mrs. walorski: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself sufficient time as i may consume -- such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from indiana is recognized. mrs. walorski: thank you, mr. speaker. let me be clear. i reject racism, anti-semitism and bigotry. i condemn conspiracy theories and calls for violence much i do not in any way condone these reprehensible views. i am not here today to defend any comments made by representative greene, whether as a private citizen, candidate or member of congress. i am here today to defend the precedent set by years of the majority and minority parties co-existing in this body. and i am here today to defend the house ethics committee on which i serve as a ranking member. house resolution 72 is nothing more than a partisan power grab. at a critical time when the majority party itself repeatedly calls for unity as our path forward, bringing a majority resolution to the floor to remove a minority member from her committee assignments is wrong and unprecedente

mrs. walorski: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself sufficient time as i may consume -- such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from indiana is recognized. mrs. walorski: thank you, mr. speaker. let me be clear. i reject racism, anti-semitism and bigotry. i condemn conspiracy theories and calls for violence much i do not in any way condone these reprehensible views. i am not here today to defend any comments made by representative greene, whether as a private citizen, candidate or member of congress. i am here today to defend the precedent set by years of the majority and minority parties co-existing in this body. and i am here today to defend the house ethics committee on which i serve as a ranking member. house resolution 72 is nothing more than a partisan power grab. at a critical time when the majority party itself repeatedly calls for unity as our path forward, bringing a majority resolution to the floor to remove a minority member from her committee assignments is wrong and unprecedente

mrs. walorski: as the member designated by mr. banks, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. banks will vote nay on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member vargas, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congress member vargas will vote yes on the previous question. mr. correa: and, madam speaker, as the member designated by congress member napolitano, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that congress member napolitano will also vote yes on ordering the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from nebraska seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. lahood of illinois, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. lahood will vote nay on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. grijalva, pursuant

mrs. walorski: as the member designated by mr. banks pursuant to h. res. 965, i inform the house that mr. banks will vote yes on amendment number 3. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does gentlelady connecticut seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. wilson, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. wilson will vote no on the curtis amendment. 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 no on the curtis amendment. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. jacobs, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that ms. jacobs will vote no on the curtis amendment. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. desaulnier, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. desaulnier

mr. stryker votes yes. ms. walorski votes aye. mr. lahood? dr. wenstrup votes aye. mr. arrington votes yes. dr. ferguson votes yes. mr. estes votes yes. mr. smucker votes aye. mr. hern votes yes. mrs. miller votes aye. mr. chairman? mr. chairman votes no. chair neal: the clerk will report the tally. >> i have 25 no's and 17 ayes. the amendment is -- chair neal: the amendment is not agreed to. mr. buyer? -- mr. buyer -- chair neal: as we await mr. reed's amendment, we will come to him for recognition. chair neal: the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment i -- obviously i think i know the way the vote will go and how this vote will go down but i put this on your radar and i hope you will figure out a way to fix this problem that is a serious problem for many people across america that are victims of domestic violence and divorce, individuals that are going to lose their checks that we see in situations during covid-19. this amendment is very simple. i know there are folks on both sides of the aisle that cared deeply about victims of

mrs. walorski. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from indiana is recognized for one minute. mrs. walorski: thank you, mr. speaker. i believe every person, born or unborn, is worthy of our protection. a majority of americans, nearly 60%, agree that federal tax dollars shouldn't be used to pay for the destruction of life. hyde protections to prohibit taxpayer funding for elective abortions have been in place in this country ever since ford. even president biden supported him as a senator -- them as a senator. but now house democrats have abandoned nearly a half a century of bipartisan consensus. i offered an amendment in the ways and means committee to include hyde protections, which have saved more than two million innocent lives. in this $1.9 trillion bill, i also join my colleagues in submitting a similar amendment for floor consideration, democrats rejected both. this is a moment that calls for healing, not destruction. for saving lives. not ending them. for bringing americans together. not tearing us apart. it's sad to see partisanship take priority over the most vulnerable amo

mr. schweikert? miss walorski. mr. lahood? mr. lahood votes yes. mr. arrington?>> arrington is a yes. >> mr. arrington votes yes. mr. ferguson? mr. ferguson votes yes. mr. estes. >> estes votes yes. >> mr. kern? >> mr. hearn votes yes. mr. miller -- misses miller votes aye. mr. schweikert? mr. chairman? >> chairman votes no. >> mr. chairman votes no. >> the clerk will report the tally. >> mr. chairman, how will i recorded? >> mr. schweikert, you are not recorded. >> i vote yes. >> mr. schweikert votes yes. rep. neal: the clerk will report the tally. 24 nose and 18 ayes. the amendment fails. are there any more in the nature of a substitute? if there are no further amendments, the question is on the adoption of the amendment. all of those in favor signify by saying aye. >> aye. rep. neal: all those opposed, signify by saying no. >> no. >> on that, mr. chairman, i request a recorded vote. rep. neal: in the impairment -- in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. >> mr. chairman, i recommend the committee move reconciliation recommendations in order to support th

mr. rice votes aye. >> schweikert votes yes. >> walorski votes aye. >> lahood, yes. >> wenstrup, absolutely yes. >> arrington's a yes. >> ferguson is yes. >> mr. estes votes yes. >> smucker, aye. >> hern, yes. >> miller boats -- votes aye. mr. evans? mr. chairman? chair neal: the chairman votes no. are there any members who wish to change or cast their vote? the clerk will report. >> 23 nos, 18 yeas. chair neal: the amendment is not agreed to. are there additional amendments? if there are no further amendments, the question is on the adoption of amendment and nature of a substitute. all those in favor, signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. let me recognize mr. beyer for the purpose of offering a motion. rep. beyer: i move the committee favorably transmit to the committee on the budget subtitle d of the budget recommendation relating to elder justice, as amended. chair neal: the question is on transmitting subtitle d to the house committee on budget. members unmute themselves for the voice vote. >> aye. >> no.

mrs. walorski: i seek unanimous consent to address the house. i rise in opposition to a massive spending bill with payoffs to progressives. we should defeat covid and helping small business recover. house democrats are tossing bipartisanship aside to ram through a one-sided $1.9 trillion bill. we need a full accounting of the $1 trillion in existing covid relief that hasn't been spent before asking taxpayers to foot the bill. less than 10% is less for fighting covid. the rest will make it harder for small businesses to recover and rebuild our economy. on top of that, it is a massive bailout for fiscally irresponsible cities and states. put simply, hoosiers should not pay for the bad decisions of progressives in california. this isn't the unity that president biden called for or bipartisanship that americans expect and not the covid relief our country needs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. cohen: address the house for one minute and revise

mr. schweikert? >> schleicher, yes. >> miss walorski? >> walorski votes yes. >> mr. lahood? >> lahood, yes. >> when strip? >> when strip, yes. >> mr. arrington? >> arrington is a yes. >> mr. arrington votes yes. dr. fredrickson? >> yes. >> dr. ferguson votes yes. >> mr. estes? >> yes. >> mr. smucker? >> aye. >> mr. kern? >> kern votes yes. >> misses miller? >> miller votes aye. >> miss chu? >> chu votes aye. -- votes nay. >> mr. evans? mr. chairman? >> mr. neil votes no. >> the chairman votes no. yes, i'm all set -- >> yes, i'm all set. >> mr. chairman, there are 23 noes, 18 yeas. >> the amendment fails. is there an addition in nature of a substitute? the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, is recognized. please pause while we pass out the amendment. let me recognize mr. buyer. >> i reserve a point of order. >> the gentleman has reserved a point of order. thank you. that's ok. >> which one? [indiscernible] >> good, thank you. [indiscernible] everybody set? >> yes. >> yep. >> everybody's good. let me recognize the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, to speak on his amendment. >

walorski. >> thank you, mr. chairman. unemployment compensation has massively expanded in response to the devastation caused by this pandemic and the economic shutdown. last spring, unemployment benefits played an important role in helping those who lost their jobs, and at that time, made sense as a way to reduce the economic impact of stay-at-home orders. now we are facing a much different situation, but democrats continue to insist on keeping in place enhanced unemployment benefits that discourage work. hour and implement rate has -- our unemployment rate has spiked from 14.7% last april, to 6.3% last month. the cbo projects declining unemployment even with no additional stimulus, reaching 5.3% by the end of the year. nevertheless, this bill would increase and extend enhanced unemployment benefits through the end of the summer. at this level, of unemployment benefits could end replacing more than 100% of a worker's prior earnings. a better way to get workers back to work would be to target those dollars so that suppleme