Jim McGovern

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I am having trouble trying to figure out exactly what the problem that some of my Republican colleagues may have with this bill. Maybe, based on the lack of speakers, they are having trouble figuring it out too. Madam Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), who is a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining for us on both sides.

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I encourage all Members here today to read today's Washington Post editorial questioning Leader McCarthy's political courage in opposing this bill and calling for him to testify under oath about his eyewitness experience of the violence and former President Trump's apparent indifference to it. The editorial also criticizes his false equivalence of Black Lives Matter protests to the Capitol invasion and his minimization of the insurrection's significance, which only encourages the lies on which it is based. I include that article in the Record. [From the Washington Post, May 18, 2021] Opinion: Kevin McCarthy Plumbs New Depths of Political Cowardice (Opinion by the Editorial Board) Democratic and Republican negotiators agreed last week to create a high-level, expert commission with subpoena power to conduct an examination of the Jan. 6 Capitol invasion, one of the lowest moments in U.S. history. But House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Tuesday threw his negotiators under the bus, condemning the compromise and vowing to oppose the bill creating the commission when it comes to a House vote Wednesday. Many Republicans do not want an impartial panel to remind the public of their party's role in the event. A fair inquiry would examine how GOP lawmakers fed the election lies that inspired the mob, and how they built Jan. 6, which should have featured a pro forma counting of electoral votes, into a showdown over the 2020 presidential election. Republican lawmakers who signed a spurious lawsuit seeking to overturn the results bear some guilt; those who went on to object to the counting of electoral votes from several swing states bear even more. An honest proceeding would also require Mr. McCarthy to testify under oath about his eyewitness experience of the violence--and to then-President Donald Trump's apparent indifference. Mr. McCarthy has resisted offering the public a frank accounting of his interactions with Mr. Trump, including on a phone call during which Mr. McCarthy reportedly begged Mr. Trump to stop the mob. Mr. McCarthy has concluded that whatever political benefits he receives from embracing Mr. Trump are worth the price of his integrity. If there are to be hearings, Mr. McCarthy argued, they should examine not only the Capitol invasion but other politically motivated violence, such as the riots surrounding the Black Lives Matter protests last summer. The point is to draw a false equivalence between a historically unique attack on the nation's seat of government, in which Mr. Trump and other Republicans are directly implicated, and crimes that left-leaning activists committed--crimes that did not occur in the halls of Congress, that did not aim to interrupt the peaceful transition of power, that did not reflect a plot to overturn a presidential election. Mr. McCarthy knows Democrats will never endorse a panel designed to mislead the nation about Jan. 6, so his proposal for a broader mandate is a ruse: He simply does not want any investigation at all. House Democrats should nevertheless advance the compromise plan on Wednesday. Then the public will see whether there are 10 Senate Republicans willing to approve the deal. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R- Ky.) on Tuesday did not rule out supporting it, raising minor concerns about its structure that should be negotiable. But if Senate Republicans capitulate to the calculations driving Mr. McCarthy, House and Senate committees should use their subpoena power to conduct their own investigations, even if that means Democrats lead the inquiries without Republican cooperation.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I am deeply disappointed that any of my Republican colleagues would oppose the creation of this commission. There is a lot of talk all the time about the need for bipartisanship, and that is what we have here. This is true bipartisanship. The distinguished minority leader sent a letter to Speaker Pelosi asking for an equal 5:5 ratio in appointments by Democrats and Republicans on this commission. He got it. He asked for coequal subpoena power. He got it. He asked for no inclusion of findings or other predetermined conclusions which ultimately should be rendered by the commission itself. He got it. Now, maybe the gentleman didn't think he would, but Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Katko, who was appointed by the minority leader to negotiate on behalf of the Republicans, came to a deal, a genuinely bipartisan deal to look into the horrific acts of what happened in this Chamber on January 6. I was here that day. They were not ordinary tourists who came in here. My colleagues on the Republican side who are here today, there are pictures of them helping to barricade the doors. They know exactly what happened on January 6. Those people who attacked the Capitol were not here to make a political point. They were here to desecrate this building and hurt people. We, as Members of Congress, signed up for this job. But I want Members to vote for this commission, not because of us, but because of the people who work here, our staff, the support staff, the Capitol Police, the people who work in our cafeterias, the people who maintain this building. They were traumatized by what happened here. Our response to all of this is: Well, let's move on. Let's not do this, in spite of a truly bipartisan negotiation and a bipartisan commission. This is so disappointing. I mean, don't talk to us about bipartisanship, and then when you get it, you turn your back on it. Madam Speaker, I am sick and tired of those who want to hover around mistruths and lies and spread conspiracy theories. What happened 133 days ago can never be normalized. We all have to speak the truth, and we must act to prevent it from ever happening again. That starts with not only passing this rule but passing this bipartisan bill to establish a bipartisan commission to produce a report for the American people so that we know clearly and credibly as to what happened and that we can take additional actions to make sure it never happens again. As I said in my opening, vote for this out of respect for this institution, out of respect for our democracy, out of respect for the truth, out of respect for the people who work for you, who come here every day and work for you. We owe it to them and to this country to move forward.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I have very strong views about the national protest taking place across Colombia over the past 2 weeks and the absolutely brutal response against the demonstrators by the Colombian public security forces. But today, I rise about a very different and specific human rights crisis in Colombia, one that receives little attention in the United States and from the international community. I am speaking about the plight of the Raizal people who have lived for centuries on the islands that make up the San Andres archipelago. The Raizal are descendants of Pilgrim settlers, enslaved Africans, Amer-Indians, and British emigrants. They speak Creole English, and most are Protestants. However, in a twist of fate characteristic of the history of colonization, the islands on which they live--San Andres, Ketlina, and Old Providence--are under the sovereignty of Colombia, whose population is Spanish speaking and largely Catholic. It has been that way since the 1800s. For a long time, the Raizal were left largely to their own devices. They were self-governed with a self-sustaining economy. But in the 1950s, the Colombian Government decided to strengthen control over the islands by promoting tourism and mass migration from the mainland. The result is that San Andres, the largest of the islands, is extremely overpopulated. The Raizal have been reduced to minority status on that island. And the development for tourism has so seriously damaged the pristine environment that UNESCO tried to protect it by declaring it a biosphere reserve in 2000. But the smaller islands of Old Providence, accessible only by ferry or small plane, and Ketlina, connected by a bridge, largely escaped the fate of San Andres. The population of both is almost entirely Raizal, and their communities have successfully resisted efforts to bring in big development projects or build military installations there until now. The islands were hit very hard by Hurricane Iota last November. On Old Providence, hundreds of houses were damaged and hundreds more destroyed completely. Colombian President Ivan Duque promised to rebuild in 100 days. It has now been 6 months. The next hurricane season is on the horizon, and reconstruction is nowhere near complete. The delay is partly due to the government's failure to properly consult with those most affected. But what the government did do was allow the Colombian Navy to take advantage of the crisis and build a new dock, a project the community had previously rejected due to the risk of environmental damage. The navy has installed its dock near a fishermen's co-op whose own dock was destroyed by Iota, cutting off its members' access. In response, fishermen whose livelihoods are at risk have been protesting for 62 days. There is a profound difference of vision between the islanders and the mainlanders. The Raizal fear that if the government continues to ignore them, their way of life in Old Providence and Ketlina will be overtaken by the mainland population, as has happened in San Andres. That would be a major violation of the human rights of the Raizal people. In 2004, when the U.N. Special Rapporteur on racism visited the archipelago, the Raizal communities complained of political discrimination and marginalization from the decisionmaking processes that affected their territory. They also described cultural domination by the mainland, for example, the exclusive use of Spanish as the language of instruction and pressure to convert to Catholicism to be able to advance economically. More than 15 years later, the Colombian Government persists with many of the same practices that led the Raizal to lodge those human rights complaints. It is time to change course. It is time to prioritize the human rights of the Raizal people. It is time for the government to recognize the Raizal as legitimate interlocutors and respect their right to protect their ancestral lands. I urge the Duque government to accelerate reconstruction so that the people have adequate shelter and medical facilities as soon as possible, certainly before the next hurricane season. I urge the government to stop importing labor from the mainland and, instead, employ local Raizal workers. I urge the government to remove the navy's new dock, rebuild the co- op's dock instead, and end further militarization of the islands. I urge a thorough review of any U.S. Government resources used for post-Iota reconstruction to ensure that they were expended in full compliance with requirements of prior consultation. And I encourage the United Nations and the Inter-American human rights bodies to immediately review the situation of the Raizal people and issue new recommendations to the Colombian Government to ensure that their rights are fully protected going forward.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California, a distinguished member of the Rules Committee and also a graduate of the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, for yielding me the time. Madam Speaker, I support this rule and the underlying legislation, and I urge my colleagues on both sides to do the same. I hope they all will vote for the rule. The two bills that we are bringing to the floor are the product of regular order. They went through the committee process, hearings and markups. We, in the Rules Committee, made the Republican substitutes in order so they can try to defend their ideas, which I don't agree with. Nonetheless, other Republican amendments are made in order as well. But then again, I guess there is not much we can do to make some of my friends happy. Madam Speaker, I rise for a more somber purpose, and that is to honor my friend and colleague, Congressman Alcee Hastings, who we lost last week after a courageous battle with cancer. I am proud to have sat side-by-side with him in the Rules Committee for many years. I often say that the Rules Committee is like a family. To those outsiders who are observing the Rules Committee, we can sometimes look a little bit like a dysfunctional family, but nonetheless, we are a family. Today, our family is in mourning. This House is already a little less joyful and a little less purpose- driven without him here. That was the thing about Alcee Hastings. Whether he was in the majority or the minority, or whether he liked what we were considering on this floor or not, he relished his service in this institution. He used every day here to wage worthy fights on behalf of justice. His election marked the first time an African American was elected from Florida since the Civil War era. He went on to become the first Black chairman of the Helsinki Commission, a respected voice on the world stage. There was not a barrier he was afraid to break. He was steadfast in providing a voice to all those who needed an ally, including minorities, children, immigrants, and people struggling in poverty. Madam Speaker, I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that he could do more with the simple turn of a phrase than many of us could do with 100 words or more. As he was yielding back his time in the committee or here on the floor, especially if he felt that we were considering a bill that somehow was disadvantaging vulnerable people in this country, he would get up and give a stern and passionate and succinct lecture to this body. Then he would conclude by saying: That is my story, and I am sticking to it. And if I offended any of you by what I said, that was intentional. It was pure Alcee Hastings. He chose his words carefully, and he meant every one of them. Now I have lost a dear friend, this Congress has lost a giant, and those who all too often go unseen in America have lost a champion. We send our prayers and our condolences to his family, to his dedicated and wonderful staff, and to his constituents, knowing that these Halls will never see someone quite like him again. May he rest in peace.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to urge President Biden to move quickly and comprehensively to restore U.S.-Cuban relations. The last 2 years of the Obama administration saw an explosion of positive change in Cuba. The fledgling Cuban private sector flourished. Innovation, the internet, communications, and political space expanded. And exchanges between our two peoples multiplied. Official cooperation advanced significantly on law enforcement, antinarcotics, migration, human trafficking, and the environment. Dialogues began on tough topics like economic reform and human rights. Tragically, these advances were wiped out by President Trump. Today, we need strong, levelheaded leadership capable of rebuilding trust, navigating a return to normal relations, and advancing U.S. interests. We need to immediately end restrictions on travel; remittances; financial transactions; and educational, scientific, environmental, and cultural exchange. We must remove Cuba again from the state sponsors of terrorism list and rescind any sanction that impedes the delivery of humanitarian aid. Let's not make the mistake of moving slowly and incrementally. We need to act now. I call on the Biden administration to make this a priority.

Mr. McGOVERN

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 198 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield to the gentlewoman if she could tell me how much money is in her bill. Madam Speaker, I yield 15 seconds to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney) to ask how much money is in the gentlewoman's bill.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to read the bill, to look at what is in this bill, and to look at the people who it will help. To claim somehow that this is not going to help with reopening of schools or helping our small businesses or helping children struggling in poverty or helping people who are hungry shows that people are not reading the bill. This is a big, bold, appropriate response to a horrific pandemic that has struck our country and struck the world. So we are acting, and it is the right thing to do. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Hayes).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), 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.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, today, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 198, providing for a motion to concur with the Senate amendment to H.R. 1319, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The rule provides 2 hours of debate on the motion, equally divided and controlled by the chairs and ranking minority members of the Committees on Budget and Ways and Means. Madam Speaker, a once-in-a-century pandemic brought us the need to act, and a Democratic Congress and a Democratic President have seized the moment, not as a chance to help big corporations or the already well-off, as those on the other side have done over and over again, but as an opportunity to invest in our workers, our students, our communities, and the very people who need help the most. More than 18 million Americans are receiving unemployment benefits today. Nearly 24 million adults are going hungry. Roughly 12 million children are living in households with food insecurity. Up to 40 million people cannot afford to pay rent and fear eviction. Over 2 million women have been forced to leave the workforce. Eight of 10 minority businesses are on the brink of closure. That is what COVID has wrought in America today. This is more than a Band-Aid; this is a lifeline, Madam Speaker. It will put more vaccines in arms, put more kids back safely in schools, put more money in people's pockets, and put more people back to work. It is hard to overstate just how important this is. This bill, Madam Speaker, attacks inequality and poverty in ways we haven't seen in a generation. This legislation makes the biggest investments in our workers and our middle class that I have seen in my two-and-a-half decades of service here. Make no mistake, I am disappointed to see the cut in the unemployment insurance made over in the Senate, and we are going to keep fighting to raise the minimum wage so that no one who works full time lives in poverty. We are going to keep focusing on the hunger crisis in this country until we end it once and for all. These should be fundamental priorities of the wealthiest nation on the planet. But let's be clear. Today, we are on the doorstep of history. We are about to send the most sweeping and progressive economic investment in modern times to the President of the United States: $1,400 in direct payments, a historic child allowance, school infrastructure, an expansion of the Affordable Care Act, student loan relief, billions in rental assistance, aid that will cut child poverty in half, and I could go on and on and on. Everything included in this final package is necessary to crush the virus and revitalize our economy. As I have noted, I have been in Congress for more than 20 years, but this, Madam Speaker, this is among my proudest moments. I want to thank our distinguished Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and my fellow committee chairs who worked so hard on this bill. I want to thank Budget Committee Chair Yarmuth and all of my colleagues here in the House for getting us to this point. Democrats on both sides of the Capitol, together with the Biden administration, have crafted something historic. In 1 day, with a single vote in favor of this bill, we will change the lives of millions of Americans for the better. For all of our important work, day in and day out, we don't get many chances like this. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in voting for this rule and the underlying rescue plan. Let us rise and meet this moment, and let's send this historic bill to the President's desk for his signature. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I include in the Record an article that appeared in Politico entitled, `` `Check Partisanship At the Door': Biden finds GOP allies for rescue money.'' [From Politico, Mar. 5, 2021] `Check Partisanship at the Door': Biden Finds GOP Allies for Rescue Money (By Kellie Mejdrich) Republicans in Congress attacking President Joe Biden's plan to pour hundreds of billions of dollars in pandemic relief aid into local governments are facing resistance--from GOP-run states and cities. Republican mayors in Texas, Arizona, Florida and Oklahoma are among those backing Biden's state and local government funding plan as part of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus aid bill that's before the Senate, defying GOP lawmakers in Washington, who are broadly resisting the spending. ``In a crisis and an emergency, you check partisanship at the door, and you get through the crisis,'' said John Giles, the Republican mayor of Mesa, Ariz. ``You can get back to playing politics when the crisis is over. And so this is one of those times.'' The clash between local and national Republicans is a rare public division in a party that has generally been united in opposition to policies being pushed by Biden and Democrats in control of Congress. It's a breach that Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have gone out of their way to exploit as the coronavirus legislation enters the final stretch. Lawmakers including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Sens. Rick Scott and Marco Rubio of Florida, and Ted Cruz of Texas have been among the most vocal national Republicans in rejecting the aid, calling it a ``bailout'' of what they say are poorly run Democratic states and arguing that state budgets fared much better than expected during the pandemic. They also say that a good chunk of the money doled out to the states by Congress last year remains unspent. McConnell slammed the relief package in his opening remarks Friday, calling it ``an ideological spending spree packed with non-Covid-related policies'' and panning the $350 billion targeted for state governments as a ``massive cash bailout for mismanaged state and local governments.'' But Giles and other mayors say their residents are locked in a struggle to fill pantries with food as municipal reserves and other dedicated funds are running dry. ``There has been an overwhelming backlash from our Republican congressmen and senators because of how much money is in this bill,'' said Arlington, Texas, Mayor Jeff Williams. ``For us, the reality is the need is very much here for cities.'' Williams said that when he talks with his counterparts in Washington he tells them ``we have seen the great economists of our country all come together'' in support of these additional funds for state and local governments. He also draws on comments by Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. While Powell hasn't taken a specific position on state aid or the coronavirus legislation itself, he has often spoken of the drag on the economy from the loss of more than a million state government jobs during the pandemic. Biden underlined the conflict within the party by inviting a bipartisan group of governors and mayors to the White House last month to discuss local funding issues. Pelosi late last month said Republicans in Congress were choosing to ``mock'' the aid package despite its broad support, citing a bipartisan letter signed by mayors across the country requesting more aid--including signatures from more than 30 Republicans. Miami Mayor Francis Suarez, a Republican who attended the White House meeting, told POLITICO, ``We're hoping that it doesn't become a partisan punching bag.'' He said he hoped that ``hearing from local officials that are on the ground, day in and day out, will be something that motivates elected officials from both parties'' to support the funding. GOP lawmakers say that a surge in tax revenue for most states following last year's massive aid packages makes more help unnecessary now. But while the financial picture is brighter than many officials projected, some of the states hardest hit by the pandemic are represented by these lawmakers. A recent report from Moody's Analytics showed that five of the 10 states with the biggest budget shortfalls are Louisiana, Oklahoma, Alaska, Florida and Kansas. They were among 19 states where Moody's identified looming budget shortfalls even after accounting for federal aid and local reserves. Ten of the 19 are represented by at least one GOP senator. ``It would be a dereliction of duty for me not to try to fight for $116 million that would allow us to restore our police, fire and other core services,'' said Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt, a Republican. City and county leaders are amplifying calls for support because the new bill sets aside more than $100 billion for municipal and county governments--just over $120 billion in a ``local fiscal recovery fund,'' according to the latest Senate version of the bill. So while just 38 cities got funding in the first round in March, the United States Conference of Mayors estimates the new formula expands eligibility to 19,000 cities, towns and villages. That's why more than 30 Republican mayors signed on to the letter in support of the package last month that Pelosi touted, with Giles, Holt, Suarez and Williams among them. Giles said the city of Mesa was lucky enough to get $90 million in the first round of aid, but added, ``We could have turned in twice that much in receipts that were tied to virus relief; our expenses have gone higher.'' ``Because we're in the food bank business, we're in the buying laptop computers for school business, we're in the rent, utility business. We're doing all of these things that we weren't doing a year and a half ago,'' he said. Even some Republican governors have publicly vouched for the plan, including Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas and Larry Hogan of Maryland, citing the financial stakes ahead. Meanwhile, 22 Republican governors in a statement issued at the end of February criticized Biden's funding plan--but only because their states will see a smaller share of the direct grant funding compared to what Congress sent them in March. ``The new stimulus proposal allocates aid based on a state's unemployed population rather than its actual population, which punishes states that took a measured approach to the pandemic and entered the crisis with healthy state budgets and strong economies,'' read the statement, whose signatories included Republican Governors Ron Desantis of Florida, Kevin Stitt of Oklahoma and Doug Ducey of Arizona. Many of Florida's tourism-dependent cities have taken a financial beating, and the state faces a big shortfall for the coming budget year. Local media reported last month that the state deficit was estimated at $2 billion. Yet the same day that Miami's Suarez traveled to Washington to discuss local funding with the president, Republican Sen. Scott slammed Biden's proposed aid package for the states in an editorial, saying the money would be used to ``bail out fiscally irresponsible governors in New York and Illinois.'' Rubio, Florida's other Republican senator, has also spoken critically of more local aid, saying that some states ``see this as the latest opportunity to get bailed out.'' But even with better outcomes for states overall, state and local government employment still hasn't recovered from the pandemic downturn. The latest Bureau of Labor Statistics data show that they are still down about 1.4 million jobs from a year ago--about 1 million of which are in education. Teryn Zmuda, chief economist of the National Association of Counties, said states do need the help. ``Local government specifically is down 1 million of those 10 million jobs that the nation is short right now,'' Zmuda said. ``So, aid to local governments will get those 1 million workers back in the workforce.''

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I raise that because the only place where this bill isn't bipartisan is here in Washington. Republican mayors and Republican Governors all across the country want this bill. Seventy percent of the American people want this bill. But here in Washington, my Republican friends think they know better than their constituents. They have what we call Potomac fever or they have gone Washington on their constituents. The bottom line is people back home need help. People back home are struggling, businesses back home have been devastated because of this pandemic. This is a bill designed to help the American people. Before I yield to the gentlewoman from Connecticut, we are about to be treated to a little bit of theatrics, and I understand that they want to delay the passage of this bill and bring up an alternative, a bill that they claim is going to help our schools but provides no new funding. What we are doing here, Madam Speaker, is we are not only providing funding to help our schools reopen safely, we are also providing money to help those who are unemployed, to help those who are hungry, to help our cities and towns that are on the verge of laying off first responders. In a moment, everybody in this House needs to stand and be counted; and on this side of the aisle--and I hope some of my Republican friends will join with us--we are going to stand with the people. We are going to stand with the people. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I will not yield for that purpose. All time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, it is interesting that we just saw a parade of Republicans come before the microphone and urge us to move on a bill, and they read the short title of the bill. But the real title of the bill, and let me read it to you, is: ``To encourage local educational agencies to resume in-person instruction at elementary and secondary schools.'' That is what the bill does. Now, let me just say to my Republican friends, I don't know if you go home and you don't talk to principals, superintendents, teachers, parents, and students, but our schools don't need encouragement. What they need are resources to be able to reopen safely. This bill that you are talking about here doesn't provide one additional cent to help schools reopen. Nothing. No money. No resources. Nothing. Give me a break. Come on. Madam Speaker, the bill that we are about to debate here will provide $130 billion to help K-12 schools reopen safely. That is not encouragement. It is real resources to make it a reality. By the way, this bill also requires States to award K-12 funds to local school districts no later than 60 days after receipt and school districts to develop plans to ensure that schools return to in-person learning. I could have saved you a lot of time and a lot of embarrassment. That was bad theater. It was terrible theater. Madam Speaker, people need help. We are trying to crush this virus, get this economy back on the right track, and reopen our schools, and this is what we get. Look, I hope everybody takes note of those who went before the mike to argue against this bill and for a symbolic bill that provides no resources, because, at the end of the day, people need to know who was on their side in the middle of this crisis, who stood up and fought for them and provided much-needed Federal relief to our local communities and our schools. That was pathetic. Madam Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross), a distinguished new member of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I reclaim the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, here we have a Republican colleagues coming to the floor basically advocating nothing. Their bill--read the long title again--is to encourage local educational agencies to resume in-person instruction at elementary and secondary schools. Not one new cent in money. Schools don't need to be encouraged. They need the resources to be able to deal with issues like ventilation, to be able to make sure that the infrastructure is such that it is safe for students and teachers and others to come back to the schools. And my Republican friends, while they are coming here and trying to find ways to delay the American Rescue Act, they are going to vote against it. They are not advocating for one additional cent for vaccines. They are not advocating for any additional help for those who are unemployed, for small businesses and restaurants that are struggling. They don't want any more resources to go to cities and towns. So I hope that we don't see some of my Republican friends show up at announcements announcing money and resources for schools and cities and towns, for those who are struggling, trying to take credit for something that they voted against. Madam Speaker, I would, again, urge my colleagues on both sides to look at this for what it is. This is not about trying to help people. This is about a continuing effort to delay much-needed resources to our schools, to our struggling families, and to our small businesses. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lois Frankel).

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, let me just state for the record and respond to the gentlewoman. The bill she is talking about is not an appropriations bill. Let's be clear. Let's make sure we are clear about what we are talking about here. This is not an appropriations bill. She is talking about money that was previously allocated in previous bills. The bill that my Republican friends are bringing forward allocates zero. It encourages schools to open up. Again, our schools don't need encouragement. What they need are resources. And if my friends would go home and listen to their superintendents, to the principals, to the teachers, to the parents, to the students, they would understand how desperate the situation is. Now is the time for action, not more empty rhetoric, not more political theater, not more words. People need resources and they need it now. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, we all want schools to reopen, but we want them to reopen safely. There is such a thing called science that we need to respect, and we need to make sure that our schools are reopened safely. This is a deadly disease that has invaded our country. We have all lost friends and loved ones to COVID-19. We lost a congressman-elect and a sitting Member of Congress on the Republican side to COVID. So to get up here and to talk like this is much ado about nothing? Come on. What are my friends thinking? This is serious. Communities after communities all throughout this country are trying to find ways to reopen schools safely. Some of them are trying to invest in infrastructure for better ventilation to make sure that it is safe. Some are talking about additional school buses to be able to transport kids to and from school safely. They need resources, not encouragement. Give me a break. How insulting to somebody watching this debate in any of our districts to hear Members of Congress get up and say, you know, you don't need any help, you don't need any resources, you don't need any money to be able to help institute these changes so we can get kids back to school safely, but we are going to give you encouragement instead. Come on. We can do better than that. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Madam Speaker, we can talk and talk and talk and talk, and it might make us feel better, but it doesn't do any good for the people we represent who are in desperate need. They are crying out for help. People are struggling, people are hungry, and businesses are shutting down. My friends talk about reopening schools. They offer a measure that would encourage our schools to be reopened but don't offer one additional penny in resources to help them reopen, which is so tone deaf and so disconnected from reality. People need help, and they need it now. Madam Speaker, let's be really honest here. My Republican friends do not have a problem spending $2 trillion. They spent that with their tax cut bill that benefited mostly people who are well-off and well- connected, and they were willing to spend that on COVID when Donald Trump was President. What they have a problem with is where this is going: to our workers, not the wealthy; and to our communities, not corporations. That is the fundamental difference in how we govern. Democrats govern for the people. Right now people are hurting, Madam Speaker. An overwhelming majority of the American people across all party lines and divisions support the American Rescue Plan. We have seen that in poll after poll after poll. My Republican friends just say that they are uninformed, including their Republican mayors and Republican Governors. How insulting. This bill will put more vaccines in arms. It will put our kids back to school safely. It will put food on dinner tables and put workers back in jobs. This pandemic is an all-hands-on-deck moment. After weeks and weeks of work, Congress doesn't have a moment to spare. I urge all of my colleagues to support these historic investments in our Nation. We have told our neighbors and communities that help is on the way. Let's deliver on that promise. I am proud to be on the House floor today. I am proud to speak in favor of the American Rescue Plan. And I am proud to vote in favor of this important piece of legislation. This will help save lives and will help save our economy.

Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.