits, we want a share because we enable those profits. so, yes, we are for giving workers the right to organize. we are for everybody who benefits from that paying part of the taxes for that. there are a lot of people don't like the policies we pursue. but they have to pay taxes. because the majority decides that that's what we are going to do. that's the policy of the united states. and you can't say well, i don't

mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous extend. to revise and the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, irst, let me thank representative speier, representative maloney, and all hose who have been such warriors on this issue for such a long period of time. the faith.eping constitutional amendment was proposed in -- and passed in 1972. to be specifically, in the early part of 1972. member of the maryland state senate in 1972. honor of shortly after 1972, juste spring of months after the e.r.a. had been ratify of voting to that. now, the previous speaker said, states -- that's 70% of in a ates ratified that timely fashion. imely in the sense we set in a resolution, as the chairman date.d out, a 70% of the states of this nation. . it need ed three more states. it has now received three more states. so i have been an advocate for the equal rights amendment for essentially four decades. actually longer. i will be proud to vote for it today. just a few months as i said after congress adopted the e.r.a., maryland voted for ratification. i thought that it was long overdue e

mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. speaker, mr. green from texas, said it's time, it's time, but it's never too thing. do the right a m pleased this will be bipartisan vote. emmett till. lynching. it's about violence. it's about hate. in a larger sense, this is about a country, who we are as a country that said we old these truths to be self-evident that all men are equal. surely our founders today would men and women are equal. ut in the eyes of two urderers, emmett till was neither equal nor fellow human dehumanized being, protection or of decency. to the surprise, i think, of americans, madam lynching has not been described as a hate crime. we will do that today. collins.r. i thank chairman nadler for the floor.is bill to he house will make that determination today. i'm proud to bring this egislation to the floor as majority leader. broadcaster in our area, joe madison, came up to me some year half ago and said, why an't you pass lynching legislation? no answer. the chair of the congressional black caucus who spoke just earlier,

mr. hoyer: i solemnly swear that in all things ap pertaining to the impeachment otrial of donald j. trump, president of the united states, now pending, i will do impartial justice. according to the constitution and laws. that is the oath senators swore on january 16. s the oath created by senators when they tried the first impeachment of a president in 1868. it is an oath rooted in the revolution fought by their grandparents to create a republic of laws. not kings. it is an oath whose power derives from its commonsense that a juror must always be impartial for a trial to be fair. and it is an oath made necessary by the fact that senators are not, as we are not, under normal circumstances impartial in our work. the words chosen for this oath recognize that when our constitution calls senators to try impeachment, it calls them away from their role as partisans. when that oath is taken, senators are supposed to step back from the affiliation of party or political kinship with or opposition to the president on trial. they are required as the oath plainly states, do impartial justice acc

mr. mccarthy: i want to see reforms to title 1. i know a number of our members want to see that as well. reached out to steny hoyer. we're working together, along with judiciary committee and the intel committee. i know that the democrats had to pull their bill yesterday. think anything that moves within fisa should be bipartisan. need for re-authorization, but there's a great need for reforms. in title 1 is a critical section that it needs and verybody understands that as well. this can get done. unfortunately, that -- the spendingparty has been the vast majority of their time on impeachment and investigations when they should focusing on this as well. but i think having done that, we learned a great deal about title and the reforms needed to protect americans. reporter: what specifically in title 1? number rthy: we have a of amendments. won't walk you through today, walking -- reporter: what concerns do republicans have after the 2016?ence in what's in there right now that's problematic for you? abusecarthy: i don't see of the system for an american citizen. want abuse -- we had reports back from the justice depa