The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2377, FEDERAL EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACT OF 2021” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the in the House section section on pages H5348-H5361 on June 8.
The Department is one of the oldest in the US, focused primarily on law enforcement and the federal prison system. Downsizing the Federal Government, a project aimed at lowering taxes and boosting federal efficiency, detailed wasteful expenses such as $16 muffins at conferences and board meetings.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2377, FEDERAL EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDER ACT OF 2021; PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 7910,
PROTECTING OUR KIDS ACT; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1153 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1153
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 2377) to authorize the issuance of extreme risk protection orders. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-46, modified by the amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 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 the Judiciary 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 (H.R. 7910) to amend title 18, United States Code, to provide for an increased age limit on the purchase of certain firearms, prevent gun trafficking, modernize the prohibition on untraceable firearms, encourage the safe storage of firearms, and for other purposes. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 117-48 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) two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees; (2) proceedings under section 3 of this resolution; and (3) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 3. The proceedings referred to in section 2 of this resolution are as follows:
(a) after debate pursuant to section 2 of this resolution, the Chair shall put the question on retaining each title of the bill, as amended, in the order specified by the Chair;
(b) the yeas and nays shall be considered as ordered on each of the questions under subsection (a); and
(c) after disposition of the questions under subsection
(a), the Chair shall put the question on engrossment and third reading of the text comprising those portions of the bill retained pursuant to subsection (a).
Sec. 4. In the engrossment of H.R. 7910, the Clerk shall conform title and section numbers and make related corrections to cross-references in the event a portion of the bill is not retained pursuant to section 3 of this resolution.
Sec. 5. House Resolution 1151 is hereby adopted.
Sec. 6. House Resolution 1152 is hereby adopted.
Sec. 7. House Resolution 188, agreed to March 8, 2021 (as most recently amended by House Resolution 1097, agreed to May 10, 2022), is amended by striking ``June 10, 2022'' each place it appears and inserting (in each instance) ``June 17, 2022''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. McBath). The gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. Fischbach), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
There was no objection.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, yesterday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1153, for two measures.
First, it provides for consideration of H.R. 2377 under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment, provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, and provides one motion to recommit.
Second, the rule provides for consideration of H.R. 7910 under a closed rule. The rule provides 2 hours of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Judiciary Committee. It provides that following debate the House will vote separately on retaining each title of the bill and provides one motion to recommit.
Additionally, the rule deems passage of H. Res. 1151 and H. Res. 1152.
Finally, the rule extends recess instructions, suspension authority, and same-day authority through June 17.
Madam Speaker, I am struggling to put into words right now the tremendous pain that so many Americans feel in the wake of the mass shootings in Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo, New York, pain because, once again, we are burying America's children.
The hopes and dreams and futures of our kids, birthday parties and bar mitzvahs, and summer breaks and high school graduations stolen by a senseless, unceasing drumbeat of gun violence. The lives of innocent shoppers ended in a hate-fueled rampage of white supremacy.
It does not have to be this way. What kind of country are we if we let this happen and do nothing? What does that say about our values and our priorities as a society?
I am so deeply disappointed and frustrated as a Member of Congress, but even more as a parent. What happened in Uvalde is unconscionable.
For God's sake, the parents had to submit DNA because the bodies of their fourth graders were unrecognizable. They had to identify them by their shoes because the exit wounds produced by an AR-15 were so large that their bodies were torn apart by the bullets.
Madam Speaker, 18-year-olds can't even rent a car, but they can buy guns that can tear people apart. It just doesn't make any sense.
When I think of the trauma the parents had to go through, burying their kids, knowing that this could have been prevented if bills like the ones we are considering today were passed into law, it is beyond heartbreaking.
There are no words, just sadness, when I think of my kids. Then, I think of all the parents who won't get to watch their own kids grow up.
For Uvalde, for Parkland, for Sandy Hook, for Buffalo, and all the mass shootings that have torn apart communities all across this country, I am pleading with my colleagues: Do not throw away this opportunity to get something done. Do not let partisan talking points get in the way of reasonable gun safety measures.
{time} 1230
None of these ideas are extreme. In fact, they are what the vast majority of people in this country want us to do.
This vote will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stands: on red flag laws, on raising the age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21, on gun trafficking and straw purchases, on ghost guns, on the safe storage of firearms, particularly when a minor is likely to gain access to them, on bump stocks, and on large-capacity magazines.
We will have separate votes on all of these issues. This week there will be no excuses.
Really, think about that list. None of these proposals are aimed at taking firearms away from law-abiding gun owners. They are aimed at stopping people from getting slaughtered in their schools, in churches, in grocery stores, in homes.
These bills would have stopped the shooters in Buffalo and Uvalde from buying their guns.
Madam Speaker, I am pleading with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work with us, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me be clear: House Republicans condemn the violence in Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and Philadelphia. We stand ready to work with the majority to directly address school safety, mental health, and the root causes of gun violence.
Unfortunately, the bills we are considering today under the rule are nothing more than an attempt by Democrats to try to push their antigun agenda.
H.R. 7910 is a grab bag full of far-left proposals that will not effectively address gun violence but will severely limit America's Second Amendment rights.
There are a few provisions I would like to point out.
The bill raises the legal age of gun ownership to 21. This provision is very likely unconstitutional. Even a liberal district court in California has already determined that with regard to similar restrictions.
This bill broadens the definition of ``frame or receiver'' that could define multiple parts of the same gun as separate firearms. Each of these parts would need its own distinct serial number or risk becoming a classified ghost gun. This could turn millions of legal guns into contraband, and law-abiding gun owners into felons.
H.R. 2377 is another reminder the Democrats fundamentally have no respect for Second Amendment rights. It shows their lack of respect for Fourth Amendment rights also. This bill destroys the presumption of innocence that is the bedrock of our justice system.
It does away with the notion that an individual is innocent until proven guilty, and instead makes anyone subject to an extreme risk protection order guilty until proven innocent with what amounts to another version of a red flag law.
They also want to mandate a system for gun storage in private homes, which is unconstitutional, and almost impossible to enforce without stripping even more rights from law-abiding citizens. Democrats are picking and choosing legal standards to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights based on how closely those rights are aligned with their political agenda.
Furthermore, the universe of individuals who can petition a court for an extreme risk protection order under this bill is far too broad, and it creates a process that is ripe for abuse. This bill would create an opportunity for a disgruntled ex-roommate or predatory domestic partner to use the judicial system to harass and burden an individual by requiring law enforcement to seize that individual's firearms and ammunition.
Federal law already prohibits dangerous and unfit individuals from purchasing or possessing firearms. An individual with a misdemeanor domestic violence conviction, an individual involuntarily committed to a mental institution or adjudicated mentally defective, or an individual who is an unlawful user of controlled substances are all prohibited from possessing or purchasing a firearm under current law.
Democrats rejected an amendment that will allow for transfers of a firearm to a victim of domestic violence for self-defense. Under this bill, a friend or neighbor trying to help a victim would be charged with gun trafficking.
These bills are not about public safety, they are about the left's antigun agenda.
During the Judiciary Committee's consideration of this bill, the chairman of the committee conceded that the strict gun laws in liberal jurisdictions don't work because criminals are able to obtain guns elsewhere illegally. A Member from Tennessee on that committee admitted that the Democrats' bills will make it harder for law-abiding Americans to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Another Member, one from New York, threatened to abolish the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court if any of our Nation's checks and balances stood in the way of the Democrats' agenda to trample the Second Amendment.
The majority will argue that these are commonsense proposals, but they fail to explain the details and the real effects of these provisions.
And what are law-abiding gun owners concerned about? They are concerned about the attack on their constitutional rights provided in the Second Amendment.
All of us recognize the recent tragedies, and our heart goes out to the parents, the families, and communities, but the root causes must be addressed. Simply attacking law-abiding gun owners will not solve the problem. Addressing the causes will.
House Republicans stand ready to address the root causes of these senseless acts of violence, but not at the cost of America's constitutional rights.
Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule, and I ask Members to do the same. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentlewoman said Republicans stand ready to address school safety and other root causes of gun violence.
I include in the Record a May 26, 2022, article from The Texas Tribune entitled: ``Texas already `hardened' schools. It didn't save Uvalde.''
Texas Already ``Hardened'' Schools. It Didn't Save Uvalde.
(By Jolie McCullough and Kate McGee)
Four years after an armed 17-year-old opened fire inside a Texas high school, killing 10, Gov. Greg Abbott tried to tell another shell-shocked community that lost 19 children and two teachers to a teen gunman about his wins in what is now an ongoing effort against mass shootings.
``We consider what we did in 2019 to be one of the most profound legislative sessions not just in Texas but in any state to address school shootings,'' Abbott said inside a Uvalde auditorium Wednesday as he sat flanked by state and local officials. ``But to be clear, we understand our work is not done, our work must continue.''
Throughout the 60-minute news conference, he and other Republican leaders said a 2019 law allowed districts to
``harden'' schools from external threats after a deadly shooting inside an art classroom at Santa Fe High School near Houston the year before. After the Uvalde gunman was reportedly able to enter Robb Elementary School through a back door this week, their calls to secure buildings resurfaced yet again.
But a deeper dive into the 2019 law revealed many of its
``hardening'' elements have fallen short. Schools didn't receive enough state money to make the types of physical improvements lawmakers are touting publicly. Few school employees signed up to bring guns to work. And many school districts either don't have an active shooting plan or produced insufficient ones.
In January 2020, the Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District received $69,000 from a one-time, $100 million state grant to enhance physical security in Texas public schools, according to a dataset detailing the Texas Education Agency grants. The funds were comparable to what similarly sized districts received.
Even with more funds and better enforcement of policies, experts have said there is no indication that beefing up security in schools has prevented any violence. Plus, they said, it can be detrimental to children, especially children of color.
``This concept of hardening, the more it has been done, it's not shown the results,'' said Jagdish Khubchandani, a public health professor at New Mexico State University who studies school security practices and their effectiveness.
Khubchandani said the majority of public schools in the United States already implement the security measures most often promoted by public officials, including locked doors to the outside and in classrooms, active shooter plans and security cameras.
After a review of 18 years of school security measures, Khubchandani and James Price from the University of Toledo did not find any evidence that such tactics or more armed teachers reduced gun violence in schools.
``It's not just guns. It's not just security,'' Khubchandani said. ``It's a combination of issues, and if you have a piecemeal approach, then you'll never succeed. You need a comprehensive approach.''
Insufficient Active Shooter Plans
Since the shooting, GOP lawmakers have repeatedly suggested limiting access to schools to one door.
``We've got to, in our smaller schools where we can, get down to one entrance,'' Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick offered at the press conference Wednesday. ``One entrance might be one of those solutions. If he had taken three more minutes to find that open door . . . the police were there pretty quickly.''
There are still questions about the timing and details of the tragedy, however, including whether the shooter busted a lock to get into the school or if a door was unlocked. A state police official reported Thursday that the door appeared to be unlocked but that it was still under investigation.
Khubchandani and education advocates said locking doors and routing everyone through one entrance is already standard practice in most districts. And safety leaders said locking exterior doors is a best practice, but it's one strategy that needs to be strictly enforced.
``Sometimes convenience can take priority over safety and you can have a plan in place, you can have policies in place,'' said Kathy Martinez Prather, director of the Texas School Safety Center at Texas State University. ``They're only as effective as they're being implemented.''
At Wednesday's press conference, Abbott emphasized that the package of school safety laws passed in 2019 required school districts to submit emergency operations plans to the Texas School Safety Center and make sure they have adequate active shooter strategies to employ in an emergency.
State law dictates that districts must be able to show how they will prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters like active threats, but also extreme weather and communicable disease. These plans must include training mechanisms, communication plans and mandatory drills. Schools must create safety committees and establish a way to assess threats.
But a three-year audit by the center in 2020 found that out of the 1,022 school districts in the state, just 200 had active shooter policies, even though most districts reported having one. The audit revealed 626 districts did not have active shooter policies in place and 196 districts had insufficient policies.
Just 67 school districts had viable emergency operations plans overall, the report found.
Martinez Prather wouldn't say if Uvalde's emergency plan was considered adequate because of ongoing investigations into the shooting. But said the center's review did not find any areas of noncompliance.
The audit reviewed school districts' emergency plans in June 2020, and Martinez Prather said she was ``absolutely'' surprised that so many schools did not have clear-cut plans, especially after the Santa Fe shooting and others around the country.
``Our attention to this issue should not be as close to the nearest and latest school shooting,'' she said. ``We need to keep sending that message that this can happen at any point in time and to anybody.''
She said the center has spent the last year and a half following up with schools to get their plans up to standard.
Arming Teachers and Staff With Guns
Texas leaders have already shunned the idea of restricting gun access in the aftermath of the Uvalde shooting. In fact, in recent years, Texas lawmakers have loosened gun laws after mass shootings.
Instead, lawmakers point to the nearly decade-old school marshal program in Texas as another measure to deter and prevent mass shootings. That program was created in response to the deadly shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, that left 26 people dead, including 20 first- graders.
Designated school employees who take an 80-hour training course and pass a psychological exam are allowed to keep a firearm in a lockbox on school grounds, an idea most attractive to rural schools in areas where law enforcement response can take longer.
After the school shooting in Santa Fe, state lawmakers removed the cap that limited schools to one marshal per 200 students. Today, according to the Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, which oversees the training for the program, there are 256 marshals across the state.
While lawmakers tout it as a potential tool to prevent mass shootings, just 6% of school districts use it, according to a report from the Texas School Safety Center. Martinez Prather at the Texas School Safety Center said many school districts say it's expensive and the training is time-consuming for educators.
Meanwhile, 280 schools are utilizing an unregulated option known as the Guardian Program, which allows local school boards to approve individuals in schools to carry concealed weapons. Each ``guardian'' must have a handgun license and take 15 to 20 hours of specialized training by the Texas Department of Public Safety.
Nicole Golden, executive director of Texas Gun Sense, said she's concerned by the ``minimal'' level of training school staff go through before they are approved to have a weapon in the classroom.
``These aren't law enforcement officers,'' she said.
``These are school staff who have some training, and there's really not a lot of data to support that that's the safe direction to go in.''
Plus, Golden said, placing more guns on school grounds can be problematic when data shows students of color are disproportionately disciplined.
When lawmakers decided to expand the number of marshals in Texas schools in 2019, Black students and parents said the idea made them feel less safe in school, knowing they are disciplined more than other students.
The study from Khubchandani and Price pointed to a 2018 shooting at a high school in Kentucky where the shooter killed two and injured 14 students in 10 seconds.
``Armed school personnel would have needed to be in the exact same spot in the school as the shooter to significantly reduce this level of trauma,'' the researchers wrote. ``Ten seconds is too fast to stop a school shooter with a semiautomatic firearm when the armed school guard is in another place in the school.''
$10 per Student for Safety
Big changes often take big money, and officials have noted that the 2019 school safety bill gives about $100 million per biennium to the Texas Education Agency. The agency then distributes the money to school districts to use on equipment, programs and training related to school safety and security, a little less than $10 per student based on average daily attendance. The money can be used broadly, ranging from physical security enhancements to suicide prevention programs.
According to a self-reported survey of districts by the Texas School Safety Center, more than two thirds of school districts have used this money for security cameras. 20% used it for active shooter response training. Nearly 40% of districts installed physical barriers with the allotment.
But Zeph Capo, president of the Texas chapter of the American Federation of Teachers, said that money wasn't enough to pay for the more expensive projects lawmakers were suggesting.
``Districts ended up spending money on some programs, some electronic AV equipment, but I don't think it was nearly enough to do what needs to be done in most of the schools, which is really change the structures of the buildings so there's better control over entrance and egress,'' he said, noting that AFT believes more gun restrictions is a better solution.
The TEA also received a separate one-time $100 million pool of money to provide grants to districts specifically for physical security enhancements, like metal detectors, door- locking systems or bullet-resistant glass.
It's unclear how Uvalde CISD spent the $69,000 it received from the state to enhance its physical security. School officials did not respond to questions Wednesday. As of the May 2 report, the district had spent about $48,000 of the grant, which is set to end at the end of the month.
Other remote town school districts received comparable grants per their student population, according to an analysis by The Texas Tribune. For example, the Sulphur Springs Independent School District in East Texas has only a slightly larger student population and received about $71,000 in grant funds.
According to a district document, Uvalde CISD, which enrolls around 4,100 students, had a variety of so-called hardening measures in place that lawmakers and school safety leaders recommend.
The district employed four district police officers, installed perimeter fencing meant to limit access around schools, including Robb, and instituted a policy that all classroom doors remain locked during the day.
There are campus teams that identify and address potential threats, and schools hold emergency drills for students
``regularly.'' The district employed a threat reporting system for community members to raise concerns. Some schools had security vestibules at their entrances and buzz-in systems to get inside from the outdoors.
But a security vestibule, which is basically a secure lobby to the school, can be a huge expense for school districts already tight on money. In 2019, the Waller Independent School District estimated that the addition of two of these entrances to the junior high school would cost $345,000. Security cameras at a small elementary school can cost more than $20,000, according to industry experts.
In recent years--even before the Santa Fe shooting--school districts have begun to rely on bond proposals to find the money to implement some of these changes.
But Texas voters have expressed hesitancy at the ballot box to approve such bonds in recent years, which the Texas Association of School Boards attributed to the lingering pandemic and political polarization. Recent changes by the Texas Legislature have also complicated bond requests for schools after it started to require districts to write,
``This is a property tax increase,'' on bond project signs, even when the proposals wouldn't affect the tax rate.
Overall, Monty Exter, a senior lobbyist with the Association of Texas Professional Educators, said the per- student allotment and one-time grants set aside for school security could never pay for the types of construction projects lawmakers have touted publicly in the wake of the shooting.
``Thinking about making significant changes to 8,000-plus campuses, $100 million doesn't necessarily go that far,'' he said.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, we keep hearing that the epidemic of mass school shootings can be solved by hardening schools. Guess what? Robb Elementary had been hardened. We can harden schools all we want, we can turn them into fortresses, but unless we deal with the underlying issue, it is going to keep happening.
The gentlewoman from Minnesota also said mental health is a root cause. I include in the Record a Bloomberg article published May 27, 2022, entitled: ``Republicans Push Unfounded Mental Health Claim for Gun Violence.''
Republicans Push Unfounded Mental Health Claim for Gun Violence
(By Emma Court)
Republican politicians from Senator Ted Cruz to Texas Governor Greg Abbott have been quick to blame mental illness following a deadly school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, that killed 19 children and two teachers.
The problem with that thinking is that the evidence doesn't support it--even if common sense suggests a mass shooting, especially of children, is not the act of a person who is mentally well.
While reporting from Texas following the May 24 shooting makes clear the Uvalde gunman, Salvador Ramos, was a deeply troubled individual, state officials have said he had no documented mental health issues. Research shows that only a very small percentage of violent behavior is connected to mental illness.
``If we magically cured all these serious mental illnesses tomorrow, which would be wonderful--imagine the alleviation of suffering--our violence problem would go down by about 4%,'' said Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Duke University.
Firearm violence is a greater risk for young males, individuals with a violent childhood and those who abuse drugs and alcohol. While mental illness can contribute to gun violence, the vast majority of those suffering from mental illness will never engage in violent acts, Swanson said.
Attributing school shootings to mental illness, meanwhile, increases the stigma around such conditions, which include depression, schizophrenia and psychosis, according to experts.
Gun Deaths
National Rifle Association leaders are expected to shift the focus away from gun policies that put deadly weapons in the hands of the public when their national convention kicks off in Houston on Friday. The organization called the Uvalde massacre ``the act of a lone, deranged criminal'' in a statement.
Around 45,000 people died from gun-related deaths in the US in 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. More than half those deaths were suicides, and many of the remainder were murders.
Guns are also now the leading cause of death among children and adolescents, surpassing car crashes, drug overdoses and drownings, according to recent CDC data.
Texas is fiercely pro-gun rights, and Abbott last year signed legislation allowing Texans to carry handguns without a license.
Abbott, at a press conference in Uvalde, suggested that access to guns isn't the issue.
``We haven't had episodes like this before,'' Abbott said.
``One thing that has substantially changed is the status of mental health in our communities.''
In truth, shooters in the US have tried to kill in places like schools, malls and bars for decades.
Cruz, who is expected to be at the NRA event, has described the shooting as the actions of a ``violent psychopath.'' He also said none of the gun-law proposals made by Democrats would have stopped it.
Democrats have been quick to dispute those claims. ``Spare me the bull,'' Democrat Chris Murphy of Connecticut said to reporters after urging his colleagues to take action against gun violence.
Other countries have mental health problems too but rarely have mass shootings, President Joe Biden said in a May 24 speech in which he pleaded for gun reform and called for standing up to gun manufacturers.
``They have mental health problems. They have domestic disputes in other countries. They have people who are lost,'' Biden said. ``But these kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency they happen in America.''
Widespread Misconception
Many people associate mental illness with violence, likely because of how these conditions are portrayed in the media, including in reporting about shootings like Uvalde.
Mental illness can also be an easy scapegoat for making sense of tragedies like Uvalde, which are devastating and hard to comprehend, said Lynsay Ayer, a senior behavioral scientist at Rand Corp., a nonprofit research organization.
``People want to explain it, to say `this person wasn't thinking rationally, wasn't thinking like you and me, something went wrong in their brain wiring,' '' she said. Blaming mental illness is ``convenient, but it's overly simplistic and runs the risk of hurting people who have mental health problems.''
People with mental health disorders are, in fact, more likely to be the victims of violence than a perpetrator, Ayer said.
Using mental illness as an explanation for such events also plays into outdated tropes, like the idea that ``something is wrong with'' those individuals, said Hannah Wesolowski, chief advocacy officer for the National Alliance on Mental Illness.
``I think people confuse having a mental health condition with being troubled, and they are not one and the same,'' she said. Mental illness is defined by specific medical guidelines. It's also widespread, affecting one in five US adults every year.
Gun violence remains poorly understood. One reason: Since 1996, Congress has limited federal funding of research into the subject. While that's now changing, gaps in understanding remain. Studying mass shootings is also challenging because such events are relatively rare, Ayer said.
(Everytown for Gun Safety, which advocates for universal background checks and gun-safety measures, is backed by Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent company Bloomberg LP.)
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, let me set the record straight.
Yes, we have people with mental health issues in America. So do other countries. Only here in America do we have widespread, fatal gun violence to the extent that we do, so spare us the lectures.
I should say, under GOP Governor Greg Abbott, Texas is last--last--in the Nation for mental health access.
Just one final thing. We keep hearing about the inconveniences of these proposals: safe storage, background checks, waiting lists. I get it. There may be some inconvenience here, but stack that up against the carnage, stack that up against the mass shootings, the daily killings in this country. I mean, for once, can we put that first over the inconvenience of going through a background check? This is a moment I hoped that we could actually do something, but instead we are complaining about inconveniences. Give me a break.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Bowman).
Mr. BOWMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of my resolution, H. Res. 1152, to condemn the great replacement myth, which is a delusional white supremacist conspiracy theory.
I am honored to be joined by my co-leads: CBC Chairwoman Beatty, CHC Chairman Ruiz, CAPAC Chairwoman Chu, LGBTQ-plus Equality Caucus Chairman Cicilline, CPC Chairwoman Jayapal, Congressman Takano, Congressman Raskin, and the Representative from Buffalo, New York, Congressman Higgins. We are joined by more than 140 of our Democratic colleagues as original cosponsors.
On May 14, a self-described white supremacist and anti-Semite drove more than 200 miles to Buffalo, New York, where he killed 10 people and injured 3 others, 11 of which were Black.
In a 180-page manifesto that he posted publicly online, he cites the great replacement myth as his motivation and cause to target Black people. The great replacement myth is a racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, xenophobic, nativist, and hateful lie.
It is 2022, and Black people are still being hunted down and killed in America. The same goes for every person of color, Jewish people, the LGBTQ-plus community, and every marginalized person in this country. We remember the lives of Aaron Salter, Ruth Whitfield, Pearl Young, Katherine ``Kat'' Massey, Heyward Patterson, Celestine Chaney, Roberta Drury, Margus D. Morrison, Andre Mackneil, and Geraldine Talley, all who should still be here with us today.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. BOWMAN. Madam Speaker, our Nation has been mourning since this country was founded. We cannot continue to carry on as if this hatred is an undeniable part of American culture and cannot change. We must combat white supremacy. I refuse to be complicit in this hatred because we have failed to take a stand as a Nation.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to stand together and condemn this myth as the white supremacist conspiracy theory that it is and vote ``yes'' on the rule.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I just want to make a couple of comments. The gentleman from Massachusetts, with all due respect, mentioned other countries. I will just point out that other countries don't have the freedoms and don't live the way we do in our great democracy or Republic, whichever, and they don't have the constitutional rights that we have under the Second Amendment.
Our citizens ask to have that Constitution respected, and I don't believe I used the word ``inconvenient'' at all. What I used are the words, ``trampling our constitutional rights,'' and that is what I think is important here, that we do not talk about the gentleman from Massachusetts mentioning these inconvenient things. I am talking about our citizens' constitutional rights under the Second Amendment.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).
Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 2377, the Extreme Risk Protection Order Act. Simply put, this bill tramples upon the Second Amendment by means of destroying the Fifth.
However, I would like to direct my argument against the bill towards another amendment, the Tenth, which reserves powers to the States. Nineteen States have already enacted red flag laws in some form or another, and all 31 additional States have the authority to do so.
The Federal Government must ask itself whether this bill will add any measure of additional security the States are not already able to make for themselves. The Federal Government must also look to these States to gauge whether red flag laws have any effect on gun violence at all.
It is certainly not the case in Chicago, Illinois, a city subject to State red flag laws, which leads all American cities in the number of persons killed and injured in mass shootings over the past 4 years. Red flag laws have saved no lives in Chicago.
This bill is redundant, not to mention likely ineffective. Americans deserve better than this.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, the gentlewoman from Minnesota made a reference to the United States in comparison to other countries. I am holding this chart up here. You may not be able to see, but this is the number of gun deaths. The U.K. is way down here, France, Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, all free countries. You may not be able to see because it is so small, compared to the United States. You sure as hell can see the number of gun deaths here in the United States. It is unacceptable. It is unacceptable. And it is about time that Democrats and Republicans all agree that it is unacceptable, and that is what this debate is about.
If we want to talk about other countries around the world that are free, lots of countries that enjoy freedom do not have the number of gun deaths and massacres. Their parliaments and their Congresses are not meeting to grieve over the execution and the mass killing of little children in schools like we do on a regular basis.
{time} 1245
The only question for people here is whether we are going to do anything or whether this is going to be business as usual: Take the money from the gun lobby and do nothing.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.
Ms. ROSS. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today because there is no greater moral imperative for us as Representatives than protecting the safety of our children and our residents.
In recent weeks, our Nation has been yet again shaken to its core by the senseless attack on our most vulnerable. Heartbreakingly, mass shootings have become a steady drumbeat in American life, striking community after community, and instilling fear in the American people as we drop our kids off at school, go to the grocery store, or enter a house of worship.
Madam Speaker, after each of these terrifying events, after the vigils have been held and the new cycle has moved on, there is one thing that never fades. Every person who has had a friend, neighbor, spouse, or child taken by violence, carries with them the heartbreaking pain of that incomprehensible loss.
So what will it take for Republican leaders to join us in taking action? So many Republicans agree with us. How many kids need to die? How many families need to suffer before they finally say enough is enough?
I have spent much of my public life in public service, and I believe in American democracy. And I still believe in the ability of men and women in this Chamber to set their differences aside, to make transformative change for the public good.
Madam Speaker, my plea to my colleagues across the aisle is to stand up for what is right. Let's start the hard work of building a safer America. I come from a southern State with plenty of law-abiding gun owners, but people from across North Carolina have been reaching out to me and my office, including several Republicans and gun owners.
Madam Speaker, I support the rule and commend it to this body.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to immediately consider the Prosecutors Need to Prosecute Act, legislation authored by Representatives Malliotakis and Tiffany that ensures accountability for those charged with keeping our streets, our schools, and our communities safe.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment along with extraneous materials immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Minnesota?
There was no objection.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, while my colleagues in the majority believe that the best approach to addressing violence is to strip away American's constitutional rights, Republicans stand with parents and communities in ensuring those who commit crimes are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And those who don't, will be held accountable. Just last night, families in San Francisco ousted their district attorney for failing to keep their streets free from criminals.
Americans are fed up with liberal prosecutors letting criminals run rampant for the sake of woke idealism. This legislation will ensure the Department of Justice and the American public have the data and information necessary to hold those responsible for keeping our streets safe accountable.
Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York
(Ms. Malliotakis) to further explain this amendment.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Madam Speaker, I rise today to oppose the previous question so that we can immediately consider my bill, H.R. 7967, the Prosecutors Need to Prosecute Act.
My legislation will hold prosecutors accountable and create transparency by letting the public know how many cases prosecutors are declining to prosecute, the number of offenses committed by career criminals, and the number of criminals released.
Over the past 2 years, we have seen a disturbing trend in progressive district attorneys in cities across the country who are refusing to prosecute violent criminal offenders.
Look no further than my city of New York, where Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg released a ``Day One'' memo initially directing his staff not to prosecute certain crimes, including: drug possession, trespassing, driving with a suspended license, sex trading, resisting arrest, and public obscenity.
He even directed his staff to downgrade felony charges filed by our police, including armed robbery, weapons charges, and drug dealing. Worst of all, his office will no longer seek life sentences without parole, which means the most heinous murderers, including terrorists, serial killers, cop killers, and perps who kill young children in connection with sex crimes will be released back on to our streets in 20 years or less.
These policies have sent a clear message to criminals, and that message is: Go ahead, commit crime, break the law, because we will not enforce it. What is the point of creating laws if the ones currently on the books are not enforced?
With prosecutors that refuse to prosecute, it is no surprise that crime is surging in cities across America. In Boston and Los Angeles, if you want a designer purse, toiletries, or food, you can break into any store and take it. No questions asked.
This week, LA's District Attorney George Gascon doubled down on the light sentence given to a teen driver who mowed down a mother and her newborn baby last summer. The teen only received juvenile probation, which authorities say is less than military school and a little bit tougher than summer camp.
In 2020, defund the police rioters and looters created chaos in my city of New York, destroying storefronts; they assaulted police officers, and they even put police cars on fire. While police made hundreds of arrests, New York City district attorneys dismissed the majority of those charges filed.
In the Bronx, more than 60 percent of arrestees had their charges dropped, and of the 485 rioters arrested in Manhattan, 222 individuals had their charges dropped entirely, while 73 received lesser counts.
The same goes for Federal prosecutors in Portland, Oregon, who dismissed roughly half the cases charged in connection with violence and anti-police protests.
In Philadelphia, 23-year-old Police Corporal James O'Connor was gunned down and killed in 2020 by a career felon and wanted gangbanger because the DA's office allowed him to freely roam the streets. Perhaps if the DA's office had done its job, Corporal O'Connor would be alive today. We had a similar story in my city of New York as well.
In Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco, on New Year's Eve 2020, a man slammed a stolen car into two women crossing the street, killing them both. The man, who had a lengthy criminal rap sheet, was out on parole, thanks to San Francisco's soft-on-crime DA Chesa Boudin, the son of a domestic terrorist cop-killer associated with the far-left militant group, Weather Underground.
Well, you know what? Voters have had enough of the violence and crime plaguing our communities and endangering their families. In fact, just last night, when San Francisco voters recalled Boudin, they sent a clear message that prosecutors who fail to do their job will be removed from office.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentlewoman.
Ms. MALLIOTAKIS. Madam Speaker, our Nation is under attack by criminals with no regard for property and life, and rogue district attorneys who allow them to wreak havoc on our streets.
Madam Speaker, I close with the words of the late Democrat Senator Robert Kennedy: ``Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on.''
Let's stop siding with the criminals preying on our cities. Let's stop emboldening the district attorneys to lay idly by as crime plagues our streets.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support my legislation today. It is time to support our citizens, not criminals.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I began this debate by appealing to my colleagues to try to find common ground and come together and do something about this gun violence epidemic. And yet, we hear the same old tired red State versus blue State talking points directly from the gun lobby.
Madam Speaker, since it was brought up, I include in the Record an April 4, 2022, Yahoo News article entitled, ``Republican-controlled States have higher murder rates than Democratic ones,'' according to the study.
Republican-Controlled States Have Higher Murder Rates Than Democratic
Ones: Study
(By Ben Adler)
Republican politicians routinely claim that cities run by Democrats have been experiencing crime waves caused by failed governance, but a new study shows murder rates are actually higher in states and cities controlled by Republicans.
``We're seeing murders in our cities, all Democrat-run,'' former President Donald Trump asserted at a March 26 rally in Georgia. ``People are afraid to go out.''
In February, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., blamed Democrats for a 2018 law that reduced some federal prison sentences--even though it was signed by Trump after passing a GOP-controlled Congress. ``It's your party who voted in lockstep for the First Step Act that let thousands of violent felons on the street who have now committed innumerable violent crimes,'' Cotton said during a speech in the Senate.
Last December, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, told Fox News viewers, ``America's most beautiful cities are indeed being ruined by liberal policies: There's a direct line between death and decay and liberal policies.''
But a comparison of violent crime rates in jurisdictions controlled by Democrats and Republicans tells a very different story. In fact, a new study from the center-left think tank Third Way shows that states won by Trump in the 2020 election have higher murder rates than those carried by Joe Biden. The highest murder rates, the study found, are often in conservative, rural states.
The study found that murder rates in the 25 states Trump carried in 2020 are 40 percent higher overall than in the states Biden won. (The report used 2020 data because 2021 data is not yet fully available.) The five states with the highest per capita murder rate--Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama and Missouri--all lean Republican and voted for Trump.
There are some examples of states Biden won in 2020 that also have high per capita murder rates, including New Mexico and Georgia, which have the seventh- and eighth-highest murder rates, respectively. And there are Trump-supporting states with low murder rates, such as Idaho and Utah. Broadly speaking, the South, and to a lesser extent the Midwest, has more murders per capita than the Northeast, interior West and West Coast, the study found.
Those findings are consistent with a pattern that has existed for decades, in which the South has had higher rates of violent crime than the nation as a whole.
``We as criminologists have known this for quite some time,'' Jennifer Ortiz, a professor of criminology at Indiana University Southeast, told Yahoo News. ``States like Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama have historically had high crime rates.''
Criminologists say research shows higher rates of violent crime are found in areas that have low average education levels, high rates of poverty and relatively modest access to government assistance. Those conditions characterize some portions of the American South.
``They are among the poorest states in our union,'' Ortiz said of the Deep South. ``They have among the highest rates of child poverty. They are among the least-educated states. They are among the states with the highest levels of substance abuse. All of those factors contribute to people engaging in criminal behavior.''
``I thought that was a very good study,'' Richard Rosenfeld, a professor of criminology at the University of Missouri-St. Louis and former president of the American Society of Criminology, told Yahoo News about the Third Way report. ``In Republican states, states with Republican governors, crime rates tend to be higher. I'm not certain that's related to the fact that the governor is a Republican, but it's a fact nonetheless.''
(While the Third Way study divided states by presidential vote in 2020, using gubernatorial party affiliation leads to similar results because most states have recently chosen the same party for governor and for president. Based on presidential vote, eight of the 10 states with the highest murder rates lean Republican, versus seven of the top 10 if one uses the governor's party.)
Although murder rates tend to be highest in the South, the biggest increases in 2020 were found in the Great Plains and Midwest, according to Third Way. The largest jumps were in Wyoming (91.7 percent higher than in 2019), South Dakota (69 percent), Wisconsin (63.2 percent), Nebraska (59.1 percent) and Minnesota (58.1 percent). Wyoming, South Dakota and Nebraska all voted for Trump and have Republican governors. Wisconsin and Minnesota voted for Biden and are led by Democrats.
Few large cities are governed by Republicans--only 26 of the 100 largest U.S. cities have Republican mayors--making apples-to-apples comparisons difficult. But cities that do have Republican mayors do not have lower murder rates than similarly sized Democratic-led cities, the study found.
Some experts warn against the impulse to use crime data to score quick political points.
``Being a Republican or Democratic state or city is correlated with many other issues,'' David Weisburd, a professor of criminology and executive director of the Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy at George Mason University, wrote in an email to Yahoo News. ``That means that the murder rate may be due to the state being Republican, or it may be due to the fact that Republican states have many other risk factors related to crime or murder rates. Even with a very comprehensive modeling of all of these factors, it is very difficult to get a valid causal result for explaining crime rates.''
That argument cuts both ways, however. Weisburd also thinks the claims of Trump and other Republicans who say Democrats have caused a crime wave in the cities and states they govern are unfounded. ``I don't think this argument can be supported no matter which way you go,'' Weisburd said.
Murder rates in the U.S. rose dramatically in 2020 from record lows, and the increases are similar across states-- regardless of partisan preference. For homicides in 2020, Third Way found a 32.2 percent uptick in Trump-backing states versus a 30.8 percent rise in those that voted for Biden. Some states with large cities, such as New York and Pennsylvania, saw larger-than-average increases: New York went up 47 percent and Pennsylvania is up 39 percent. But the largest increases were in rural, Republican-led states, including Montana (+84 percent and South Dakota (+81 percent).
The higher national murder rate is naturally causing public concern, although violent crime does remain far below its early 1990s high point. ``Using the FBI data, the violent crime rate fell 49 percent between 1993 and 2019,'' from 757 incidents per 100,000 people to 379 per 100,000, the Pew Research Center noted last November. Between 2019 and 2020, the murder rate jumped from 6 homicides per 100,000 people to 7.8 homicides per 100,000, but that was still 22 percent below the rate in 1991 of 10 homicides per 100,000.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, Republicans would rather point fingers than look in the mirror, but a recent study found that the highest murder rates are often in conservative, rural States. The five States with the highest per capita murder rate: Mississippi, Louisiana, Kentucky, Alabama, Missouri--all lean Republican.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record the summary of a December 16, 2021, report from Everytown Research & Policy, entitled, ``City Dashboard: Murder and Gun Homicide Report.''
Summary: City Dashboard: Murder and Gun Homicide Report
(By Everytown Research & Policy)
In the midst of one public health epidemic, COVID-19, 2021 and 2020 were also two of the deadliest years on record for another public health crisis--gun violence. The United States saw a 33 percent increase from 2019 to 2020 in the rate of gun homicides. This upward trend continued--but slowed-- through the end of 2021 during which time there was an additional 7 percent increase in gun homicides relative to 2020.
Due to limited funding and inconsistent data collection, data on city gun violence is too often old, incomplete, and conflicting from one federal agency to another. Below is the most recent, available, reliable data on murders (firearm and non-firearm) from 2016 to the first three quarters of 2021 and on gun homicides from 2016 to 2020 in nearly 500 cities.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I will debunk some myths. Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco do not have the highest gun violence rates in the country.
You don't measure gun violence rates by the raw number. These are big cities. Of course, they are going to have more gun deaths than other places. You measure these rates by measuring per 100,000 people. When you do that, these cities aren't even in the top 20.
Jackson, Mississippi; Gary, Indiana; St. Louis, Missouri; New Orleans; Memphis--the list goes on and on. Find a new talking point.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a February 28, 2018, piece from ABC News entitled, ``Trump calls for raising minimum age to buy all guns to 21.''
Trump Calls for Raising Minimum Age To Buy All Guns to 21
(By Jordyn Phelps)
President Trump again called for raising the minimum legal age to purchase all guns to age 21 during a meeting with lawmakers on guns and school safety Wednesday, while suggesting that those who are staying silent on the topic are
``afraid'' to come up against the NRA,
``I'm going to give it a lot of consideration,'' Trump said. ``People aren't bringing it up because they're afraid to bring it up. You can't buy a handgun at 18, 19 or 20. You have to wait until you're 21. You could buy the weapon used in this horrible shooting at 18. You are going to decide--the people in this room pretty much--are going to decide. I would give very serious thought to it.''
While noting the NRA's opposition to proposals to raise the minimum age to purchase firearms, the president made the case that raising the minimum age is common sense.
``The NRA is opposed to it and I'm a fan of the NRA. No bigger fan. I'm a big fan of the NRA. These are great people. Great patriots. They love our country but that doesn't mean we have to agree on everything,'' Trump said. ``It doesn't make sense that I have to wait till I'm 21 to get a handgun but I can get this.''
The president also signaled his support for the Manchin- Toomey proposal that was defeated back in 2013, and is in the process of being reworked, that calls for expanding background checks on guns sales to include firearms sold at gun shows and on the internet.
The president suggested that the measure failed back in 2013 because President Barack Obama was in office at the time, saying ``that was your problem,'' in reference to Obama. But in fact, Obama backed the bill at the time.
He asked Sen. Pat Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican, if the bill he's sponsoring with Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat, would proposing raising the purchasing age for certain guns.
``We don't address it,'' Toomey told the president.
``You know why, because you're afraid of the NRA,'' the president said in reply.
Wednesday evening, the NRA responded to Trump's proposals.
In a statement, spokesperson Jennifer Baker said: ``While today's meeting made for great tv, the gun-control proposals discussed would make for bad policy that would not keep our children safe. Instead of punishing law-abiding gun owners for the acts of a deranged lunatic our leaders should pass meaningful reforms that would actually prevent future tragedies.''
``They can start by fixing the broken mental health system,'' her statement continued, ``strengthening background checks to ensure the records of people who are prohibited from possessing firearms are in the NICS system, securing our schools and preventing the dangerously mentally ill from accessing firearms.''
At the White House meeting, the president repeatedly expressed his support for legislation to improve the nation's background check system but said such a measure should not also include a provision to expand concealed carry law to allow people with concealed carry licenses to carry their firearms across state line.
``I'm with you but let it be a separate bill,'' Trump told Louisiana Republican Rep. Steve Scalise, who was gunned down during a congressional baseball practice last year. ``You'll never get this passed if you add concealed carry to this, you'll never get it passed. I don't think--again, you'll never get it passed. We want to get something done.''
The president also vowed to ban bump stocks through executive action, telling the lawmakers that the rapid-fire devices are ``gone.''
``I'm going to write that out. We can do that by executive order,'' the president said, noting that ``the lawyers'' are working on the language.
Last week, Trump said he ordered the Justice Department to move to ban the rapid-fire devices that were used in the Las Vegas massacre last year. Bump stocks were not used in the Parkland shooting.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, the very person that everybody on the other side of the aisle is so afraid to take on, so frightened of, says that we should raise the age to 21.
Madam Speaker, former President Donald Trump said it himself: ``You can't buy a handgun at 18, 19, or 20. You have to wait until you're 21. You could buy the weapon,'' meaning an AR-15, ``used in this horrible shooting at 18 . . . It doesn't make sense.''
I mean, come on. Trump said this in 2018, and these guys here are telling us that somehow this is a violation of the Constitution? Give me a break.
We are here to try to save the lives of America's kids. And there should be more outrage on the other side of the aisle, not the usual talking points that we hear over and over and over again from the gun lobby. If this isn't important, then nothing is.
Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle), a distinguished member of the Committee on Rules.
Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. McGovern, my colleague and friend, the distinguished chair of the Committee on Rules, for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule and the underlying legislation, the Protecting Our Kids Act and the Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act.
It is hard to find words to describe the despair we feel in the wake of the recent series of senseless mass shootings in Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and too many neighborhoods across our country. For the sake of the victims, their families, and all Americans, we cannot rest until we put an end to this vicious cycle.
Madam Speaker, there have been more than 200 mass shootings already in 2022. That is more shootings than there have been days of the year. And according to a recent analysis published in the New England Journal of Medicine, firearm deaths have now replaced motor vehicle accidents as the leading cause of death for children in this country. I know the insurmountable pain of losing a child all too well, but losing a child to something entirely avoidable, that is a uniquely devastating kind of tragedy.
Madam Speaker, June is gun violence awareness month, but we are already painfully, brutally aware. What we need now is action. That is why this week we are passing legislation to strengthen red flag laws, raise the age for semiautomatic gun purchases, ban bump stocks and high-capacity magazines, and promote safe storage of firearms.
This builds on action we have already taken to enact universal background checks and marks a critical step forward in keeping dangerous weapons out of the wrong hands.
In the midst of so much pain and suffering, it is astonishing that there are those who still refuse to act. If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are not willing to be part of the solution, then please, please, please, stand aside so you are not part of the problem.
Madam Speaker, it doesn't stop here. I will continue pushing to ban assault weapons, combat gun trafficking so we can put a stop to this devastating and maddening cycle of violence. Because the absolute worst thing we can do is nothing at all.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Tiffany).
{time} 1300
Mr. TIFFANY. Madam Speaker, I rise to oppose the previous question so that the House can consider the Prosecutors Need to Prosecute Act.
Madam Speaker, it is no secret that crime is out of control in this country. Annual homicide records have been broken in at least a dozen major cities. Brazen smash-and-grab robberies in broad daylight are a daily occurrence. Killing, severe beatings, armed robberies, carjackings, sexual assaults, arson, and looting have become a common feature on the evening news.
Yet, rogue prosecutors in cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, New York City, and Milwaukee continue to release predators from custody almost as fast as the police can arrest them.
The use of no-cash bail policies, plea bargains, and a complete refusal to put dangerous repeat offenders behind bars has demoralized our police and endangered our communities, and America's most iconic cities resemble a Third World country.
I will give you an example in my home State. In Milwaukee County, we witnessed back at Christmas a massacre at the Waukesha County Christmas Parade, 6 people dead, 60 injured. How? With a guy that had a rap sheet that had felonies, misdemeanors, statutory rape, resisting arrest, and strangulation, and he was out on $1,000 bail.
Here is the worst part, though: That district attorney, John Chisholm in Milwaukee County, here is what he said years ago about his philosophy. ``Is there going to be an individual I divert, or I put into treatment program, who is going to go out and kill somebody? You bet. Guaranteed. It is guaranteed to happen. It does not invalidate the overall approach.''
That is what we have for district attorneys around the United States.
Americans are sick and tired of the lawlessness, and they are demanding accountability.
Madam Speaker, each year, jurisdictions across the United States benefit from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant program, which provides funding to States, Tribes, and local governments to support a range of justice-related programs.
If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule, calling for immediate consideration of the Prosecutors Need to Prosecute Act. It would, among other things, mandate that district attorneys report to Congress on how often they follow through, holding criminals charged with violent crimes, like murder, rape, arson, crimes involving illegal guns, and motor vehicle theft accountable.
They would also be required to disclose how often they prosecute the initial charges, how often they secure convictions, whether or not those charged were already on probation or parole, and how many offenders were released without bail.
Madam Speaker, the American people need to know if the people they have entrusted to keep their neighborhoods safe are actually using their tax dollars to finance this crime wave.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 10 seconds to the gentleman.
Mr. TIFFANY. It is time to end the policy of underwriting progressive policies that endanger the lives and livelihoods of decent, hardworking Americans, and that starts with transparency.
I urge my colleagues to stand with us for safer communities and oppose the previous question.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Takano).
Mr. TAKANO. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the rule, which would deem and pass a resolution condemning great replacement theory and white supremacy.
The recent mass shooting in Buffalo, New York, that claimed the lives of 10 Americans was committed by a self-described white supremacist who referenced great replacement theory in a manifesto.
The perpetuation of xenophobia, racism, and anti-Semitism by rightwing extremists who believe in a grand conspiracy theory that minorities, somehow facilitated by Jews, are actively seeking to diminish the political and cultural power of White voters must be condemned.
Notably absent is the condemnation of our leaders on the right, who refuse to speak out against this senseless violence and call it what it is: hate speech meant to divide us and not unite us.
This departure from logic and reason, and cozying up to fear, is leading people to violence and extremism in communities all across this country, and it must be stopped.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
We learned in the Rules Committee yesterday--in fact, the gentlewoman from Minnesota pointed out--how Republicans had little opportunity to provide any input into these bills that are going to be provided for in this rule. Unfortunately, the Speaker has no interest in involving half of the Representatives in this country in addressing an issue we all care about: Keeping Americans safe.
Yesterday, in the Rules Committee, it was stated that Republicans vote against all mental health bills. I don't know where that concept comes from. Republicans passed into law the 21st Century Cures Act, which represents the most significant reform to the mental health system in several decades.
Republicans have also taken steps to reform the National Instant Criminal Background Check System with the so-called Fix NICS Act of 2017, which improved reporting to the database.
Unfortunately, we also know the Department of Justice inspector general reported that only 1 percent of individuals who try to purchase a firearm illegally, and it is known they are trying to purchase a firearm illegally, are prosecuted.
So, I have introduced a bill, H.R. 194, to require the Department of Justice to recommence this reporting to Congress so that Congress can have a better idea of how many guns exist illegally in commerce and, ultimately, to ensure that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives recovers these illegal firearms.
Republicans would have also engaged on the issue of the age of purchase, but honestly, as brought up by Representative Massie yesterday during the Rules Committee hearing, let's examine all the data points to determine whether the age for law enforcement officers, military service, and the Selective Service should also be considered. But that was not on the table.
Then, as if to underscore just how partisan and one-sided this rule is today, there is a provision in the rule that deems a $1.6 trillion budget resolution for fiscal year 2023. Madam Speaker, I am a member of the Budget Committee, and during the Rules Committee hearing yesterday was the first time I heard about this budget resolution. It is a 9 percent increase over fiscal year 2022 and $21 billion over President Biden's fiscal year 2023 budget proposal.
We have a problem with inflation in this country. We have a problem with inflation because the Federal Government and congressional Democrats and the Biden administration are overspending what the economy can tolerate. Yet, here we are, adding a 9 percent increase on a resolution that is deemed passed when the rule is voted on. We don't even get to debate the pros and cons in the committee. It is just deemed passed when the rule is passed. I have to ask: When will this partisan policymaking end?
Half the country represented by Republicans deserve--and we have a mandate from our constituents--to be part of the legislative process.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me remind everybody that 21 people were killed in Uvalde, 19 children. Ten people were killed in Buffalo. I say that because I think my colleagues need to be reminded about why we are here today, not to talk about the budget, but to talk about saving lives.
I also remind them that the shooter in Buffalo and the shooter in Uvalde went in and legally purchased an AR-15 at 18 years old.
Our bill that we are talking about here today would have prevented that. Whatever they are doing for the previous question--I don't know what it is--would not.
I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a member of the Rules Committee.
Ms. SCANLON. Madam Speaker, since the Judiciary Committee marked up the Protecting Our Kids Act last Thursday, dozens more Americans have been killed or wounded in shootings, including in Philadelphia.
Saturday night was a beautiful summer evening in the South Street entertainment district when a fistfight broke out. It ended with 3 deaths and 11 injured after multiple people pulled guns and fired into the bustling crowd. Most of those gun owners were licensed to carry. One had a ghost gun, which, of course, is the subject of our legislation today.
The point is that the current approach to gun violence in this country, which has encouraged a flood of guns to our streets, is not working. We need to do more, and we need to do it now.
This isn't about being progun or antigun. Gun violence is not a partisan issue. It is a sickness infecting this entire country.
Whether Philadelphia, Uvalde, Tulsa, Buffalo, or anywhere else in between, none of us should sit idly by and watch preventable gun deaths happen every single day, and I know that I, for one, cannot.
We are not helpless. We can change this. The needle on this issue has moved, and it is not going back. The only question is whether Republican Members of Congress and the Senate will listen to their constituents or the NRA.
Our fellow Americans are demanding action. There is nothing unconstitutional about the bills we consider today, and they will help stop the routine slaughter of children, neighbors, teachers, doctors, and seniors in our schools, neighborhoods, churches, temples, mosques, and supermarkets.
I refuse to tell our children that they must be sacrificial lambs to a radical, twisted theory of armed Second Amendment liberty that is decoupled from personal responsibility and refuses to recognize the overriding purposes of the Constitution, to ensure domestic tranquility and promote the general welfare, and that also refuses to recognize that there are constitutional limits to the Second Amendment. Our Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Our children know as well as we do that we can do something. We have the power to pass this bill, and we must.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My colleague from Massachusetts continues to use his talking points and mentions the gun lobby, and I want to point out that I hear from many of my constituents who are law-abiding gun owners and who are extremely concerned and oppose this bill.
As a matter of fact, I met with a group of students from my district this morning who oppose this legislation. Even students know that this bill will do nothing to stop gun violence, but they do understand it will trample Second Amendment rights.
Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Smith).
Mr. SMITH of Missouri. Madam Speaker, today's rule is an all-too-
familiar pattern of the legislative laziness from my Democrat colleagues.
Once again, Washington Democrats are hiding their spending from the American people. They are smuggling their spending levels for the upcoming appropriations process into a rule for a totally unrelated bill so they don't have to debate or defend their out-of-control spending habits.
Last year, Democrats did the exact same thing. The chairman of the Budget Committee drafts a spending resolution; he skips over his committee; and then they toss it into a rule, hoping no one notices.
At no point in the last 4 years of the majority have House Democrats actually marked up a budget in the Budget Committee. Time and again, House Democrats have acted with as little sunlight as possible because they don't want to be held accountable for their record.
Americans know that Washington spending is driving inflation, and now Democrats are calling for even more. Last year alone, House Democrats voted for $7.5 trillion in new spending, including the $2 trillion so-
called rescue plan that ignited the highest inflation in four decades.
Since President Biden took office and one-party Democrat control of Congress took over in Washington, inflation is up 11 percent. Gas prices are up 110 percent on their watch. President Biden's 2021 deficit was the second highest in history, $517 billion more than the CBO said it should have been.
Democrats don't want to debate budgets. They certainly don't want to debate the President's budget, which would spend $73 trillion over the next decade, a 66 percent increase over the past decade. It would add
$16 trillion in new debt with well over $1 trillion annual deficits every year.
Democrats don't want to talk about budgets because they are spending like they simply don't exist. If Democrats won't show their cards, allow me. The resolution that is tucked away in this rule has over $1.6 trillion in discretionary spending next year, a $132 billion, or 9 percent, increase over the most recent fiscal year 2022 omnibus. It is
$21 billion more in spending than even Biden's budget proposal.
Instead of hiding, I urge my colleagues to be crystal clear with the American people about exactly what they have in store for them: tax increases, high inflation, open borders, energy dependence, and an ever-growing mountain of debt.
{time} 1315
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, you got to be kidding me. The gentleman from Missouri comes down here for 3 minutes and unloads on everybody here about a technical provision that doesn't even spend any money. It is a technical provision to allow us to go forward with our appropriations work.
Not a mention of the children who were killed in Uvalde or the people who were killed in Buffalo--not a mention. What the hell is wrong with this place?
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record--since the gentleman didn't have the dignity to acknowledge those who were killed--the names of those who were murdered in Uvalde and Buffalo.
Robb Elementary School--Uvalde, TX (May 24, 2022)
19 Children, 2 Teachers--21 Total Fatalities, 18 injured
Makenna Lee Elrod, age 10;
Layla Salazar, age 11;
Maranda Mathis, age 11;
Nevaeh Bravo, age 10;
Jose Manuel Flores Jr., age 10;
Xavier Lopez; age 10;
Tess Marie Mata, age 10;
Rojelio Torres, age 10;
Eliahna ``Ellie'' Amyah Garcia, age 9;
Eliahna A. Torres, age 10:
Annabell Guadalupe Rodriguez, age 10;
Jackie Cazares, age 9;
Uziyah Garcia, age 10;
Jayce Carmelo Luevanos, age 10;
Maite Yuleana Rodriguez, age 10;
Jailah Nicole Silguero, age 10;
Amerie Jo Garza, 10;
Alexandria ``Lexi'' Aniyah Rubio, age 10;
Alithia Ramirez, age 10;
Irma Garcia, age 48; and
Eva Mireles, age 44.
____
Supermarket Shooting--Buffalo, NY (May 14, 2022)
10 Total Fatalities, 3 injured
Pearl Young, age 77;
Ruth Whitfield, age 86;
Andre Mackniel, age 53;
Katherine 'Kat' Massey, age 72;
Celestine Chaney, age 65;
Margus D. Morrison, age 52;
Heyward Patterson, age 67;
Aaron Salter Jr., age 55;
Roberta Drury, age 32; and
Geraldine Talley, age 62.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I will respond to the gentlewoman from Minnesota.
Madam Speaker, I include in the Record this Business Insider article entitled ``Host Republican leaders told their Members to vote against eight gun-safety bills, citing opposition from the NRA and Gun Owners of America.''
House Republican Leaders Told Their Members To Vote Against 8 Gun-
Safety Bills, Citing Opposition From the NRA and Gun Owners of America
(By Bryan Metzger)
House Republicans are poised to vote against eight bills aimed at preventing gun violence on Tuesday, in part due to opposition from powerful pro-gun groups on the right.
House Democratic leaders have scheduled votes for Wednesday evening on the ``Protecting Our Kids Act''--a package of seven gun violence-related measures that includes raising the age for legal purchase of semiautomatic rifles and shotguns to 21, closing the ``bump stock'' loophole, and other measures aimed at preventing the illegal trafficking of guns.
The House will also vote on the ``Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act,'' a federal ``red flag'' bill that would allow family members and law enforcement officials to temporarily block firearm access to those who a court determines pose a danger to themselves or others.
In a ``whip notice'' sent to rank-and-file members on Tuesday afternoon, House GOP leadership urged a ``no'' vote on all eight bills, referring to the seven-bill package as the ``Unconstitutional Gun Restrictions Act.'' They wrote that House Democrats had ``thrown together this reactionary package comprised of legislation that egregiously violates law-abiding citizens' 2nd Amendment rights and hinders Americans' ability to defend and protect themselves and their families.''
The email also noted the opposition of the National Rifle Association and Gun Owners of America, including links to talking points from the NRA about both the gun package and the red flag law. Leaders also noted the opposition of Heritage Action for America, an advocacy group tied to the conservative Heritage Foundation.
``Due to the importance of this issue, votes on this legislation will be considered in future candidate ratings and endorsements by the NRA Political Victory Fund,'' declares one of the memos shared by party leaders.
It's not uncommon for party leaders to note the opposition of outside groups to major pieces of legislation. For example, in a February whip notice urging Republicans to vote against a major piece of legislation aimed at boosting the US semiconductor industry, GOP leaders noted the opposition of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, National Taxpayers Union, and Americans for Prosperity.
But the two gun groups' inclusion--and the NRA's threat to downgrade candidate ratings or withhold endorsements should any Republicans back the measures--underscores the enduring influence of pro-second amendment groups on the right, despite the NRA's recent financial troubles and shrinking membership.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a member of the Rules Committee.
Mr. RASKIN. Madam Speaker, the blood bath continues. Gun violence has now become the number one cause of death of children in the United States. We have rates of gun violence and gun deaths 20 times higher than any other industrialized nations like France, the United Kingdom, Japan, and Israel. No other nation comes close to what we are seeing. That is 200 percent higher than our peer countries.
The American people want change and action, but the minority invites us to believe that the bloody carnage piling up around the country from Buffalo to Uvalde, from Newtown to Las Vegas is a necessary feature of our Second Amendment.
We are invited to believe that all of the lost sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters of America are the necessary collateral damage of their fidelity to the Second Amendment.
Our family members must be sacrificed to a completely false vision of the Second Amendment. It is a lie. It is a lie based on a totally bogus misreading of the Second Amendment and what the Supreme Court has actually said about it.
Read Justice Scalia in Heller v. District of Columbia. No, he says, the right to guns is not an unlimited right. No, he says, the Second Amendment right is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever, in any manner whatsoever, and for whatever purpose. No.
The Second Amendment is not the only right in the Bill of Rights that is not subject to reasonable regulation in the interest of public safety and public security. He specifically upheld reasonable gun safety regulations, including bans on carrying a concealed weapon, the possession of firearms by felons and other people who shouldn't have guns; laws forbidding carrying firearms in schools and government buildings; laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the sale and purchase of firearms.
Stop hiding behind the Second Amendment. Take responsibility for your irresponsible position.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, we already have gun laws in this country and yet those laws continue to be broken. If Democrats want to talk about common sense, how about we talk about enforcing the laws that already exist.
Communities across the country are making it clear that they want people who commit crimes to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law; yet, liberal prosecutors are letting criminals go free with minimal punishment. This is not woke. This is dangerous.
Criminals need to be held accountable for their actions, and that is why we offered the PQ we did.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, the gentlewoman mentioned our gun laws, and just to demonstrate the absurdity of the gun laws that are in place, I include in the Record the Texas Parks & Wildlife ``Migratory Game Bird Hunting Methods'' list of regulations, which is valid September 1, 2021 through August 31, 2022.
Migratory Game Bird Hunting Methods
(By Texas Parks & Wildlife)
Harvest Information Program (HIP)
No person shall hunt migratory game birds in this state unless that person is HIP-certified in Texas. The federally- mandated Harvest Information Program (HIP) improves harvest information for all migratory game birds. Hunters who buy a Migratory Game Bird Hunting Endorsement, including Super Combos, will be asked a few simple questions about their migratory bird hunting activities.
Please report Migratory Game Bird bands. Check migratory game birds harvested (especially doves) for leg bands and report them to reportband.gov.
Means and Methods
Shotguns, lawful archery equipment, falconry, dogs, artificial decoys, and manual or mouth-operated bird calls are legal.
A shotgun is the only legal firearm for hunting migratory game birds. Shotguns must not be larger than 10-gauge, must be fired from the shoulder, and must be incapable of holding more than three shells. Shotguns capable of holding more than three shells must be plugged with a one-piece filler which cannot be removed without disassembling the gun, so the gun's total capacity does not exceed three shells.
Hunting is permitted in the open or from a blind or other type of concealment or from floating craft or motor boat provided that all motion resulting from sail or motor has ceased. Sails must be furled and motor turned off before shooting starts.
A craft under power may be used to retrieve dead or crippled birds; however, crippled birds may not be shot from such craft under power.
No person, while hunting waterfowl anywhere in the state, may possess shotgun shells containing lead shot or loose lead shot for use in muzzleloaders. Approved shot includes steel
(including copper, nickel or zinc-coated steel), bismuth-tin, tungsten-iron, tungsten-polymer (e.g. moly-shot), and any other nontoxic material approved by the Director of the USFWS.
Baiting Regulations
Directly or indirectly placing, exposing, depositing, distributing or scattering of salt, grain, or other feed that could serve as a lure or attraction for migratory game birds to, on or over areas where hunters are attempting to take them is prohibited by federal law. Hunters are responsible for knowing whether an area is baited or not.
For further information on federal regulation regarding baiting:
USFWS Dove Hunting and Baiting.
USFWS Waterfowl Hunting and Baiting.
A hunter may hunt migratory game birds including waterfowl, coots and sandhill cranes:
on or over standing crops, standing flooded crops and flooded harvested crops;
over natural vegetation that has been manipulated;
on or over a normal soil stabilization practice that is defined as a planting for agricultural soil erosion control or post-mining land reclamation conducted in accordance with official recommendations of State Extension Specialists of the Cooperative Extension Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA);
on or over lands or areas where seeds or grains have been scattered solely as a result of a normal agricultural practice which is defined as a planting, harvesting or post- harvest manipulation conducted in accordance with official recommendations of State Extension Specialists of the Cooperative Extension Service of the USDA. Does not include the brocast spreading of seed that is normally drill-planted;
over crops or natural vegetation where grain has been inadvertently scattered as a result of entering or leaving a hunting area, placing decoys or retrieving downed birds;
using natural vegetation or crops to conceal a blind, provided that if crops are used to conceal a blind, no grain or other feed is exposed, deposited, distributed or scattered in the process.
A person may hunt doves over planted crops that have been manipulated for the purpose of hunting. Waterfowl and sandhill cranes may not be hunted where grain or feed has been distributed or scattered as a result of manipulation or livestock feeding.
Unlawful Activities
It is unlawful to:
hunt migratory birds with the aid of bait, or on or over any baited area;
hunt over any baited area until 10 days after all baiting materials have been removed and a game warden has confirmed removal of baiting materials;
place or allow the placement of bait on or adjacent to any area where migratory game birds could be attracted for the purpose of hunting migratory game birds by any person;
hunt waterfowl or sandhill cranes over manipulated planted millet in the first year after planting;
hunt waterfowl or sandhill cranes over crops that have been manipulated, unless the manipulation is a normal agricultural post-harvesting manipulation in accordance with official recommendations of State Extension Specialists of the Cooperative Extension Service of the USDA;
use any firearm other than a legal shotgun; use a trap, snare, net, fishhook, poison, drug, explosive or stupefying substance; use live birds as decoys; use recorded or electronically amplified bird calls or sounds; or use a sinkbox;
hunt from or by means of motor vehicles or aircraft of any kind (including stationary) except paraplegics and single or double amputees of legs may hunt from stationary motor-driven conveyances;
use motor-driven land, water or air conveyances or sailboats to concentrate, drive, rally or stir up any migratory game bird; or
hunt where tame or captive live ducks or geese are present unless such birds are or have been for a period of 10 consecutive days prior to such taking confined within an enclosure which substantially reduces the audibility of their calls and totally conceals such birds from the sight of wild migratory game birds.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, shotguns used for duck hunting can't hold more than three shells. Let me repeat: In order to protect the duck population in Texas, shotguns cannot hold more than three shells. Imagine if our Republican friends could muster the same courage to protect America's children.
Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of New York. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the rule for the House to consider commonsense measures to protect our communities and our kids from massacres caused by weapons of mass destruction.
In Buffalo, on May 14, the shooting started at 2:30 in the afternoon. In 2 minutes and 3 seconds it was over: 10 people were killed, 3 injured, 11 African Americans, 1 shooter with a weapon of mass destruction.
I don't want anybody's guns, but we should at least be able to be supportive of background checks to ensure that people that shouldn't have a gun possess a gun. That uplifts the integrity of gun ownership by taking a responsible position and does nothing relative to constitutional rights, and represents a collective responsibility.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, why are we here debating legislation we know will never become law, and when there are--completely separate from this proposal--bipartisan efforts going on in the Senate? We know this is not a genuine effort by the Democrats as they went right to extremes of what they know will divide this country, and would not work with Republicans or accept any of the reasonable amendments that were put forward in committee.
This is a political ploy being put on by the Democrats for them to use as talking points, and it is at the expense of a tragedy and the heartache of so many across this country.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan).
Mrs. TRAHAN. Madam Speaker, many of us in this Chamber have young children. For us, today's vote comes down to simple questions: Can you as a mom or dad imagine getting a call that your child's school was locked down because of an active shooter? Can you imagine standing helplessly behind a police line as gunshots are fired near your daughter's classroom? Can you imagine having to identify the unrecognizable body of your missing baby boy by his favorite shoes? Can you imagine standing in line for a DNA test praying to God that it does not come back a match?
I ask those questions because that is what 19 families in Uvalde just had to do. That is their reality and it has been the reality for 14 families in Parkland, 20 families in Sandy Hook, 12 families in Columbine, and the list goes on.
If you imagine that reality, then do today what should have been done 25 years ago. Pass the legislation so no parent in America ever experiences this horrific reality again. Our children are counting on us and they are watching.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib).
Ms. TLAIB. Madam Speaker, it is inhumane, colleagues, to allow the killing of children. I do have one more question for so many that I have asked over and over again: Is doing nothing really going to save lives? Is it going to actually result in change? How many more of our children have to die?
How many more school children's little pink shoes will be left behind stained with blood before some of the electeds in this room put the lives of people ahead of the profits of their political donors?
In my district, in River Rouge, a 6-year-old girl was caught in a crossfire and shot by a high-powered assault rifle.
The measures in the Protecting Our Kids package that we are set to vote on today is essential and it does save lives. Let's just be very clear though: Our kids need way more than this. They need an assault weapon ban. They need far stricter regulations on handguns and bold initiatives to reduce the number of firearms in our communities.
Most of all, they need accountability from us--from all of us.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 15 seconds.
Ms. TLAIB. Madam Speaker, they need accountability from those of us who are enabling the mass murder of millions of Americans so they can profit from our pain, and that the people that enable their slaughter-
for-profit scheme are here in our government.
Madam Speaker, I look forward to supporting this and so much more because our kids deserve it.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, we have no further requests for time on our side, and I am ready to close. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, these bills are not about keeping kids and communities safe from violent criminals, they are about furthering a blanket anti-
gun agenda. This is one-size-fits-all gun restriction legislation that would punish law-abiding gun owners and fail to improve public safety. My colleagues on the left know it.
This was not a bipartisan effort and these bills will never make it through the Senate. With very real problems to solve, why are Democrats wasting precious time on something that will never make it into law? If Democrats were serious about addressing gun violence, they would engage in meaningful conversation about public safety instead of this agenda-
driven political theater.
The sad fact is that the Democrats' approach demonstrates that these bills and the issue of gun violence on the whole are nothing more than political talking points in an election year. This is designed to advance the radical Democrat base that believes no private citizen should ever be able to own a gun.
They should be ashamed of themselves for putting us through this political show rather than working with Republicans on a bipartisan solution to gun violence.
Madam Speaker, I oppose the rule and I ask Members to do the same. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman has 2\1/4\ minutes.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record Newsweek's May 27, 2022, article entitled ``More Children Have Been Shot Dead in 2022 Than Police in the Line of Duty.''
More Children Have Been Shot Dead in 2022 Than Police in the Line of
Duty
(By Gerrard Kaonga)
More children have been shot and killed in the U.S. this year than police while on duty, according to new data.
The Officer Down Memorial Page website records the death of police officers across the country and honors them for their service.
As well as showing a picture of the deceased officer, it also shows where they were stationed, the date of their death and the cause.
According to the website, in 2022, 20 officers have been killed after being involved in a shooting.
In comparison, in 2022, 24 students have been killed as a result of shootings at school, according to data collected by Education Week.
``School shootings, terrifying to students, educators, parents and communities, always reignite polarizing debates about gun rights and school safety,'' the Education Week report read.
``To bring context to these debates, Education Week journalists began tracking shootings on K-12 school property that resulted in firearm-related injuries or deaths.''
According to the Education Week report, there have been 27 school shootings in 2022 and 119 in total since 2018, when they began tracking such incidents.
The Robb Elementary School shooting, which resulted in 21 people being killed--19 children and two adult staff, lifted the number of children killed in school shootings above the number of police officers shot dead in the line of duty.
The other school shootings that brought the total number to 24 deaths included an attack at Tanglewood Middle School, Greenville, South Carolina, on March 31.
A 12-year old student was shot and killed at the school. At the time, this was the youngest age a student had been killed in a school shooting in 2022.
Another incident that contributed was the Eisenhower High School shooting, Yakima, Washington, on March 15, that resulted in one student being killed and another injured.
There was also a shooting at East High School in Des Moines, Iowa, on March 7 that resulted in a 15-year-old boy being killed and two female students getting injured.
The second shooting of 2022 that resulted in a fatality of a student was at the South Education Center, Richfield, Minnesota, on February 1.
Large Number of School Shootings
A shooting outside the South Education Center left a 15- year-old student dead and a 17-year-old student critically wounded.
The first incident of 2022 that resulted in a student's death was at Oliver Citywide Academy, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on January 19. This resulted in a 15-year-old boy being shot and killed as he waited to go home.
President Joe Biden addressed the issue in a speech on Tuesday and said it was time America stood up to the gun manufacturing industry. Biden also reflected on the frequency of mass shootings in America in his speech.
``It's been 3,448 days--10 years since I stood up at a high school in Connecticut--a grade school in Connecticut, where another gunman massacred 26 people, including 20 first- graders, at Sandy Hook Elementary School,'' he said.
``Since then, there have been over 900 incidents of gunfire reported on school grounds. Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Santa Fe High School in Texas. Oxford High School in Michigan. The list goes on and on,'' Biden said. ``And the list grows when it includes mass shootings at places like movie theaters, houses of worship, and, as we saw just 10 days ago, at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York.''
``I am sick and tired of it. We have to act. And don't tell me we can't have an impact on this carnage,'' Biden said.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the remainder of my time.
Madam Speaker, will the bills before us pass the Senate? I sure as hell hope so. None of these proposals are extreme. Quite the opposite. In fact, they are what the vast majority of people in this country--
Democrats, Republicans, Independents--want us to do. Maybe they will get changed in the Senate. Even if our Senate colleagues do not take up these exact bills, I will tell you what this process we are going through will absolutely do and why our efforts here are worthwhile.
This process will unequivocally show where each and every one of us stand in the wake of this unspeakable tragedy. More importantly, it will demonstrate which of the solutions we are putting forward have majority support in this half of the Congress.
As our Senate colleagues discuss gun violence solutions, they will have no doubt as to where the House of Representatives stands on red flag laws; raising the age to purchase a semiautomatic rifle from 18 to 21; gun trafficking and straw purchases; ghost guns; safe storage of firearms, particularly when a minor is likely to gain access; bump stocks; and large-capacity magazines.
We will have separate votes on all of these issues. This is on top of the background check bill and the Charleston loophole bills we have already sent them.
{time} 1330
This week there will be no excuses. We will vote on these ideas one issue at a time. None of these proposals are aimed at taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. They are aimed at stopping people from getting slaughtered in their schools, in their churches, in grocery stores, and in their homes. These ideas won't solve every problem or stop every shooting, but no sane person can come to the conclusion that these proposals would not save lives.
I know that things like background checks and waiting until you are 21 to buy an AR-15 and smaller magazine capacity may seem like an inconvenience to some people. But when stacked up against the carnage we have seen in this country, I think we can all live with a little inconvenience.
Madam Speaker, I cannot be any clearer. These bills will keep people from dying, but only if they become law or if similar bills become law.
I know that everybody hates Congress. Hell, I even hate Congress sometimes. But, Madam Speaker, don't listen to the NRA or extremists on this bill. Vote your conscience.
Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and the previous question.
The material previously referred to by Mrs. Fischbach is as follows:
Amendment to House Resolution 1153
At the end of the resolution, add the following:
Sec. 8. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution, the House shall proceed to the consideration in the House of the bill (H.R. 7967) to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act to direct district attorney and prosecutors offices to report to the Attorney General, 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 the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to recommit.
Sec. 9. Clause l(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 7967.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mrs. FISCHBACH. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217, nays 205, not voting 5, as follows:
YEAS--217
Adams Aguilar Allred Auchincloss Axne Barragan Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Bourdeaux Bowman Boyle, Brendan F. Brown (MD) Brown (OH) Brownley Bush Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Carson Carter (LA) Cartwright Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Cherfilus-McCormick Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doggett Doyle, Michael F. Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Fletcher Foster Frankel, Lois Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Golden Gomez Gonzalez, Vicente Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Himes Horsford Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jacobs (CA) Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Jones Kahele Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim (NJ) Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lieu Lofgren Lowenthal Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Manning Matsui McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Mfume Moore (WI) Morelle Moulton Mrvan Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Newman Norcross O'Halleran Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Perlmutter Peters Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Ross Roybal-Allard Ruiz Ruppersberger Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell Sherman Sherrill Sires Slotkin Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Suozzi Swalwell Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Trone Underwood Vargas Veasey Velazquez Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wexton Wild Williams (GA) Wilson (FL) Yarmuth
NAYS--205
Allen Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bentz Bergman Bice (OK) Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Boebert Bost Brady Brooks Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Calvert Cammack Carey Carl Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Cawthorn Chabot Cheney Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Comer Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Donalds Duncan Dunn Ellzey Emmer Estes Fallon Feenstra Ferguson Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Foxx Franklin, C. Scott Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gibbs Gimenez Gohmert Gonzales, Tony Gonzalez (OH) Gooden (TX) Gosar Granger Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Greene (GA) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Harris Harshbarger Hartzler Hern Herrell Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Hill Hinson Hudson Huizenga Issa Jackson Jacobs (NY) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kim (CA) Kinzinger
Kustoff LaHood LaMalfa Lamborn Latta LaTurner Lesko Letlow Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Mace Malliotakis Mann Massie Mast McCarthy McCaul McClain McClintock McHenry McKinley Meijer Meuser Miller (IL) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Mooney Moore (AL) Moore (UT) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nehls Newhouse Norman Obernolte Owens Palazzo Palmer Pence Perry Pfluger Posey Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Rodgers (WA) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rosendale Rouzer Roy Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sessions Simpson Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Steel Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner Upton Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Wagner Walberg Walorski Waltz Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Zeldin
NOT VOTING--5
Aderholt Good (VA) Higgins (NY) Hollingsworth Houlahan
{time} 1410
Mr. MULLIN, Ms. TENNEY, Mrs. HARTZLER, and Mr. KATKO changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress
Barragan (Beyer) Bass (Blunt Rochester) Brooks (Fleischmann) Brown (OH) (Beatty) Calvert (Valadao) Cardenas (Soto) Cawthorn (Gaetz) Crist (Wasserman Schultz) Evans (Beyer) Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz) Gomez (Garcia (TX)) Guest (Fleischmann) Jacobs (CA) (Correa) Johnson (SD) (LaHood) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Kim (CA) (Valadao) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) Lamb (Blunt Rochester) Leger Fernandez (Neguse) Loudermilk (Fleischmann) Lowenthal (Beyer) Mace (Donalds) McEachin (Beyer) Moore (WI) (Beyer) Moulton (Neguse) Payne (Pallone) Price (NC) (Manning) Ruiz (Correa) Ryan (Beyer) Sanchez (Garcia (TX)) Sewell (Kelly (IL)) Sherman (Beyer) Sires (Pallone) Spartz (Banks) Strickland (Takano) Suozzi (Beyer) Swalwell (Veasey) Taylor (Fallon) Tonko (Pallone) Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester) Vargas (Takano) Walorski (Banks) Waters (Garcia (TX)) Welch (Pallone) Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. BURGESS. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 218, nays 205, not voting 5, as follows:
YEAS--218
Adams Aguilar Allred Auchincloss Axne Barragan Bass Beatty Bera Beyer Bishop (GA) Blumenauer Blunt Rochester Bonamici Bourdeaux Bowman Boyle, Brendan F. Brown (MD) Brown (OH) Brownley Bush Bustos Butterfield Carbajal Cardenas Carson Carter (LA) Cartwright Case Casten Castor (FL) Castro (TX) Cherfilus-McCormick Chu Cicilline Clark (MA) Clarke (NY) Cleaver Clyburn Cohen Connolly Cooper Correa Costa Courtney Craig Crist Crow Cuellar Davids (KS) Davis, Danny K. Dean DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DelBene Demings DeSaulnier Deutch Dingell Doggett Doyle, Michael F. Escobar Eshoo Espaillat Evans Fletcher Foster Frankel, Lois Gallego Garamendi Garcia (IL) Garcia (TX) Gomez Gonzalez, Vicente Gottheimer Green, Al (TX) Grijalva Harder (CA) Hayes Higgins (NY) Himes Horsford Houlahan Hoyer Huffman Jackson Lee Jacobs (CA) Jayapal Jeffries Johnson (GA) Johnson (TX) Jones Kahele Kaptur Keating Kelly (IL) Khanna Kildee Kilmer Kim (NJ) Kind Kirkpatrick Krishnamoorthi Kuster Lamb Langevin Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Lawrence Lawson (FL) Lee (CA) Lee (NV) Leger Fernandez Levin (CA) Levin (MI) Lieu Lofgren Lowenthal Luria Lynch Malinowski Maloney, Carolyn B. Maloney, Sean Manning Matsui McBath McCollum McEachin McGovern McNerney Meeks Meng Mfume Moore (WI) Morelle Moulton Mrvan Murphy (FL) Nadler Napolitano Neal Neguse Newman Norcross O'Halleran Ocasio-Cortez Omar Pallone Panetta Pappas Pascrell Payne Pelosi Perlmutter Peters Phillips Pingree Pocan Porter Pressley Price (NC) Quigley Raskin Rice (NY) Ross Roybal-Allard Ruiz Ruppersberger Rush Ryan Sanchez Sarbanes Scanlon Schakowsky Schiff Schneider Schrader Schrier Scott (VA) Scott, David Sewell Sherman Sherrill Sires Smith (WA) Soto Spanberger Speier Stansbury Stanton Stevens Strickland Suozzi Swalwell Takano Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Titus Tlaib Tonko Torres (CA) Torres (NY) Trahan Trone Underwood Vargas Veasey Velazquez Wasserman Schultz Waters Watson Coleman Welch Wexton Wild Williams (GA) Wilson (FL) Yarmuth
NAYS--205
Allen Amodei Armstrong Arrington Babin Bacon Baird Balderson Banks Barr Bentz Bergman Bice (OK) Biggs Bilirakis Bishop (NC) Boebert Bost Brady Brooks Buchanan Buck Bucshon Budd Burchett Burgess Calvert Cammack Carey Carl Carter (GA) Carter (TX) Cawthorn Chabot Cheney Cline Cloud Clyde Cole Comer Crawford Crenshaw Curtis Davidson Davis, Rodney DesJarlais Diaz-Balart Donalds Duncan Dunn Ellzey Emmer Estes Fallon Feenstra Ferguson Fischbach Fitzgerald Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Foxx Franklin, C. Scott Fulcher Gaetz Gallagher Garbarino Garcia (CA) Gibbs Gimenez Gohmert Golden Gonzales, Tony Gonzalez (OH) Good (VA) Gooden (TX) Gosar Granger Graves (LA) Graves (MO) Green (TN) Greene (GA) Griffith Grothman Guest Guthrie Harris Harshbarger Hartzler Hern Herrell Herrera Beutler Hice (GA) Higgins (LA) Hill Hinson Hudson Huizenga Issa Jackson Jacobs (NY) Johnson (LA) Johnson (OH) Johnson (SD) Jordan Joyce (OH) Joyce (PA) Katko Keller Kelly (MS) Kelly (PA) Kim (CA) Kinzinger Kustoff LaHood LaMalfa Lamborn Latta LaTurner Lesko Letlow Long Loudermilk Lucas Luetkemeyer Mace Malliotakis Mann Massie McCarthy McCaul McClain McClintock McHenry McKinley Meijer Miller (IL) Miller (WV) Miller-Meeks Moolenaar Mooney Moore (AL) Moore (UT) Mullin Murphy (NC) Nehls Newhouse Norman Obernolte Owens Palazzo Pence Perry Pfluger Posey Reschenthaler Rice (SC) Rodgers (WA) Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rose Rosendale Rouzer Roy Rutherford Salazar Scalise Schweikert Scott, Austin Sessions Simpson Slotkin Smith (MO) Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smucker Spartz Stauber Steel Stefanik Steil Steube Stewart Taylor Tenney Thompson (PA) Tiffany Timmons Turner Upton Valadao Van Drew Van Duyne Wagner Walberg Walorski Waltz Weber (TX) Webster (FL) Wenstrup Westerman Williams (TX) Wilson (SC) Wittman Womack Zeldin
NOT VOTING--5
Aderholt Hollingsworth Mast Meuser Palmer
{time} 1430
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Members Recorded Pursuant to House Resolution 8, 117th Congress
Barragan (Beyer) Bass (Blunt Rochester) Brooks (Fleischmann) Brown (OH) (Beatty) Calvert (Valadao) Cardenas (Soto) Cawthorn (Gaetz) Crist (Wasserman Schultz) Evans (Beyer) Frankel, Lois (Wasserman Schultz) Gomez (Garcia (TX)) Guest (Fleischmann) Jacobs (CA) (Correa) Johnson (SD) (LaHood) Johnson (TX) (Jeffries) Kim (CA) (Valadao) Kirkpatrick (Pallone) Lamb (Blunt Rochester) Leger Fernandez (Neguse) Loudermilk (Fleischmann) Lowenthal (Beyer) Mace (Donalds) McEachin (Beyer) Moore (WI) (Beyer) Moulton (Neguse) Payne (Pallone) Price (NC) (Manning) Ruiz (Correa) Ryan (Beyer) Sanchez (Garcia (TX)) Sewell (Kelly (IL)) Sherman (Beyer) Sires (Pallone) Spartz (Banks) Strickland (Takano) Suozzi (Beyer) Swalwell (Veasey) Taylor (Fallon) Torres (NY) (Blunt Rochester) Vargas (Takano) Walorski (Banks) Waters (Garcia (TX)) Welch (Pallone) Wilson (FL) (Neguse)
____________________
SOURCE: PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 7910, PROTECTING OUR KIDS ACT
