Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. That is correct, we cannot vote on that.

Mr. McGOVERN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, sometimes I can't believe what is said on this House floor. Mr. Speaker, I would say to my friend, the distinguished chair of the Rules Committee, if he is so sure of his arguments on this issue, then bring the amendment to the floor, present your case, and let the majority of this House determine what we should do. I guarantee you the majority of this House would vote to provide the money to the States and to local communities, because they are hearing from their constituencies about how concerned they are about potential Russian meddling in our election. They are doubly concerned after the President's horrific performance in Helsinki where he seemed to go out of his way to cozy up to Putin. So people are concerned. So the vote that we lost in the Rules Committee was not to enact this amendment, the Quigley amendment, to put the money back in so that the grants could go to States and local communities, the vote we lost-- people need to understand this: the vote we lost was to have the ability to debate it and vote on it. This is the United States House of Representatives. That is what we are supposed to do. Stop the obstructionism, especially on an issue like this. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I don't know what the hell else we can do over here. I mean, I appreciate the fact that the gentleman from Washington only wants to yield for debate only, but how about yielding so that we can act? I mean, I think the American people want us to do something. I mean, what happened in the 2016 election, what Russia did to our country, was a serious matter. And I am going to tell you, it is not just Democrats that are concerned. I know Republicans and Independents are concerned as well. This is an American issue, and when our Nation is attacked, we come together. We put partisanship aside. We act. We just don't talk. We act. We have been trying, using every procedural means we know. We have been appealing in the Rules Committee. We have been trying to bring these issues to the floor, and we get shut down every single time. This is unbelievable. I mean, history is going to look back on the inaction of this Congress with great shame. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Vermont (Mr. Welch) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gonzalez) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Veasey) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Gabbard) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I am now proud to yield to the gentleman from my home State of Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this week, Republicans have brought to the floor a bill that zeros out funding for a grant program to the Election Assistance Commission to help States and local governments secure our elections. Now, a news flash, Mr. Speaker--I hope my Republican friends are listening--Russia was just caught meddling in our election. In fact, meddling is not strong enough. They attacked our country. When we discovered this, Mr. Quigley offered an amendment to restore this critical funding, and it was blocked in the Rules Committee. My friends in the Rules Committee won't even let us vote on it. People may ask why, why can't we have a vote on putting money back in to secure our election system. Well, the reason why, I think, is because we might win and that Democrats--and there are probably a lot of Republicans--would join with us in supporting the amendment. They denied it because it makes sense. It is common sense. We should be funding this program and, instead, we are debating a press release that my friends on the other side are so passionate about, that will do nothing for anybody. It is just a press release. We are not debating a carbon tax. We are debating a press release. We ought to be protecting our election system. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) for the purpose of a unanimous consent request.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis), to discuss that proposal.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I tried to get the gentleman from Kentucky to yield, but I guess he didn't want to get into an exchange. But he said that he is worried about Kentucky jobs. There is nothing in this bill that will protect one job anywhere. We are not debating a carbon tax. This is a sense of Congress. This is a press release. This is not going to protect anybody's paycheck. This is ridiculous. Are you going to go home to your constituents and say, ``Oh, I did something for you. I passed a press release''? I mean, give me a break. The gentleman talks about the poor. If he is worried about the poor, then stop cutting Medicaid. If he is worried about the poor, stop cutting food assistance from people struggling in poverty, because that is what the Republican majority has been doing consistently in this Congress. So I don't need any lectures about that. To the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse), my colleague, let me again say, because I think people need to have this sink in, this is the most closed Congress in the history of our country: 92 closed rules. That means that the majority of bills--I want my Republican colleagues to listen to this as well--the majority of bills have come to the floor where nobody, even Republicans, are allowed to offer any amendments--nothing. Is this the people's House? Is this what you came to Washington to do, to shut out debate, to shut out good ideas? It is a disgrace. My hope is that the people of this country are watching and that they will send you a message in November. Mr. Speaker, I am going to ask my colleagues to defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up H.R. 12, the Voter Empowerment Act, introduced by my colleague, Representative John Lewis, which would ensure equal access to the ballot, modernize the voter registration system, and take steps to eliminate deceptive practices that deter voters from casting their ballots. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment in the Record, along with extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse), for yielding me the customary 30 minutes for debate. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to debate a Republican sense of Congress resolution proclaiming that a carbon tax would be bad for the U.S. economy. That is it. That is how this majority is choosing to spend its precious legislative time. I mean, this is a big nothing burger. Instead of considering legislation to address the administration's horrific child separation policy at the border or addressing the surging cost of prescription drugs or taking action to address gun safety, or finally, finally holding Russia accountable for their interference in the 2016 election, something the President himself has trouble acknowledging, we are here considering a sense of Congress stating that a carbon tax would be bad for America. You know, I don't know how many of my Republican colleagues are scientists, but you might want to meet some and talk to some of them. They are smart people. They deal in facts. They deal in evidence. They deal in results. Look, Mr. Speaker, as any third grader knows, the Earth revolves around the Sun, and if I drop a pen, it will fall to the table because of gravity. We know that smoking causes cancer, and we know that the Earth is not flat. We also know that climate change is real and that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that humans are the main cause. But Republicans are burying their heads in the sand with this glorified press release attacking a potential tool to combat it. But even worse than what we are doing is what the Republican majority is blocking from consideration. This week they blocked an amendment that would have provided much needed funding to the Election Assistance Commission to protect our elections from further Russian interference. This is outrageous. Just days after President Trump sided with Putin over our own intelligence community, Republicans blocked funding to protect our elections. Essentially, the President sold out America in Helsinki. So Republicans want to vote on a sense of Congress, let's consider the resolution reiterating Speaker Ryan's statement in response to the President's terrible performance in Helsinki. It acknowledges Russia's role in interfering in our election, and it affirms our support for the intelligence community. But, of course, the majority has blocked that resolution. Instead, we are now debating our 92nd closed rule this Congress. This is the most closed Congress in history, with zero open rules. And for those in the gallery, the reason why this is important is because the majority of bills that have come to this floor have come in a way that nobody can amend them. Nobody can change even a word in the bill. I mean, this is supposed to be the people's House, not the Russia house. Mr. Speaker, this, what we are doing today, is a waste of time. We have real issues to address--substantive issues to address. The American people deserve more than show votes that throw red meat to the oil lobby. I would say to my Republican colleagues: Do your job. Listen to the American people. Start addressing some of their concerns, like the fact that we need to protect our election system from more Russian interference. That is a serious matter. All of our intelligence agencies have said it is a serious matter, that it happened. And what is your response? You zero out money in an appropriations bill to help protect our election system. Then you block an amendment that would allow us to put the money back in. All we want is a fair fight. If you want to vote ``no'' on it, vote ``no'' on it. But the American people are concerned, even if you are not. Do your job. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. (Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, when Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein announced the charges against 12 Russian military officers on Friday, he said: ``We need to work together to hold the perpetrators accountable, and we need to keep moving forward to preserve our values, protect against future interference, and defend America.'' Well, Republicans and Democrats working together need to come together to defend this country. That shouldn't be controversial. It should be common sense, and it should be above partisanship. But we have a President who probably tunes out anything the Deputy Attorney General says because President Trump is too busy attacking the special counsel investigation on a near-daily basis. He calls it a witch hunt and even worse, and that is despite the fact that the Justice Department has issued more than 100 criminal counts against more than 30 people and three companies. Numerous associates of the President have pled guilty, and his former campaign chairman is sitting in jail today. Or maybe more accurately, Mr. Speaker, the President attacks Robert Mueller's investigation because of that fact, because the special counsel could be closing in on even more possible wrongdoing. Where there is smoke there is usually fire, and there is at least a lot of smoke so far. So, given the President's action, we need, as a Congress, to step it up. We need to hold Russia accountable and prevent this kind of hacking from ever happening again because the President, who is unwilling to say even publicly that he trusts the American intelligence community over Vladimir Putin, will not. Mr. Speaker, I am asking my colleagues to defeat the previous question so we can go on record as disagreeing and condemning what the President did in Helsinki, which was such a betrayal of our values. And what we are asking to do is to vote to endorse the Speaker of the House, the Republican Speaker of the House's words. I mean, quite frankly, we should have a resolution of disapproval on the floor, or maybe even a censure, given what the President did. But we are saying let's come together in a bipartisan way, and let's make a statement that we disagree with what the President did, what his behavior was. So vote ``no'' on the previous question, and vote ``no'' on the rule. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I have left to close.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how many more speakers the gentleman has on his side.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the majority has filled the Financial Services Appropriations bill with anti-Home Rule riders that meddle in local D.C. affairs. Not one or two provisions, which would be bad enough, but five. One would prohibit D.C. from using its own funding to carry out Initiative 77, which eliminates the tipped minimum wage. That is an initiative, by the way, that passed recently with 56 percent of the vote. Last night in the Rules Committee, the Republicans even made in order the Palmer amendment. This would prevent the District from implementing its local individual responsibility requirement. If passed, this amendment would increase health insurance premiums and cause residents to lose access to affordable coverage options. Mr. Speaker, why are the Republicans continuing to interfere in local D.C. government? Where are the small-government conservatives? Where is the Freedom Caucus? They should be outraged by this meddling. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton filed amendments to strike these riders and spoke in the Rules Committee last night. She asked a pretty simple question: Don't my Republican friends have their own districts to worry about? Her amendments complied with the rules of the House, yet they were blocked from getting a vote on the floor. We can't even debate them here. The majority is afraid of a fair fight. We are long past the point of breaking the record for being the most closed Congress in the history of the United States of America. This is more of the same for the most closed Congress in history, but that doesn't make it right, Mr. Speaker. When will the Republicans finally say, ``Enough''? So enough with the meddling in D.C. affairs, enough with overriding the will of local residents, and enough with the restrictive amendment process. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).

Mr. McGOVERN. I yield the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia an additional 30 seconds.