Providing for Consideration of H.R. Va Employee Fairness Act of Providing for Consideration of S. Preventing Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Federal Acquisition Act; Providing for Consideration of S. Law Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act of Providing for Consideration of Senate Amendment to H.R. Providing Research and Estimates of Changes in Precipitation Act; Relating to Consideration of Senate Amendments to H.R. Performance Enhancement Reform Act; and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1518 and ask for its immediate consideration

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1518

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1948) to amend title 38, United States Code, to modify authorities relating to the collective bargaining of employees in the Veterans Health Administration. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. An amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-71 shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.

Sec. 2. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 3905) to prevent organizational conflicts of interest in Federal acquisition, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to commit.

Sec. 3. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (S. 4003) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to provide for training on alternatives to use of force, de- escalation, and mental and behavioral health and suicidal crises. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. The bill shall be considered as read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; and (2) one motion to commit.

Sec. 4. House Resolution 1516 is hereby adopted.

Sec. 5. (a) At any time through the legislative day of Thursday, December 15, 2022, the Speaker may entertain motions offered by the Majority Leader or a designee that the House suspend the rules as though under clause 1 of rule XV with respect to multiple measures described in subsection (b), and the Chair shall put the question on any such motion without debate or intervening motion.

(b) A measure referred to in subsection (a) includes any measure that was the object of a motion to suspend the rules on the legislative day of December 12, 2022, December 13, 2022, December 14, 2022, or December 15, 2022, in the form as so offered, on which the yeas and nays were ordered and further proceedings postponed pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX.

(c) Upon the offering of a motion pursuant to subsection (a) concerning multiple measures, the ordering of the yeas and nays on postponed motions to suspend the rules with respect to such measures is vacated to the end that all such motions are considered as withdrawn.

Sec. 6. Notwithstanding clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on a vote by the yeas and nays on the question of adoption of a motion that the House suspend the rules offered on the legislative day of December 12, 2022 may be postponed through the legislative day of December 15, 2022.

Sec. 7. Upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 1437) to amend the Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2017 to direct the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to provide comprehensive and regularly updated Federal precipitation information, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without intervention of any point of order, a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or her designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-72. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their respective designees. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion.

Sec. 8. Upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall be considered to have taken from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2617) to amend section 1115 of title 31, United States Code, to amend the description of how performance goals are achieved, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendments thereto, to have concurred in the Senate amendments numbered 1, 2, 3, and 5, and to have concurred in the Senate amendment numbered 4 with an amendment consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-73.

Sec. 9. House Concurrent Resolution 124 is hereby adopted.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Reschenthaler) pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for purpose of debate only. General Leave
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1518, providing for consideration of four measures.

First, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 1948 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and a motion to recommit.

Second, the rule provides for consideration of S. 3905 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, and a motion to commit.

Third, the rule provides for consideration of S. 4003 under a closed rule. The rule provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary and a motion to commit.

Fourth, the rule provides for consideration of a Senate amendment to H.R. 1437. The rule makes in order a motion offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations that the House concur in the Senate amendment with a House amendment and provides 1 hour of debate on the motion equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations.

The rule also deems passage of a motion to concur in the Senate amendments to H.R. 2617 with a House amendment.

The rule further deems passage of H. Con. Res. 124 and H. Res. 1516.

Lastly, the rule provides the majority leader or his designee the ability to en bloc requested roll call votes on suspension bills considered from December 12 to December 15. The rule also provides roll call votes on suspension bills considered on December 12 may be postponed through December 15.

Mr. Speaker, as we come to the end of the 117th Congress, we are working this week to pass legislation that deserves to make it across the finish line before the end of the year.

First, the VA Employee Fairness Act. The healthcare workers at VA medical centers are exceptional at what they do serving our veterans. Many of them are veterans themselves. They deserve the same rights as their counterparts outside of the VA system to collectively bargain.

In today's world, the balance of power is disproportionately skewed towards employers over employees.

As a former union member and a small business owner myself, and as the current chair of the Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions subcommittee, I can think of no better way to honor these workers and the people they serve, who we all respect and honor, than to provide them the tools to empower them to have a voice in this important American workplace.

From our national security to the regulation of prescription drugs, the Federal Government relies on services of contractors and consultants to provide for the American people. It is critical that we know that these contractors are working in the best interest of the American people.

Unfortunately, the current Federal acquisition process allows bad actors to slip through the cracks without disclosing their potential conflicts of interest.

As a member of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, I am proud of the work that the committee has done to investigate McKinsey & Company for this very reason. This contractor--one of the oldest and most prestigious consulting firms in the world--was advising the FDA on the safety and efficacy of prescription pain medications at the same time the very same consultants were also advising Purdue Pharma on how to ``turbocharge'' sales of OxyContin, a major driver of the opioid epidemic.

While the McKinsey scandal shined a light on organizational conflicts of interest, the issue itself is not new. The Preventing Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Federal Acquisition Act would require Federal contractors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before they are awarded a Federal contract to ensure they are effectively serving the taxpayers. In the Senate it was bipartisan, and it should pass without objection and without delay.

Also included in today's rule is the Law Enforcement De-Escalation Training Act, which would direct the Department of Justice to develop trainings on alternatives to the use of force and safely to respond to an individual experiencing a mental health, behavioral health, or suicidal crisis. We shouldn't even have to be including this bill in the rule, but unfortunately, partisan politics caused it to need to be reconsidered this week.

On this topic, I am proud that the district I represent is leading the way with an initiative we call A3, anyone, anywhere, anytime. This program connects people in need of mental health support that is outside the police system to help respond to the emergency while simultaneously allowing the police to focus on more appropriate police matters.

This was a long, developed partnership between our behavioral health departments and our local law enforcement, which support it very strongly, and is working to protect the public.

Finally, the rule includes a 1-week continuing resolution. Appropriators are hard at work to come to a year-long agreement over spending, and they need an extra week to finalize it.

Mr. Speaker, we have a wonderful opportunity this week to make transformative changes with these bills.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record an ABC news piece titled: ``Lawmakers aim to strengthen transparency in the lucrative--and murky--Federal contracting process.'' [From ABC News] Lawmakers Aim To Strengthen Transparency in the Lucrative--and Murky-- Federal, Contracting Process (By Soo Rin Kim)

A bipartisan coalition of senators introduced legislation on Monday meant to improve transparency in the highly competitive and notoriously murky federal contracting process, taking aim at companies that accept lucrative work from government agencies without having to disclose potential conflicts of interest

The bill, called the Preventing Organizational Conflicts of Interest in Federal Acquisition Act would seek to mitigate conflict-of-interest concerns by forcing contractors to ``disclose other parts of their business that conflict with the work they are bidding to perform for the government,'' according to Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich., chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

``If we don't know whether [federal contractors] are serving other, potentially conflicting interest, we can't be confident that Americans are getting exactly what they pay for,'' said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, a cosponsor of the bill.

For many American companies, federal contracts represent a crucial source of revenue, as well as visibility and credibility. Firms from every major business sector compete for this work, and winners often execute their end of the agreement while pursuing outside business opportunities-- which sometime overlap with their frederal contracts.

While existing rules stipulate that government agencies assess potential conflicts of interest before determining contract winners, watchdogs say the process remains opaque.

``Based on current federal contract regulations, agencies cannot always discern whether government contractors have business relationships with foreign governments and private entities that could create a conflict of interest,'' said Noah Bookbinder, president of the nonprofit government watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

Scott Amey, general counsel for the government ethics watchdog Project on Government Oversight, warned that ``without more guidance, organizational conflicts of interest can result in unfair competitive advantages and biased contract awards--both of which compromise the impartiality of the federal government and the integrity of the contracting process.''

In a press release announcing the new legislation, lawmakers cited reporting in ProPublica that raised conflict- of-interest questions about consulting giant McKinsey & Company's recent work for the Food and Drug Administration. ProPublica reported that in at least one FDA contract, McKinsey allegedly failed to disclose its conflicts of interest with corporate pharmaceutical clients despite its contract with the agency obligating the firm to do so.

According to documents obtained by ProPublica, McKinsey allegedly advised the FDA's drug-regulation division for more than a decade while simultaneously accepting work from major pharmaceutical companies. In some cases, according to ProPublica, McKinsey helped those clients navigate FDA regulations while advising the FDA on how to strengthen regulations for the pharmaceutical industry.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., said McKinsey's handling of its work with the FDA demonstrates ``the danger that conflicts of interest can pose in government contracting.''

``Our bipartisan bill would help ensure that companies that enter into a contract with the government are acting in the best interest of the American people,'' Hassan said.

McKinsey spokesperson Neil Grace told ABC News that McKinsey's consulting work with pharmaceutical companies ``did not create a conflict of interest'' for the firm's work with the FDA because it ``has not advised the FDA on regulatory policy or on specific pharmaceutical products.'' Instead, said Grace, McKinsey's work for the agency ``focused on administrative and operational topics, including improvements to organizational structures, business processes and technology.''

``Given the absence of a conflict of interest, there was no requirement for any McKinsey disclosure,'' Grace said. ``That said, McKinsey's proposals to the FDA frequently mentioned the company's and personnel's experience with the pharmaceutical industry, making the FDA aware of this aspect of McKinsey's work in the field.''

Republican Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa joined Peters, Grassley, and Hassan in sponsoring the federal legislation.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, conflicts of interest are not a new issue, but it is clear that more needs to be done by this Congress. The American people ought to have faith that their tax dollars are being spent wisely on contractors who are working in their best interest. This bill will increase impartiality and integrity within the Federal consultant and contractor system.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, first of all, my good friend from Pennsylvania and the gentleman from Texas--you know, I am always open to working on these sometimes difficult rules that we have in our Congress. I respect the opinion, but I have a different perspective. What we are doing today is keeping the lights on.

With all due respect, the last time the Republicans were in charge of the Congress the lights went off. That is not good for anyone. It is not good for the American people, and it is not good for the world economy.

What we are trying to do here in the House is make it a little bit easier for the arcane rules that, I think, most of us would agree to in the Senate to make it easier for the bill to come back over and, hopefully, have an agreement, a bipartisan agreement, on longer spending in an omnibus.

With all due respect, we have something that we have here in these Chambers: a disagreement. The tone, I think you can tell, of my voice is very different. But I do think the things that both gentlemen have brought up are real issues.

Immigration is a real issue. We have tried, many of us, to come up with something that is bipartisan that leads to solutions to a difficult situation that multiple administrations and Congresses have struggled for; that has a long history in this country when it comes to immigration, the benefit and the challenges around that; and being able to make sure that the beneficiaries of immigration are consistent with treaties that we have signed around the world, and principles, but also to American citizens.

On the other issues, those are all real issues. What we have here in front of us today in these resolutions are laws that will actually help the American people, too, and, lastly, will continue to keep the lights on by funding government.

We are not talking about the Federal budget in its entirety today. That will continue to be negotiated and debated, and there will be a vote on it.

What we are talking about are specific resolutions that the Committee on Rules has passed down here to this body to talk about protecting workers who protect veterans. That is what we are talking about today. We are talking about improving healthcare for America's veterans that we all say we respect, admire, and honor.

We know that when people are able to organize in the workplace, or at least to present the opportunity, they are safer. Research shows that hospitals that have had the ability for workers and nurses to organize and have a fair say in how they treat their patients, that mortality rates improve, that people are served better. That is what we are talking about today.

We are talking about giving police departments the resources they need in the world today so that behavioral health people can do their job, so that police officers can do their job and not respond to almost one in four calls in the United States that involve mental health, where the police officers are asked to do something that they shouldn't be asked to do.

As I mentioned in my opening comments, I have spent 30 years involved in my own district--from a mayor of a city of 130,000 people, to the legislature, to this body--developing programs with the police department in behavioral health, which started with a conversation with a beat patrolman and a mental health clinician. All it is about is improving the safety of Americans. That is what we are talking about here.

We are talking about helping with the opioid crisis. I haven't heard anything from the gentleman about the things that are actually in this rule.

Do we want to help people with the high mortality and suicide crisis in opioids that we know now, from the hearings that we have had, that the chair and I have asked for in the Committee on Oversight?

We brought the CEOs of the largest corporation, Johnson & Johnson, to testify in front of Congress about what they did at what used to be a great American pharmaceutical company that once had one of the most admired CEOs in the world and now has somebody who has lied on his college resume twice and has helped to kill Americans by deliberately turbocharging the sale of opioids to Americans.

That is what we are talking about in this rule, holding people accountable.

McKinsey & Company, a company that was based in San Francisco for years--I have known people who lived in my district and worked there. It once was a shining light of American innovation and management. Now, it has fallen to this epitome of greed and hypocrisy. That is what we are talking about, stopping that kind of behavior, in this rule.

We are talking about keeping the lights on in the United States Congress, and the Federal Government, for 1 week so that we can have an omnibus, and then we can debate those other things.

Do I agree that the process is not perfect? I agree. Do I agree we could do better? I agree, and I am open to those things. But let's focus on what is in this rule.

Mr. Speaker, let me say that I always enjoy being on the floor and debating my friend from Pennsylvania. I will miss this if I am not afforded the opportunity to do it again.

Mr. Speaker, again, focusing on the rule here. First in this rule, we are helping veterans. We are helping the people who serve veterans to be able to organize.

One of my favorite quotes on the ability of workers to have a voice is from Dwight David Eisenhower, who said, Only a fool would try to stop an American man or woman in the workplace from organizing.

So that is the first point, helping people to have a voice in the VA to serve our veterans better.

The second point is on holding McKinsey & Company, a very large corporation, American company, accountable for their role in the opioid epidemic.

Third in the rule is helping our investment in public safety, a bipartisan effort that came out of the Senate, to help provide them to de-escalate when they are in a difficult situation.

Lastly, we are here to keep the lights on.

Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate the debate and the passion, we do have work to do today, and I would request and ask Democrats and Republicans to vote ``yes'' on this rule.

This rule is an important step in passing these bills that will make a difference in the lives of the Americans that we represent and help restore faith in this institution and the government.

Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the legislation, and I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Reschenthaler is as follows: Amendment to House Resolution 1518

Strike sections 8 and 9.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source