Providing for Consideration of H.R. Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2017
Floor Speech
I thank and appreciate the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. As we all remember, 2 weeks ago, we were not given that courtesy to have 30 minutes to debate the rule. We also had no debate on the underlying bill that was brought up 2 weeks ago. In any event, I appreciate his yielding me the time.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule, which provides for the consideration of H.R. 5485, the Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act.
I hope there is a strong bipartisan vote against this rule for, among other things, in the Rules Committee, they denied my colleague, Representative Sean Patrick Maloney, the right to offer his amendment, which would prevent discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.
For the life of me, Mr. Speaker, I cannot figure out why my Republican friends think it is so controversial--or that it is a poison pill--to put in statute language that bars Federal contractors from discriminating against the LGBT community. Yet this amendment, which is perfectly germane, was not allowed to be made in order. I think that that alone should encourage both Democrats and Republicans to vote against this rule.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill is awful as it undermines key elements of the Affordable Care Act; it undermines key elements of the Dodd-Frank financial reform; it diminishes women's access to legal health services; it meddles in the District of Columbia's internal affairs; it undermines the President's Cuba policy; it prevents the fair treatment of Internet content in order to benefit the interests of a few large corporations; and the bill rewards tax cheats, not honest, hardworking Americans, by its failing to provide sufficient funding to enforce tax law.
For all of those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote against the underlying bill as well.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the President's Statement of Administration Policy, which says, if presented with this bill, he will veto it. Statement of Administration Policy
H.R. 5485--Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2017--Rep. Rogers, R-KY
The Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 5485, making appropriations for financial services and general government for the fiscal year (FY) ending September 30, 2017, and for other purposes.
The bill's reductions in funding for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) exacerbate the damaging reductions inflicted on the IRS since 2010, and irresponsibly cut funding for the agencies charged with implementing Wall Street reform. The bill also underfunds the Federal Trade Commission's efforts to promote economic competition.
Furthermore, the legislation includes highly problematic ideological provisions, including provisions that restrict the IRS's ability to implement the Affordable Care Act (ACA), interfere with important new regulations designed to protect consumers from risky or abusive lending, and undermine the principle of home rule for the District of Columbia. These provisions also prevent the Federal Communications Commission from promoting a free and open internet and encouraging competition in the set-top box market, impacting millions of broadband and cable customers. Furthermore, these provisions would bar Federal agency efforts to reduce the risks and costs of flood disasters. Despite these shortcomings, the Administration welcomes the bill's investments in entrepreneurship and small business financing.
In October 2015, the President worked with congressional leaders from both parties to secure the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 (BBA), which partially reversed harmful sequestration cuts slated for FY 2017. By providing fully-paid-for equal dollar increases for defense and non-defense spending, the BBA allows for investments in FY 2017 that create jobs, support middle-class families, contribute to long-term growth, and safeguard national security. The Administration looks forward to working with the Congress to enact appropriations that are consistent with that agreement, and fully support economic growth, opportunity, and our national security priorities. However, the Administration strongly objects to the inclusion of problematic ideological provisions that are beyond the scope of funding legislation.
If the President were presented with H.R. 5485, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.
The Administration would like to take this opportunity to share additional views regarding the Committee's version of the bill. Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The Administration strongly objects to the $766 million reduction in funding for the IRS compared to the FY 2017 Budget request. This reduction would bring IRS funding to FY 1993 levels, in real terms, hindering the agency's efforts to provide robust service to taxpayers, improve enforcement operations, and implement new statutory responsibilities. Furthermore, these reductions would negatively impact efforts aimed at deficit reduction, with enforcement revenues in FY 2017 estimated to be more than $11 billion lower than if FY 2010 staffing levels had been maintained. In addition, the Administration strongly opposes sections of the bill that limit IRS funding and transfers to carry out implementation of the ACA, under which millions of individuals have signed up for coverage through the Health Insurance Marketplaces. The Administration also objects to provisions that unnecessarily encumber IRS operations with burdensome reporting requirements and that would constrain enforcement of tax laws.
Departmental Offices. The Administration appreciates the support for targeted investments in Department-wide cybersecurity enhancements. However, the Administration objects to the bill's defunding of the Department's Systems and Capital Investment Program and is disappointed that the bill fails to permit funding for oversight and administration of the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund to be paid from the Trust Fund. In total, the bill would require a $27.4 million reduction in funding from the comparable level in the FY 2017 Budget request for core Departmental Offices Salaries and Expenses.
Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) Fund. The Administration appreciates the Committee's support for the CDFI Fund, which is funded above the FY 2017 Budget request. However, the Administration is disappointed that the bill provides neither the $22 million requested for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative, which offers financial and technical assistance to expand the availability of healthy food options in distressed communities, nor the $10 million requested for the Small Dollar Loan Program to expand access to small dollar loans in underserved communities and combat predatory lending. The Administration also appreciates the continuation of the CDFI Bond Guarantee Program, but is concerned about the $250 million limitation on new commitments, which is below the program's annual average commitment level. This lower level of commitment authority would unnecessarily constrain the provision of long-term capital in low-income and underserved communities.
Office of Financial Research (OFR) and Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC). The Administration strongly opposes section 130 of the bill, which would subject OFR and FSOC to the annual appropriations process beginning in FY 2018. This language would hinder the independence of these entities and limit their ability to develop critical market analysis and improve regulator coordination if future funding shortfalls prevent information technology (IT) investments or the hiring of highly-skilled staff. The Administration also opposes onerous new procedural requirements that could effectively prohibit FSOC from formally designating nonbank financial companies whose material financial distress could pose a threat to U.S. financial stability. In addition, the Administration strongly opposes section 129 of the bill, which would require OFR to publish notice 90 days prior to issuing any report, rule, or regulation; research reports are intended to provide independent analysis of the facts, unswayed by public or political sentiment.
Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act). The Administration appreciates that the Committee fully funded the FY 2017 Budget request for the Bureau of the Fiscal Service for Government-wide implementation of the DATA Act, and urges the Congress to fully fund the FY 2017 Budget request for the Department of the Treasury's own implementation of the DATA Act. This funding supports efforts to provide more transparent Federal spending data, such as updating information technology systems, changing business processes, and linking financial and Federal award data with the Award ID. Executive Office of the President (EOP)
EOP Funding and Operations. The Administration objects to section 621 of the bill, which would continue a prohibition on paying salaries and expenses for certain White House staff positions and impinge on the President's ability to organize EOP operations. The Administration appreciates funding for Presidential transition costs but strongly objects to the lack of funding for Unanticipated Needs, which would severely hamper the President's ability to meet unexpected requirements for the furtherance of the national interest, security, or defense. The Administration also objects to the funding level in the bill for the National Security Council, which is $2.1 million below the FY 2017 Budget request.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Administration strongly opposes the funding level in the bill for OMB, which is $10 million below the FY 2017 Budget request. This reduction would significantly diminish OMB's ability to carry out its mission. The Administration also objects to continuation of bill language that would require burdensome OMB cost estimates to accompany the issuance of all Executive Orders, as well as language that requires OMB to submit a report to the Congress estimating the costs of implementing the Dodd-Frank Act, an onerous and duplicative report of limited value.
Information Technology Oversight and Reform (ITOR). The Administration strongly opposes the funding level in the bill for the ITOR account, which is $10 million below the FY 2017 Budget request. ITOR funds important efforts to improve the most critical public-facing Federal digital services through the application of best practices in product design and engineering by the U.S. Digital Service and its agency partners. The ITOR fund also supports efforts to protect Federal systems through implementation of leading solutions to address new and constantly evolving advanced, persistent cyber-threats, drive value in Federal IT investments, and implement the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act. The bill's reductions to these initiatives would undermine efforts to secure the Nation's highest value information targets and build on successful reforms to the Federal Government's management of IT resources, which have resulted in about $3.6 billion in cost savings and avoidance. General Services Administration (GSA)
Overall GSA Funding. Funding for GSA is an integral part of supporting agencies in their performance of critical missions. The bill's funding level would undermine GSA's ability to deliver services, impacting agencies Government- wide.
Federal Buildings Fund (FBF). The Administration finds the bill's funding level for the FBF unacceptable at nearly $934 million below the FY 2017 Budget request and the anticipated level of rent collections from other Federal agencies in FY 2017. The bill also denies critical construction funding for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Headquarters project and the next phase of the Department of Homeland Security's headquarters consolidation at St. Elizabeths, Washington, D.C. Since FY 2011, the Committee has chosen to fund the FBF at levels billions below what GSA collects in rent from agencies. Underfunding construction and renovation is particularly damaging, as the Government must be a good steward of its own assets, able to take advantage of opportunities to save money over the long term and maintain its buildings adequately to avoid more costly failures in the future. Further, the practice of chronically underfunding the FBF is unfair to other Federal agencies, who are no longer receiving the space and services that they are paying for, as well as to the other appropriations subcommittees who are providing funds that are never used for their intended purpose.
FBI Headquarters. The Administration strongly urges the Congress to provide the full request in the FY 2017 Budget for the new consolidated FBI headquarters facility. The bill provides only $200 million, $559 million below the FY 2017 Budget request for GSA for construction of the new FBI headquarters. In total, the FY 2017 Budget requests $1.4 billion for the FBI headquarters project--$646 million for FBI and $759 million for GSA's Federal Building Fund. Full funding of the FY 2017 Budget request is required for GSA to award a design and construction contract for the project this year. Absent a new, modern, and secure headquarters facility, the ability of the FBI to fully support its critical national security and law enforcement missions may be compromised.
Information Technology (IT) Modernization Fund. The Administration is concerned that the Committee does not provide the requested $100 million for the IT Modernization Fund (ITMF), part of a larger $3.1 billion request in the FY 2017 Budget that creates a revolving fund to retire and replace legacy IT systems across Government. Absent funding for the ITMF, the cost to operate and maintain legacy systems, as well as security vulnerabilities and other risks, would continue to grow.
Unified Shared Services Management (USSM). The Administration urges the Congress to support the $5 million requested in the FY 2017 Budget for the establishment of the USSM, a new organization housed in GSA that would serve as an integration body for the shared services environment. The funding is needed to give the USSM a stable funding source. Small Business Administration (SBA)
SBA Support for Businesses. The Administration appreciates the strong support for small businesses through the bill's robust funding for the SBA's business loan and entrepreneurial development programs. The SBA's business loan programs would support over $46 billion in lending to small businesses in FY 2017, and the increased funding for technical assistance and development programs would ensure business owners can effectively deploy capital to grow their businesses and create good jobs. However, the Administration opposes the elimination of funding for Regional Innovation Cluster grants and Growth Accelerators, as these innovative programs help regions leverage their unique assets to create jobs by turning entrepreneurial ideas into sustainable high- growth small businesses.
Disaster Loans Program. The Administration urges the Congress to utilize the disaster relief cap adjustment authorized in the Budget Control Act of 2011 to fund the $159 million FY 2017 Budget request for SBA's administrative costs associated with major disasters. By not utilizing the cap adjustment, the bill makes unnecessary reductions to other programs to accommodate this line of support to small businesses after a disaster has struck. Other Independent Agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The Administration strongly objects to the funding level of $1.55 billion for SEC, which is $226 million below the FY 2017 Budget request. The bill would hinder SEC's enforcement, examination, and market oversight functions and undercut investor protections strengthened by Wall Street Reform that benefit both consumers and Main Street. The bill would also shortchange SEC's core programs by mandating that funding for IT initiatives increase by $50 million over the FY 2016 enacted level and prohibiting authorized IT spending from the agency's mandatory Reserve Fund. Taken together, these provisions would inhibit SEC's ability to improve oversight and examination functions in a way that investors expect and deserve. The SEC is fee-funded and its funding level has no impact on the deficit, nor does it impact the amount of funding available for other agencies.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The Administration strongly opposes sections 502 and 503 of the bill that subject CFPB to annual appropriations and politicizes its leadership, which would severely weaken its independence and undermine its ability to serve the most vulnerable consumer populations. In addition, the Administration strongly opposes sections 506, 637, 638, and 639 of the bill that undermine key consumer protections by preventing the CFPB from finalizing or implementing payday lending and arbitration regulations and would amend the Truth in Lending Act to deny borrowers protections from certain high-cost loans. These are problematic, ideological provisions that are beyond the scope of this bill.
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The Administration objects to the total funding level of $120 million for CPSC, an $11 million reduction below the FY 2017 Budget request. This funding level would significantly impede CPSC's public safety mission intended to safeguard consumers, particularly children, from hidden hazards that continue to cause death and severe injuries, including its ability to expand the import surveillance program through which CPSC identifies hazardous products that can cause injury or death before these goods can enter the U.S. market. In addition, the Administration objects to section 510 of the bill that would continue to prohibit CPSC from using funds to finalize or implement mandatory standards for recreational off-highway vehicles (ROVs) until CPSC commissions and completes a study with the National Academy of Sciences. This provision could indefinitely delay CPSC's ability to complete rulemaking on ROVs, potentially compromising public safety. The language also would undermine the Commission's statutory independence and authority to write public safety regulations, interfering with its regulatory independence and public safety mission.
Election Assistance Commission (EAC). The Administration urges the Congress to provide the full $9.8 million requested for EAC in the FY 2017 Budget, including $1.5 million for the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The $4.9 million provided in the bill is half of the funding requested in the FY 2017 Budget. Such a significant reduction would severely limit EAC's ability to assist State and local entities administer Federal elections, test and certify voting equipment, and provide information about voting system standards.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The Administration strongly opposes the deep reductions to the funding level for FCC, which is $53 million, or 14 percent, below the FY 2017 Budget request. These reductions unnecessarily force FCC to scale back important work on public safety and wireless spectrum, delay efforts to modernize IT systems, and undermine efforts to save the taxpayers money by consolidating office space and improving oversight of the Universal Service Fund. The Administration objects to the $106 million cap on auction program funding, which is $18 million, or 15 percent, below the FY 2017 Budget request. This would severely harm the FCC's efforts to modernize its auction infrastructure to support the increasingly complex auctions of the future, which have the potential to return tens of billions of dollars to the U.S. Treasury.
FCC, Open Internet Order. The Administration strongly objects to sections 630, 631, and 632 that aim at delaying or preventing implementation of FCC's net neutrality order. The order, which was issued after a lengthy rulemaking process that garnered input from four million Americans, ensures a level playing field that is increasingly vital to the future of the Nation's digital economy and online competition. For almost a century, U.S. law has recognized that companies who connect Americans to the world have special obligations not to exploit the monopoly they enjoy over access in and out of Americans' homes or businesses. It is common sense that the same philosophy should guide any service that is based on the transmission of information--whether a phone call, or a packet of data. The FCC's rules recognize that broadband service is of the same importance, and must carry the same obligations as so many of the other vital services do. These carefully-designed rules have already been implemented in large part with little to no impact on the telecommunications companies making important investments in the U.S. economy, and would ensure that neither the cable company nor the phone company would be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what Americans can do or see online. The appropriations process should not be used to overturn the will of both an independent regulator and millions of Americans on this vital issue.
FCC, Set-top Rule. The Administration opposes section 636 that aims at delaying the FCC from adopting or enforcing new rules to open the video set-top box market to additional competition. Currently, 99 percent of cable and satellite TV consumers rent set-top boxes directly from the cable providers, costing households an average of $230 per year. The FCC is already committed to a lengthy, thorough rulemalcing process that would establish a robust record of comment and analysis from companies, non-profit organizations, and academics. The current provision unnecessarily interferes with these long-established processes by requiring a delay of at least 270 days, and probably much longer, and a redundant, potentially costly study.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The Administration is concerned that the Committee is underfunding the efforts by the FTC and the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division to protect American consumers from criminal cartel practices--such as price fixing, fraud, and currency manipulation--and anticompetitive mergers. Since 2010, the number of proposed $1 billion ``mega mergers'' reviewed annually by the FTC and DOJ's Antitrust Division has more than doubled. Anticompetitive mergers can harm American consumers significantly by raising prices, reducing quality, limiting output, restricting consumer choice, and stifling innovation in markets such as healthcare and pharmaceuticals, defense contracting, energy and petroleum, cable television and internet, cell phones and service, airline travel, appliances, and common food items. The bill provides $317 million for the FTC, $25 million below the FY 2017 Budget request.
United States Postal Service. The Administration strongly opposes new language in the bill that would roll back cost saving measures implemented by the Postal Service over the last four years. The Administration is also disappointed that language under the Payment to the Postal Service Fund account would prohibit the Postal Service from modifying its delivery schedule to better adapt to its current business environment. Each year, the President's Budget has proposed balanced reforms to provide the Postal Service with the operational flexibility to continue to meet its universal service obligation and implement structural changes that would help put it on a sustainable trajectory. While the Congress has failed to act, the Postal Service has undertaken significant administrative reforms under existing authority to reduce expenses. Despite these efforts, since FY 2012 the Postal Service has been forced to default each year on scheduled payments to reduce its unfunded liability for retiree health benefits and is expected to default on an additional $5.8 billion due during FY 2016. The Postal Service estimates that reversing four years of service changes would increase its operating deficit by roughly $1.5 billion annually and impose an additional $500 million in one-time costs.
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB). The Administration objects to the funding level of $8.3 million in the bill for the PCLOB, which is $1.8 million, or more than 17 percent, below the FY 2017 Budget request. The funding level provided would impair PCLOB's ability to maintain sufficient staff to independently and robustly assess the multi-billion dollar counterterrorism enterprise's efforts to balance privacy and civil liberties. The Congress and the Executive Branch have asked the Board to analyze a number of complex issues that are subject to ongoing public debate, including electronic surveillance. The impact of the funding reduction on the Board's staffing would hinder its ability to satisfy these requests.
Udall Foundation. The Administration opposes the elimination of funding requested in the FY 2017 Budget for the Udall Foundation, which provides education and research resources to American Indians and Alaska Natives. In addition, through the U.S. Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution, the Foundation provides mediation services for conflicts involving Federal agencies or interests. The Administration urges the Congress to fully fund the Udall Foundation at the $5 million level included in the FY 2017 Budget request. District of Columbia (D.C.)
D.C. Local Budget Autonomy. The Administration does not object to the one-year shutdown exemption in section 816 of the bill, which would allow D.C. to spend local funds in the event of a lapse in appropriations in FY 2018. However, the Administration strongly objects to section 817 of the bill, which repeals the D.C. Local Budget Autonomy Act of 2012. The residents of the District and their elected leaders deserve to have the same ability as other U.S. residents and elected leaders to determine how to use their local revenues. Such authority is fundamental to a well-functioning democracy and the denial of such authority is an affront to the residents and leaders of the District. The Administration urges the Congress to adopt provisions included in the FY 2017 Budget request that would permanently allow the District to use local funds without congressional action.
Restrictions on the District's Use of Local Funds. The Administration strongly opposes language in the bill that bars the elected leaders of the District of Columbia from determining how to use local revenues. Specifically, the Administration strongly opposes section 810 of the bill, which prohibits the District from using both Federal and local funds for abortion services for low-income women. Longstanding policy prohibits Federal funds from being used for abortions, except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered, but restrictions on the District's use of local funds for abortion services is contrary to the principle of home rule. In addition, the Administration strongly opposes the restriction in section 809(b) of the bill on the use of both Federal and local funds for regulatory or legislative activity pertaining to recreational use of marijuana, which was approved by D.C. voters. The Administration urges the Congress to adopt the provisions in the FY 2017 Budget request that limit the abortion and recreational marijuana restrictions to Federal funds.
D.C. Syringe Services Program. The Administration strongly opposes the restriction in the bill on the use of Federal funds for the District's syringe services program. This is contrary to current law, which prohibits the use of Federal funds for syringe services programs only in locations where local authorities determine such programs to be inappropriate.
D.C. Education Funding. The Administration strongly opposes the $20 million funding level in the bill for the Tuition Assistance Grant Program (TAG), which is $20 million below the FY 2017 Budget request level. TAG provides grants of up to $10,000 per year to District residents to cover the difference between in-State and out-of-State tuition at public colleges and universities and helps to make college affordable for many low-income District residents. In addition, the Administration opposes the $30 million funding level in the bill for D.C. public schools, which is $10 million below the FY 2017 Budget request, and the Administration strongly opposes the additional $12 million the bill provides for the Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP), a private school voucher program. The Administration appreciates the bill's support for evaluation and administration of OSP and will continue to use available OSP funds to support students returning to the program until they complete school, but strongly opposes additional funding for more vouchers. The Administration remains focused on improving the quality of public schools for all children rather than supporting a handful of students in private schools.
D.C. Water and Sewer Authority. The Administration opposes the bill's lack of funding for D.C. Water and urges the Congress to provide the $14 million included in the FY 2017 Budget request for ongoing work on the combined sewer overflow project.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Here we are again, Mr. Speaker, for the third time, talking about a rule to consider a bill that is going nowhere. We are doing this at a time when a vast majority of our constituents want us to do something about preventing more gun violence in this country. Mass shootings have become unacceptably commonplace in the United States of America, and we have a responsibility to do more to keep guns out of the wrong hands. The shooting in Orlando was the largest mass shooting in our country's history. This is a moment of truth, and we cannot have another moment of silence without some action.
We are pleading with the Speaker of the House, and we are pleading with our Republican colleagues to allow us to bring two bipartisan bills to the floor for consideration so that we can debate them and vote on them. One is the no fly, no buy legislation. If you are too dangerous to fly on an airplane because you are on the terrorist watch list, according to the FBI, then you are too dangerous to buy a gun. It shouldn't be controversial. The second is to eliminate the loopholes in our background check system, which says that you have to go through a background check if you go to a licensed gun dealer but that you can get around that by going to a gun show or by buying a gun online.
Overwhelming numbers of Democrats and Republicans, according to the latest public opinion polls, think both of these ideas are smart, commonsense approaches. The only thing that is standing in the way is the Republican leadership in this House.
Mr. Speaker, please schedule these bills for a vote. No, we will not be satisfied with the NRA bill that you want to bring to the floor this week that, basically, is nothing but a press release but will not keep guns out of the hands of people who are suspected of being terrorists.
Mr. Speaker, I hope that we can reach some sort of accomodation with our Republican friends. We are not going away. This issue is too important, and it is about time we acted. Silence and indifference can no longer be tolerated in this Chamber.
If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up no fly, no buy. It is bipartisan legislation that will give the Attorney General the authority to bar the sale of firearms and explosives to those who are on the FBI's terrorist watch list.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Kuster).
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I urge all of my colleagues to vote against the rule--the underlying bill is terribly flawed--but I also urge my colleagues to work with us to try to bring two commonsense pieces of legislation to the floor. The first is the no fly, no buy legislation. If you are on a terrorist watch list and you are too dangerous to fly, then you ought to be too dangerous to buy a gun.
Just so my colleagues understand this, according to the Government Accountability Office, since 2004, nearly 2,500 suspects on the FBI terrorist watch list have successfully purchased weapons in the United States. Ninety-one percent of all suspected terrorists who attempted to purchase guns in the last 12 years walked away with the weapon that they wanted. That should trouble every single person in this Chamber.
The other piece of legislation is to strengthen our background checks so we get rid of these loopholes so that everybody who wants to buy a gun goes through a background check; they can't escape going through a background check by going to a gun show or buying a gun online.
That is it. That is all we are asking for.
Mr. Speaker, we had 9 people murdered in Charleston, 12 in Aurora, 14 in San Bernardino, 26 in Sandy Hook, and 49 innocent people murdered in Orlando. Maybe the numbers are getting too big for some of my colleagues to fully comprehend how horrendous this all is. Sometimes I feel that with all these numbers that some of us are losing the human ability to feel what is happening here. These people had families. These people's lives were cut short for no good reason.
We can do something about it. The legislation that we have proposed here is not going to solve everything, but if it could save one life, then it is worth it. But inaction and indifference and silence can no longer be tolerated. We will not have business as usual in this House until we address some of these issues.
The American people want us to do this. They are waiting for us. Please, Mr. Speaker, schedule these pieces of legislation for debate and vote. No, we are not going to be satisfied with the NRA bill that will come up to the floor under a closed rule that you want us to take. That is just unacceptable. Give us a vote on this legislation. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can have that vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source