Joseph Morelle

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield the gentleman from Oregon an additional 1 minute.

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

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas. Though from time to time we may disagree on questions before the House, I always find him very thoughtful, committed American. I am pleased to serve with him on the Rules Committee and pleased that we have had an opportunity to have this conversation this morning. Madam Speaker, budgets are not exclusively about numbers or process. They are, most importantly, a statement of our priorities and our values. Our priorities are clear. Stop this virus. Help our families. Our values are to respond to the critical needs of the American people, and that is what we do today. We will continue to work through this over the next several weeks, and I very much appreciate all of my colleagues for their words in support of the rule before us today. Madam Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I would note, and I am sure the gentleman knows this, he mentioned appropriations in this bill. Obviously, there are no appropriations in this bill. This sets up a reconciliation process, and we would certainly welcome his input and welcome the support and partnership of Members on his side of the aisle. But I do want to make clear this is a process resolution. It begins the process. We will come back and have conversations in the standing committees and, certainly, again on the floor as we move forward. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, to the gentleman's point, I appreciate the passion with which the distinguished ranking member of the Budget Committee makes his argument, but why are we moving ahead, he asked. Why we are moving ahead today? The President ran on this very relief agenda and won the popular vote in the United States by more than 8 million votes. We are moving ahead because elections do matter, and the argument that President Biden made is that this country needed swift, significant, and robust relief. That is why we are moving ahead. Now, I will continue to say--and I am sure my colleagues will continue to say--that the Democrat majority invites bipartisan conversation. We would invite all the Members on the other side to come together in a meaningful way to talk about unemployment insurance for the millions of Americans who are out of work, through no fault of their own--millions. Hundreds of thousands are filing every week for the first time. Millions of Americans don't have enough food on the table. One out of every eight Americans are saying they don't have enough money for food to put on the table. This is for the millions of Americans who don't have enough money to pay their rent or pay their mortgage, and for the millions of small businesses--or the tens of thousands of small businesses struggling every single week, again, through no fault of their own. Why are we moving ahead today? Because there is no more time left on the clock. We need to move ahead in order to provide the substantial relief. I would also suggest that those who will say that this is too expensive, you only look to find economists all over this country beginning with the head of the Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, who was appointed by the President to his position, who has consistently said that the worst thing we can do is make too small of an investment. We must make a robust investment. It is what President Bident talked about repeatedly through this campaign. There is no hidden agenda here. This is, in fact, the agenda that was talked about repeatedly throughout the campaign. The American public resoundingly responded to the package that the President has now put forward, the package which we would like to take up. We would certainly like to do it with our brothers and sisters on the other side of the aisle, but we are prepared, if not, to respond to the needs of millions of Americans who are in crisis. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I will admit that there are few people I respect more than my distinguished colleague and friend from the Rules Committee, the ranking member, Mr. Cole. But I think as it relates to the budget, as I understand it, the Budget Committee chair, Mr. Yarmuth, has continued to extend an invitation to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to work together. And we do want to work together. We want to forge a bipartisan agreement. This today begins a process, however, that can move us toward reconciliation because we understand that the American people are in crisis. America is in crisis. So while we need to move ahead, and we would like to move ahead with a bipartisan agreement, we cannot sit idly by in the instance that progress is not made. I think it was President Kennedy in his inauguration, nearly 60 years ago, who said, ``Sincerity is always subject to proof.'' So prove to us your sincerity. Let's work together. And in the interim, we are going to move ahead with this resolution with the support of the Members, and I certainly hope that they will do that. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I first want to say to the distinguished gentleman, my friend: These are not partisan priorities; these are American priorities. I doubt very much that most Americans care about the process we use as they struggle to feed their families or as they struggle to pay their rent each month, when they face unemployment that could be extended. But here is an opportunity for us to work together. This is the beginning of the process, and we will continue to encourage bipartisan discussion on a budget resolution that provides meaningful relief for millions of Americans affected by this virus. As it relates to the National Apprenticeship Act, I would also suggest that this is a bipartisan bill. I can name the Members of my colleagues across the aisle: Mr. Fitzpatrick; Mr. McKinley; Members Bacon and Bost; my friend, Rodney Davis, from Illinois; John Katko, whose district abuts mine; Andy Garbarino, my friend from New York; Representatives Stauber, Kinzinger, Stivers--all Republicans who support and sponsor the National Apprenticeship Act. So this is a bipartisan bill, and I will continue to advocate for its passage. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 85 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess), my friend, 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. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, today the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 85, providing for consideration of H.R. 447, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2021, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Scott, makes in order 26 amendments, provides en bloc authority to Chairman Scott, and provides one motion to recommit. The rule also provides for consideration of H. Con. Res. 11 under a closed rule. It self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Yarmuth. It also provides 3 hours of debate with 2 hours equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Budget and 1 hour equally divided and controlled by Representatives Beyer of Virginia and Schweikert of Arizona, or their respective designees. The rule also provides that H. Res. 73 is hereby adopted. The rule updates the process by which Members can appeal fines for refusing to wear a mask or for taking photographs or recording audio or video on the House floor to align with the Ethics Committee appeal procedures established in H. Res. 73. Finally, the rule extends standard district work period instructions, same day, and suspension authority through March 12, 2021. Mr. Speaker, the National Apprenticeship Act is critical workforce development legislation that will invest $3.5 billion to create nearly 1 million new apprenticeship opportunities over the next 5 years. This is a history investment in workforce training, and I am so pleased to support this effort. Skilled workers are the backbone of our economy. And apprenticeships provide a unique opportunity to grow and expand access to this workforce. Not only do apprenticeship programs provide pathways to meaningful and sustainable careers, they are critical to expanding our Nation's skilled workforce. When I meet with local businesses in my district in Rochester, New York, I regularly hear that their greatest challenge is finding skilled labor to fill positions and keep their businesses thriving. Apprenticeships provide an invaluable pathway to engage workers, establish connections with high-demand industries, and set workers on a path to a rewarding and sustainable career. I note that as the son of an individual who dropped out of high school at the age of 16, my dad, after service in Korea in the United States Army, came home and got involved in an apprenticeship for the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 13 Union and had a long, long career where he retired at the age of 70 after having supported a family of seven. What was directly responsible for that was the apprenticeship program and his ability to build that sustained career. I am particularly proud that a bill I introduced with my colleague, Congresswoman Trahan, has been included in the text of the National Apprenticeship Act. Our bill helps scale up participation among populations not typically engaged in apprenticeships, particularly small- and medium-sized businesses, and together we can create new opportunities in high-demand industries. Now, more than ever, these programs are critical to grapple with the long-term economic impacts of COVID-19. This week we will also begin the next phase of addressing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic through H. Con. Res. 11, a budget resolution for fiscal year 2021. Passing this budget resolution is a necessary step to fast-track essential COVID relief, the American Rescue Plan. This plan will deliver the direct support the American public needs, including a national vaccination program, direct aid to individuals and families, housing and nutrition assistance, and expansion and extension of unemployment insurance, small business assistance, and resources to protect first responders and frontline workers. Our Nation has endured an unprecedented health and economic crisis which has now claimed the lives of nearly half a million Americans. After 11 months, far too many Americans are still barely scraping by or falling further behind, through no fault of their own, as they lose jobs or see smaller paychecks. We need immediate, bold action to change the course of the virus and stabilize our economy. Beginning the budget reconciliation process does not preclude a strong bipartisan agreement on a relief package that can gain wide support in both the House and the Senate. Let me repeat that. It does not preclude a strong, bipartisan agreement on a relief package that can gain wide support in our House and across the building in the Senate. But it does ensure that Congress will be able to move forward without becoming delayed by partisan gridlock at a time when so many lives and livelihoods are at stake. The budget resolution before us provides a framework for reconciliation with a target of up to $1.9 trillion, allocated across 12 congressional committees. The resolution instructs these committees to report legislation consistent with their targets to the Budget Committee by February 16. The Budget Committee will then combine the legislation--without substantive revision--and prepare it for floor consideration. The 2021 budget resolution is not a comprehensive blueprint for the next 10 years. It is designed solely to respond to the ongoing crisis and to deliver critical relief as quickly as possible. Once we have finished the work of passing a complete COVID response package, I look forward to continuing our work on the Budget Committee to craft a complete forward-looking budget resolution for fiscal year 2022. We have already lost so much time. Passing this resolution ensures that relief can get to Americans in need, who cannot wait another minute for help. Mr. Speaker, I would also take a moment to recognize that, less than 1 month ago, this Chamber was besieged by antidemocracy extremists who intended to harm this institution and even kill some of our colleagues. The rule provides penalties for any Member of the House who endangers colleagues by violating the rules of this Chamber. Members are not, under any circumstances, permitted to bring firearms on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. That has been in law and regulation since 1967. As President Ronald Reagan said: ``Trust, but verify.'' Mr. Speaker, with that in mind, there should be no problem with requiring Members to walk through metal detectors into the Chamber, ensuring that everyone is following the same rules, ensuring the safety of each and every Member of this body, and ensuring that many members of our staff who work here day in and day out are protected. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule and H. Con. Res. 11 and the National Apprenticeship Act. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Once again, I just say that those Americans who are watching what we do here today and over the next several days, they are going to be asking the question: What are you doing in Washington that will help the average man or woman and child who suffers the ravages of this disease and the economic fallout? When I talk to people in Rochester, New York--and I am sure when each of us goes back to our home districts--people aren't asking about the nuance of legislative procedures. They are asking about what the government is going to do for them as we face the greatest pandemic in a century and the greatest economic challenge in nearly a century both at the same time. We have so many other challenges as well, but the House of Representatives is going to move forward. This resolution does that. It says that we will certainly encourage bipartisan agreements, bipartisan conversations, and bipartisan action. The President's conversations with members of the Senate yesterday indicate his willingness to do that. But we cannot wait. We have waited far too long. Too many Americans have died and too many families have faced the crisis of their lifetimes because of the inaction here in Washington. So we must move ahead. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for their support of the rule before us today. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Woodall), 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. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Just to take a moment to wax philosophical on bipartisanship, I think I agree with almost everything my distinguished friend had to say. If you are frustrated, Mr. Woodall, imagine our frustration that, for the last 7 months, we have continued to try to engage in conversations with the other House, only to be met with silence. We hear, as you do, when you go home, from thousands of constituents in each district, millions of Americans who struggle because they have lost their job, because they have lost their restaurant, as a small business owner that they struggle. We have heard from healthcare workers who continue to struggle to have personal protective equipment. We have talked to people who desperately need stimulus checks or some other support to put food on the table. So we hear all of that, and I wish that the conversation that could happen between both sides of the aisle here in this Chamber would answer those questions. They can't, because we do need to have support and engagement and a dialogue with our friends in the other House. So I understand and feel your frustration. Our frustration is even greater. I would love that we could work out the issues here in this Chamber, you and I and the members of the Rules Committee and all of the Members of the House, and have that be a settled question. I think we would be in a better place Having said that, Madam Speaker, let me just, again, note, this is perhaps the last time I will have the great opportunity to serve on this floor and have a discussion on a rule with my distinguished friend from Georgia. Again, I want to just indicate how much I appreciate him and how much admiration and affection I have for him and wish him all the best. Madam Speaker, I want to thank all of the colleagues who have spoken in the various committees for their words in support of H.R. 8294, the National Apprenticeship Act. I urge a ``yes'' vote on the rule and a ``yes'' vote on the previous question.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I just want to note that I feel a little bit like Alice in ``Alice through the Looking Glass,'' where in is out and up is down. I just reiterate that this House has addressed in a significant way reform for policing. We have, indeed, in this House, addressed on two separate occasions the impact of COVID on healthcare workers and State and local governments and the millions of Americans who struggle to put food on the table and face unemployment. So all of the things that my friends on the other side of the aisle have just discussed are things that this House has done. And it is really the recalcitrance of the United States Senate and their unwillingness not only to not adopt our measures, but adopt their own that would allow us to then settle into a conversation or discussion about the differences that separate us and to try to reach that bipartisan/bicameral compromise that I know Mr. Woodall very much believes in. Madam Speaker, I also want to make one other point, if I might, which is the Apprenticeship Act that we have before us, if you had dropped in from somewhere and saw on our program that we were discussing the National Apprenticeship Program and listened to my friends on the other side of the aisle, you would be confused why they weren't on the subject. But I do want to get to the subject, which is that this is, in part, a response--not certainly totally a response to, because we were working on this for some time before COVID, but this has, at its heart, a response to the economic fallout of the virus and is entirely on point because the economic impacts will be felt for years. Some economists are saying this country will feel the impacts of COVID for another 3 or 4 years. The apprenticeship programs and the reason we are here having this conversation is to be able to expand them dramatically and give people who are either in transition from other careers or getting into careers will give them the opportunity to earn not only a living wage, but to advance, get career opportunities on a career ladder, particularly to those industries that have really not been involved in the apprenticeship program in the past. Madam Speaker, again, I reiterate what we are doing here, the importance of what we are doing, how critical this is. Obviously, we always want to seek a bipartisan compromise, because, as my dear friend from Georgia rightly points out, it is not about what we pass in this House, it is what we pass in the Congress and send to the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, hopefully, for signature. So it is very much the conversation here, and I hope that not only my colleagues here, but our friends across the floor and in the Senate will take up this much-needed legislation before we are done, in a lameduck session, the session in front of us, and that the President can be persuaded to act on it. That is the work before us and it is critical and important work, indeed. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker, I do want to note that we are here to discuss the National Apprenticeship Act, and that is the subject of the discussion in front of the House. But I would note, parenthetically, however, the irony in the subject that was brought up by my dear friend from Texas. The President of the United States has not met with his own coronavirus task force in 6 months and has barely spoken in the last 2 weeks while this Nation is engulfed with the virus' spread throughout the Midwest. We have now surpassed 250,000 Americans dead of the coronavirus. One-quarter of one million Americans have lost their lives, and yet there is no discussion out of the White House. I would encourage perhaps my colleagues to ask the President if he might meet with Dr. Fauci and the leaders in this country who are on the front lines of fighting this illness. I do also note, also parenthetically, that 7 months ago this House passed the $3.4 trillion Heroes Act to address contact tracing, testing, and support for our frontline workers, hospital systems, and State and local governments. We had no action from the United States Senate. We came back and, about 6 weeks ago, took up the updated Heroes Act-- $2.2 trillion--again, to try to address the suffering of millions of Americans. Yet, no action from the United States Senate. So I think we have more than stepped up to address the concerns of the American people as it relates to the issue not before the House right now. I do understand that the good people of Georgia, my dear friend, will go home in a few weeks, and the great folks in the State of Georgia will perhaps have something to say about the direction of the United States Senate going forward. But I do note that I think this House's record has been exemplary in addressing this. I now get back to the issue at hand. Madam Speaker, for the purpose of further discussion, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1224 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1224, providing for consideration of H.R. 8294, the National Apprenticeship Act of 2020, under a structured rule. The rule provides 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the Committee on Education and Labor and provides one motion to recommit. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment by Chairman Scott, makes in order 17 amendments, and provides en bloc authority. Additionally, the rule provides one motion to recommit and extends recess instructions, same day and suspension authority through the remainder of the 116th Congress. Before I begin my formal remarks, I would like to take a point of personal privilege to thank Mr. Woodall for his friendship during my time on the Rules Committee. We don't always agree, but even in our disagreements, he is never disagreeable. I admire his wit, his passion, his love for this institution, and his love for our country. I wish him the very best in the future and hope this is not the end of his public career. I am always delighted to spend time, not only in our lengthy Rules Committee discussions, but also on the floor with him, so I thank Mr. Woodall so much. Madam Speaker, the National Apprenticeship Act is critical workforce development legislation that will invest $3.5 billion to create nearly 1 million new apprenticeship opportunities over the next 5 years. This is an historic investment in workforce training, and I am so pleased to support this effort. Amid this challenging and catastrophic pandemic, I am grateful that this body is not only addressing the needs of the American people as they grapple with the COVID-19 virus, but also looking ahead and preparing for the challenges our Nation will face as we recover economically. Skilled workers are the backbone of our economy, and apprenticeships provide a unique opportunity to grow and expand access to this workforce. The success of apprenticeship programs is well-established. According to the Department of Labor, 94 percent of apprentices are employed after completing apprenticeship programs, earning an average starting wage of $70,000. Not only do apprenticeship programs provide pathways to meaningful and sustainable careers, they are critical to expanding our Nation's skilled workforce. When I meet with local business leaders in my district of Rochester, New York, I regularly hear that their greatest challenge is finding skilled labor to fill positions and keep their businesses thriving. Apprenticeships provide an invaluable pathway to engage workers, establish connections with high-demand industries, and set workers on a path to a rewarding and sustainable career. I am proud that a bill I introduced with my colleague, Congresswoman Trahan, H.R. 8317, has been included in the text of the National Apprenticeship Act. Our bill helps scale up participation among populations not typically engaged in apprenticeships, particularly small- and medium-sized businesses. Together, we can create new opportunities in high-demand industries. This critical piece of legislation will bolster our Nation's apprenticeship programs, build up a much-needed labor force, and open doors for businesses and workers alike. Through my position on the Education and Labor Committee, I have seen the months and years of bipartisanship that has led us to this day. While we don't agree on every aspect of the bill, I believe the legislation before us is the best course of action to support apprenticeship programs that have proven the most successful for both working families and employers. Now, more than ever, these programs are critical to grapple with the long-term economic impacts of COVID-19. I applaud my colleague, Congresswoman Davis, for her work on the National Apprenticeship Act. This comprehensive legislation is a testament to her leadership as chair of the Higher Education and Workforce Investment Subcommittee, and she will be sorely missed in the days and weeks and years ahead as she leaves us at the end of this term. I urge all of my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MORELLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. There are just a couple of points that I would make. First of all, with regard to amendments, I do note that there were substantial amendments made in order that were offered by Republicans. I do know that some amendments offered by Republicans where withdrawn because they are essentially part of the large amendment in the substitute bill which will be on the floor. So there will be, I think to Mr. Woodall's point--and I appreciate his sentiments here--I think there will be an opportunity, given the way we structured this rule and given the latitude that I think the majority gave, in making certain that there will be an adequate opportunity for a real debate about some of the distinctions between the minority's and the majority's perspective on this particular bill. So I actually think this was an opportunity and will be an opportunity for Chairman Scott and Mrs. Davis who is the chair of the subcommittee and I suspect will be debating the bill and amendments in just short order. So I think there will be that fullness and that richness of debate that my good friend from Georgia has talked about. I do want to just make a point, though, about the process over the last several years plus. I think in the last year and a half there were four different hearings held by the Higher Education and Workforce Investment Subcommittee which Mrs. Davis heads, there were months of intensive negotiations. There was a bipartisan Member-level roundtable, there were at least four hearings on the subject, and there was a real effort and I believe even an opportunity for us to reach bipartisan compromise to expand access to these high quality apprenticeship programs. Unfortunately, I think, at what I would describe as nearly the eleventh hour, the White House made clear it would not support the bill unless the Department of Labor and the White House were granted a much broader opportunity to approve apprenticeship programs in ways that we don't believe safeguard the interests of businesses or the people who would apply for those apprentice programs. It brings to mind an experience I had--I think I have shared it on this floor, and certainly with Mr. Woodall in Rules Committee meetings--my experience previous to this in the State legislature. One of my responsibilities during my career there was to chair the committee on insurance, and I often would find myself in the position-- even though I had a friendly Democratic administration--where the legislation would have, sort of at the end of it, sort of a blanket ability for at the time the superintendent of insurance to do whatever he or she felt was appropriate and give wide latitude. I would always strike that from the bills before passage saying that I thought it was the responsibility of the legislature to set policy to enact legislation. So what I believe we ought to be doing here--and I think Mr. Woodall would generally agree with me--relative to our Article I responsibilities of legislation being passed by both Houses of the Congress that giving, in my view, too wide a latitude to the Department of Labor, whether it is in the current outgoing administration or the incoming, makes little sense, that it is the rule and the responsibility and the duty of the Congress to make sure that those standards are set in law, in statute, not in rule, not in regulation, and not at the whim of the Department of Labor or any other agency of the government. So I think what we seek to do is not only to promote and expand apprenticeship opportunities, because--for all the reasons my distinguished colleague from Georgia and friend mentioned, the ability for apprentices to make more during their career, the quality of those programs--we believe standards need to be continued, that they need to be strengthened, that we can expand these programs into the kinds of industries that heretofore have not really availed themselves of apprenticeship opportunities, that we can do that, meet all of those goals, still set those standards and make sure that they are delineated in statute. Madam Speaker, I appreciate his comments, and I reserve the balance of my time.