Legislative Program
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
On Tuesday, Madam Speaker, the House will meet at 12 p.m. for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m.
On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate and 12 p.m. for legislative business.
On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business.
We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The complete list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of business tomorrow.
The House will also consider H.R. 986, the Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions Act of 2019.
On October 22, 2018, the Trump administration continued the Republican assault on affordable, quality health coverage by issuing new guidance to carry out section 1332 of the Affordable Care Act.
That new guidance, Madam Speaker, undermines patient protections and threatens coverage for Americans with preexisting conditions. H.R. 986 blocks implementation of that guidance so as to preserve preexisting condition protections and ensure that healthcare remains affordable and comprehensive.
In addition, Madam Speaker, the House will consider H.R. 2157, the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2019.
The legislation would provide relief and recovery assistance for Americans affected by recent natural disasters. It includes an additional $3 billion above that which we passed and sent to the Senate some weeks ago to address urgent needs following flooding in the Midwest and tornadoes in the South that have occurred since the House passed its first disaster relief bill in January, which, unfortunately, has languished in the Senate.
Lastly, the bill includes an extension of the National Flood Insurance Program until September 30, 2019.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. I won't respond to his initial comments. Obviously, we have a disagreement on the impact that the administration has had on preexisting conditions and on the section to which we are referring. But we will have a full debate on that next week when we consider the bill.
With respect to the gentleman's question as it relates to the President's proposal for supplemental funding for border security, which, by the way, was sent down yesterday and is now being reviewed, the gentleman knows that we are strong supporters of border security, and we want to make sure that the border is also humane.
The gentleman did not mention, but I want to point out, that in the bill that we adopted to fund the government that was shut down for 35 days, in the bill that we passed, there was $755 million for construction and technology at ports of entry where most drugs come into the country illegally. We want to make sure those drugs stop.
We want to have border infrastructure that allows for not only security but checking people who are coming into the country to make sure they do not have illicit substances with them, either for their own use or for sale.
In addition to that, we had $415 million for Border Patrol and Customs agents and for humanitarian relief, which, obviously, was anticipating the problem that currently confronts us and to make sure that people who come across our border are treated humanely and with respect.
In addition, there was $30.5 million for alternatives to detention and family case management, which we think is important.
In addition to that, there was a half billion dollars, $563 million, for immigration judges to reduce the backlog of cases.
Lastly, there was a half-billion dollars, $527 million, to assist Central American countries, which has had a positive effect on reducing crime and violence, one of the major reasons that people are fleeing those countries, particularly the Northern Triangle countries, and seeking asylum in the United States of America, pursuant to American law.
But we are reviewing. We want to make sure, as I said at the beginning, that our borders are secure and that we are treating people consistent with American law, not separating children from their families.
The President says he wants to perhaps renew that policy. We are vigorously opposed to that policy. We think the President is wrong in citing previous administrations that separated children. They did so in very few instances, almost exclusively when they were concerned about the safety of a child because of a parent's actions toward the child.
I will tell the gentleman that we are going to be reviewing the President's request very carefully. Ms. Roybal-Allard, who chairs the committee, and Mr. Thompson, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee, both will be looking at it carefully. We will be making recommendations in the near future as to the disposition of that proposal.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
The point of reciting the dollars that were included just some weeks ago to the administration is to point out that they had clearly significant sums with which to operate now, and we will see what funds they need in the future. But I wanted to point out that we have not been negligent or sleeping, with respect to both border security and the humanitarian treatment of those who come across our border seeking asylum.
As I said, we will review it and see what determination needs to be made on what further resources are necessary.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, as the gentleman knows, and I thank him for his observation, the bill to which he refers has essentially four parts, including a provision with reference to the MOU for Israel's assistance package, which we strongly support. We strongly support the levels of that. That was not controversial.
Also, the Syria sanctions bill--of course, we have passed the Syria sanctions bill, and we are working on other bills that relate to that.
Unfortunately, they are being held up in the Senate by some Republican Senators. The Syria sanctions bill has not been moved in the Senate. It also has the Jordan MOU, which is noncontroversial. It has Syria, Jordan, and the MOU. Those are the three factors. One is controversial.
It is controversial because of whether or not it comports with the law. There have been a substantial number of State cases that have been ruled on, State actions taken on this issue that have been held not to be consistent with law and the Constitution.
We are concerned about that because I share the gentleman's view. I am an opponent of the BDS movement. I think it harms one of our most important allies, and it is inconsistent with, I think, the welfare of the people in Israel and, frankly, the Palestinians in the West Bank.
Having said that, we are strong supporters of the resolution. That resolution has bipartisan support, I think, and if it comes to the floor, it will have bipartisan support. The gentleman indicated that.
We intend to come forward with that, but we are trying to work to make sure that other suggestions are consistent with law, and we may move with those as well.
We haven't made that determination yet.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his comments.
Of course, what the gentleman didn't say is that the last Congress had the most closed rules of any Congress in which I have served, the most closed Congress that we have served in, according to outside observers.
There were 30 amendments available to this bill. I am not sure how many were asked on the Democratic side or the Republican side, frankly. But having said that, there were Republican amendments made in order. Mr. McGovern, the chairman of the Rules Committee, has said he intends to have as many amendments made in order as they believe consistent with getting our work done.
So I would say to the gentleman, unlike the last Congress, I think you will see closed rules be very much the exception while, frankly, they were very much the rule in the last Congress. But I take the gentleman's point, and I will have discussions with Mr. McGovern. But as you know and I know he is one of the fairest Members in this House, and we will be trying to accommodate Members.
I will also say that the gentleman's statistics include the appropriations process, where there were a lot of amendments on both sides of the aisle. We have not gotten to the appropriations process. As you know, it is my intention that we get to the appropriations process and, frankly, try to conclude the appropriations process next month, and I am sure there are going to be a lot of amendments coming from both sides.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments.
I think the viewers and the Members of Congress are probably glazed over right now with these numbers, but I will tell the gentleman, there was not a single open rule in the House that was presided over by Paul Ryan, not one--not one. Check your record.
But as I say, Mr. McGovern has clearly said that we want to have amendments made in order so that both sides can get a fair hearing, and I think he has been doing that, and I think he will continue to do it.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source