Jacky Rosen

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment to strip funding for defense nuclear waste disposal and return this money to the Treasury in order to reduce the deficit. The $30 million allocated under the appropriations bill being considered here tonight has the potential to be used to expand Yucca Mountain so that it can be used to store defense waste, in addition to civilian nuclear waste. If there is one issue a majority of Nevadans agree on, it is that we wholeheartedly oppose becoming the Nation's dumping ground for radioactive waste. First, for my non-Nevada friends, some history. In 1987, Congress amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and targeted Yucca Mountain, located less than 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, as the sole site for our Nation's geological repository. It is a fancy way of choosing Nevada as their nuclear dump. For over 30 years, the State of Nevada and local communities have rejected this misguided project on safety, public health, and environmental grounds. In fact, we have filed 218 contentions against the Department of Energy's license application, citing safety and environmental issues in its assessments. Numerous scientific studies have deemed Yucca Mountain unsafe based on the fact that it sits above an aquifer and is in a seismically active area that just experienced a 4.1 magnitude earthquake. Any plans involving Yucca Mountain, including the recently introduced Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Acts, or any proposed plans to comingle defense and civilian nuclear waste at Yucca, ignore the environmental, safety, and security concerns of Nevadans who would be forced to store nuclear waste that they had no role in creating. Using Yucca Mountain as the Nation's dumping ground would require transporting over 70,000 metric tons of radioactive waste, much of it through my district and through the heart of Las Vegas, a city that attracts over 43 million visitors annually and generates over $59 billion in revenue. Not only does this project endanger those in Nevada, Mr. Chairman, it also threatens the health and safety of millions of Americans from over 329 congressional districts across this country who live along the proposed transportation route. As if this wasn't bad enough, now the Nation's most egregious nuclear waste producers and even some of my colleagues across the aisle are suggesting that we comingle defense waste with civilian waste from power plants, inappropriately increasing the amount of high-level radioactive material dumped in Nevada by 37 percent. This means more nuclear material coming to Yucca, and more waste traveling through 44 States and Washington, D.C. There are also concerns that this will hinder the Air Force's readiness and our country's ability to defend itself. Last week, the Las Vegas Review-Journal ran a story featuring Heather Wilson, Secretary of the Air Force, and her concerns with the Yucca Mountain project. She cited how it will directly impact Nellis Air Force Base's ability to complete its mission to train servicemembers for war, because there is no route across the range that would not impact testing and training. Her concerns, unfortunately, are not new. Since 2003, the Air Force has consistently stated that they know of no route through the Nevada Test and Training Range that would avoid sensitive areas or not negatively impact readiness activities. I understand that our country's nuclear waste must go somewhere, but this decades-old battle has proven that Yucca is not the place. We must stop wasting billions of taxpayer dollars by resurrecting a project that has been dead for over 30 years, and, instead, identify viable alternatives for the long-term repository in areas that are proven safe and whose communities consent to storage. Mr. Chairman, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment, with the understanding that we will begin a serious discussion on how to properly handle our country's waste, instead of continuing down the path of forcing this waste on my State. I fully understand we have to put our country's defense and civilian waste somewhere. But for the first time, let's bring Nevadans to the table and let's share the responsibility of facing the consequences of nuclear production. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time and withdraw my amendment.

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to echo the sentiments of my colleague from Nevada (Mr. Kihuen) by making one thing perfectly clear: Nevadans are completely against becoming the Nation's nuclear dumping ground. And make no mistake, that is exactly what this appropriations bill does. Without Mr. Kihuen's amendment, of which I am proud to be a cosponsor, Congress will tie the hands of this administration by explicitly prohibiting, even considering, closing Yucca Mountain or conducting a technical review before licensing activities begin. You heard that right. The underlying bill forbids any funds from being used to conduct activities that preclude Yucca Mountain from becoming the Nation's dumping ground for radioactive waste, no matter the science, no matter the evidence. And we already have the evidence that bringing America's nuclear waste to Yucca is bad for Nevadans and bad for Americans. We know that Yucca is unsafe for nuclear waste because it is seismically active and sits above an aquifer. And with 70,000 metric tons of radioactive waste through my district and through the heart of Las Vegas, those visitors from all across the country and the world will be exposed.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, in Nevada and across the country, we are continuing to see a huge demand for workers in the technical industry, including software developers; engineers; and computer programmers, like myself. Despite the progress we have made, fewer than one in five computer science graduates are women. I am proud to introduce my bill, H.R. 3316, the Code Like a Girl Act, because I believe in breaking down barriers and closing the gender gap once and for all. This bipartisan legislation invests in computer science education, opening doors for women to become part of a highly skilled workforce. Funding programs that encourage girls to take up computer science is one of the most important steps we can take to break down barriers and level the playing field for women everywhere. The Code Like a Girl Act will go one step further by teaching our girls that zero is false, one is true, and that we matter, too. I encourage my colleagues to invest in our girls by supporting my bill.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Congressman Lamborn's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act to require the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, and the Director of National Intelligence to report to Congress on the use of commercial aircraft by the Government of Iran for illicit activities. I am proud to be the lead Democratic co-sponsor of this bipartisan amendment, along with Reps. Lamborn, Roskam, Zeldin, and Sherman. As we are all aware, U.S. firms have reached multi-billion-dollar agreements to sell or lease hundreds of aircraft to Iran, supposedly to help bring the country's fleet into the 21st century. I am deeply concerned, however, that these aircraft, intended for civilian use, could instead be used for nefarious purposes, such as transporting fighters to Syria or weapons to Iran's proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism, with a longstanding record of human rights violations. Its support of radical groups throughout the Middle East poses a threat both to our greatest ally in the region, Israel, and also to U.S. interests.. For this reason, we must keep a watchful eye on Iran's actions, including how it uses dual use exports from the United States. If Iran is indeed only using American-made commercial aircraft for legitimate purposes, there should be no concern that a report confirming this would have an adverse effect on American trade. If Iran is using aircraft to conduct illicit activities, we must be made aware, and we must hold Iran accountable. I am also proud to have co-sponsored another amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that will help hold Iran accountable for it actions. This bipartisan amendment, offered by my Nevada colleague, Rep. Kihuen, would extend a presidential reporting requirement to ensure that we have an integrated strategy between the Administration and Congress to deter Iran's nuclear weapons program. Two years ago today, the United States, China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and Iran agreed to the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA), which aimed to ensure that Iran's nuclear program would be exclusively peaceful and that Iran would never obtain a nuclear weapon. I was not a Member of Congress when the JCPOA came to the floor for Congressional approval, but had I been, I would have opposed the agreement. However, I have said since before I first came to Congress that now that the JCPOA is the law of the land, the United States must demand that Iran abide by it completely, and that any cheating or subversion should be dealt with swiftly. Both the Lamborn and Kihuen Amendments that I have co-sponsored are manifestations of this principle. If Iran is directly violating the JCPOA by developing a nuclear weapons program, the Administration and Congress must be ready to respond. And if Iran is violating the spirit of the JCPOA by taking advantage of new streams of commerce to wage war in the Middle East, it should not matter what financial ties U.S. companies have to the regime. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote for the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes both the Lamborn and Kihuen Amendments.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, if today's vote on the previous question fails, instead of voting on a partisan bill that rolls back key environmental laws, overturns State law, and ignores real solutions to our water supply shortages in the West, we will have the opportunity to vote on my bill, H.R. 1868, the Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017. This bipartisan legislation will reverse the President's decision to assign a disastrous resolution allowing internet providers to sell their customers' personal information without their acknowledge or without their consent. As a former computer programmer and someone who has firsthand experience writing code, I can tell you that the first step towards protecting vulnerable and sensitive data is to make sure it remains private. S.J. Res. 34, which now, unfortunately, is the law, prevents vital online protections for millions of Americans nationwide from taking effect later this year. The resolution, signed by the President, negating FCC broadband consumer privacy rules is not only wrong and a blatant violation of privacy, but it jeopardizes Americans' personal data and puts them at risk of hacking. The October 2016 rule was the only rule that required internet service providers to obtain consumers' permission before selling their private internet browsing history and other sensitive information, including geolocation and amp usage. I am simply shocked that most of my colleagues across the aisle voted for a measure that violates Americans' privacy by selling our most intimate and personal information, all without our consent. Repealing the FCC rule with S.J. Res. 34 now allows broadband providers to turn private personal information over to the highest bidder--or anybody they want, including the government--without a warrant and without ever telling you. That is right. Without this rule that President Trump and most Republicans in Congress blocked, internet service providers don't need to ask for permission to collect and share sensitive personal information. Even worse, the passage of this resolution also told providers they no longer have to use reasonable measures to protect consumers' personal data. This is absolutely unacceptable. We are living in a time where identity theft and internet hacking have become the new norm. Shortly after President Trump and Republicans repealed these consumer protections, we experienced a massive ransomware attack that caused major damage to businesses and companies around the world. No American wants their most personal information to be up for grabs. By using the Congressional Review Act to eliminate this rule, the FCC is now prevented from publishing rules that are substantially the same absent additional legislation, establishing a dangerous precedent for private citizens. Americans should have the right to decide how their internet providers use their personal information, especially since many people can't choose their own broadband provider. What my bill does, Mr. Speaker, is simple. H.R. 1868 makes it clear that the American people's browsing histories are not for sale; the American people's personal information is not for sale; the American people's financial information is not for sale; and the American people's location data is not for sale. It is a very simple concept, one that I hope my colleagues across the aisle will recognize and support. The American people don't want the legislation that was signed into law this last spring. In overwhelming numbers, they are calling Congress and letting it be known they want to keep their private information private. I am proud to stand up for the American people, and I hope you take up the Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017 for consideration. This is commonsense, bipartisan legislation that will reverse a misguided resolution by saying, once and for all, that ISPs cannot sell customers' personal information without their knowledge and without their permission. This bill says that your privacy is not for sale, period.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I find it deeply disturbing that highly classified intelligence information from Israel, our indispensable ally, was carelessly compromised by President Trump in a meeting with Russian officials. By recklessly sharing this sensitive intelligence, the President has not only endangered our troops, intelligence officials, and sources who risk their lives every day to keep us safe, but he has jeopardized the relationship we have with our most important ally in the Middle East, Israel. If we wish to defeat ISIS, the President must rectify this unacceptable blunder. The American people must receive immediate assurances that this administration is doing everything necessary to repair any damage caused by the President's reckless actions. The role of Commander in Chief is one that must be taken seriously and should never result in the compromising of our most sensitive information, especially to a foreign adversary at the expense of one of our strongest allies.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and commemorate the life of Robert Stanley Ferraro, a pillar in our community and one of the longest-serving public officials in Nevada history, who passed away last week at the age of 81. Robert Ferraro served on the Boulder City Council for 31 years and was Boulder City's first elected mayor, and successfully stood for election nine times. He knocked on every voter's door, and provided leadership to one of the most unique communities in our state. Bob led the effort to maintain Boulder City's character as a special community, and to be the ``Clean, Green Boulder City'' that many of my constituents call home, and thousands visit each year. He was named Nevada Public Official of the Year in 1986, Community Leader of the Year in 2001, and led a life that was a true American success story, coming from humble beginnings to be one of the great civic leaders in our state. He will be greatly missed, and my thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to remember and commemorate the life of Robert Stanley Ferraro, a pillar in our community and one of the longest serving public officials in Nevada history who passed away last week at the age of 81. Robert Ferraro served on the Boulder City Council for 31 years and was Boulder City's first elected mayor, and successfully stood for election nine times. He knocked on every voter's door and provided leadership to one of the most unique communities in our State. Bob led the effort to maintain Boulder City's character as a special community and to be the clean, green Boulder City that many of my constituents call home and thousands visit each year. He was named Nevada Public Official of the Year in 1986, Community Leader of the Year in 2001, and led a life that was a true American success story coming from humble beginnings to being one of the great civic leaders of our State. Bob will be greatly missed, and my thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends today.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, the GOP is trying to pull a fast one over working families. This week, House Republicans and President Trump gave into extreme demands of the Freedom Caucus by colluding on a dangerous amendment that would gut protections for individuals with preexisting conditions, allowing insurers to once again discriminate against sick Americans. We all know that the ACA isn't perfect, but we cannot, in good conscience, throw out essential health benefits that have helped working families to get the protections that they need. The MacArthur amendment would take us back to the days before these key protections helped save lives. Without protections for preexisting conditions, my constituents with serious illnesses and health conditions would face discrimination from insurance companies solely based on their illness. How can Speaker Ryan seriously tell Americans that this plan is somehow better for people with preexisting conditions? We need a health plan that will help working families pay for their health coverage, not one that puts health insurance out of reach.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on rollcall No. 232.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, if today's vote on the previous question fails, we will have the opportunity to vote on my bill, H.R. 1868, Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017, which will reverse last night's disastrous action by President Trump when he signed a partisan congressional resolution allowing internet providers to sell their customers' personal information without their knowledge or consent. Before my time in Congress, I started my career as a systems analyst. I have firsthand experience writing code, and I can tell you that the first thing to protect vulnerable and sensitive data is to make sure it is kept private. S.J. Res. 34, which the House passed last Tuesday, unraveled those vital protections for sensitive information belonging to millions of Americans nationwide. The resolution negating essential protections for private citizens was signed by President Trump last night. The October 2016 FCC rule was the only rule that required internet service providers to obtain consumers' permission before selling their private internet browsing history and other sensitive information. I am simply shocked that my colleagues across the aisle would vote for a measure that violates American privacy by selling your most personal and intimate information, including your email content and your app usage, all without your consent. Not only is this wrong and a blatant violation of policy, but it jeopardizes Americans' personal data and puts them at risk of hacking. Repealing the FCC rule with S.J. Res. 34 allows broadband providers to turn over your info to the highest bidder or anyone else they want, including the government, without a warrant, without ever telling you. That is right. I will repeat it. Repealing the FCC rule with S.J. Res. 34 allows broadband providers to turn over your private information to the highest bidder or anyone else they want, including the government, without a warrant, without ever telling you. Even worse, S.J. Res. 34 also tells providers they no longer have to use reasonable measures to protect consumers' personal information. This is absolutely unacceptable. We are living in a time where identity theft and internet hacking has become the new norm. We must provide consumers with these protections. No American wants their most personal information to be up for grabs. Eliminating this rule prevents the FCC from publishing rules that are substantially the same absent additional legislation, establishing a very dangerous precedent for private citizens. Americans should have the right to decide how their internet providers use their personal information. What this bill does, Mr. Speaker, is simple. This bill makes clear that the American people's browser histories are not for sale. The American people's health information: not for sale. The American people's financial information: not for sale. And the American people's location data: not for sale. It is a simple concept and one I hope my colleagues across the aisle will recognize and support. The American people don't want the legislation that was signed last night. In overwhelming numbers, they are calling Congress and letting it be known that they want to keep their private information private. I am proud to stand up for the American people by introducing the Restoring American Privacy Act of 2017, which reverses this misguided resolution and says, once and for all, that ISPs cannot sell customers' personal information without their knowledge, without their permission. This bill says that your privacy is not for sale, period.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand here today and introduce my friend, Rabbi Sanford Akselrad. As leader of Congregation Ner Tamid, he has been a friend, a mentor, and my rabbi for 25 years. His vision for a campus, a spiritual hub, has been realized in his nearly 30-year career at Congregation Ner Tamid. He has led us with strength, with poise, and with wisdom as he has shared in the sorrows and joys--from the simchas to the shivas--of our entire community. His work in both the outreach and interfaith communities has left impact and meaning on so many lives across the Las Vegas Valley and beyond. May he continue to serve us all with grace, compassion, and strength. Mr. Speaker, as leader of Congregation Ner Tamid, he has been a friend, a mentor, and my rabbi for 25 years. Since moving to Las Vegas in 1988, Rabbi Akselrad has served as the spiritual leader of Congregation Ner Tamid. His vision for a campus, a spiritual hub has been realized in his nearly 30-year career at Congregation Ner Tamid. He has led us with strength, with poise, and with wisdom and has shared in the sorrows and joys from the simchas to the shivas of our entire community. His work in both the Interfaith and Outreach communities has left impact and meaning on so many families across the Las Vegas Valley. His unwavering commitment to building a strong community as our Congregation's spiritual leader and in creating a vibrant Jewish community in Southern Nevada has not gone unnoticed. During this time, the Synagogue grew from approximately 60 to over 600 families, becoming the largest Reform Synagogue in the State of Nevada. In his nearly 27 years of service to our Congregation, Rabbi Akselrad has served on a wide variety of community boards including the Humana Hospital Pastoral Advisory Board, the Jewish Federation of Las Vegas, Jewish Family Services and the National Conference of Community and Justice. A firm believer in K'lal Israel and building a strong Jewish community, Rabbi Akselrad has spearheaded many community-wide boards, commissions, and organizations that have helped shape the Jewish community we live in today. In the wake of the Great Recession of the late 2000's, Rabbi Akselrad envisioned Project Ezra, a partnership between the Jewish Federation of Las Vegas, the Board of Rabbis, and Jewish Family Service Agency. Project Ezra helps people of all faiths secure new employment in this changing economic climate. Rabbi Akselrad is currently a board member of the Anti-Defamation League of Las Vegas and the Interfaith Council of Southern Nevada. Rabbi Akselrad has served on the National Commission on Jewish Living, Worship and Music for the Union of Reform Judaism (URJ) since 1999. He has also served on the Outreach Committee (to interfaith families) of the URJ. Rabbi Akselrad's community contributions and leadership are the best example of Congregation Ner Tamid's commitment to Tikkun Olam and Social Justice. May he continue to serve us all with grace, compassion, and strength.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

Ms. ROSEN. I am opposed to the bill in its current form.

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended. Mr. Speaker, last night, in an effort to secure more votes to pass the so-called American Health Care Act, the GOP made another last- minute attempt to modify its replacement plan for the Affordable Care Act--a replacement that I can only describe as a disastrous piece of legislation--by offering a short-term fix to try and regulate the massive rise in premiums that Americans over the age of 50 are expected to incur under their current plan. H.R. 372 is a measure that simply ends health insurance antitrust exemption. What is ironic is that the proposed legislation is being messaged by the GOP as a bipartisan bill, a no-brainer. But Republicans have never lifted a finger to end the antitrust exemption. For years, Congressman John Conyers and the Democrats have advocated ending health insurers' special treatment. The reality is, while this is an unobjectionable bill on its own, H.R. 372 has nothing to do with reversing the extraordinary damage that the GOP plan will unleash on this country. The fact is this will not help us solve the fundamental issues underlying the GOP's repeal-and- replace bill. Yet, instead of fixing what we know is not working under the current law, the GOP has offered this Band-Aid to help mend a bill that needs major surgery. H.R. 372 is simply a complement to help fix our healthcare system, not an alternative. One of the worst aspects of the GOP's repeal is the fact that it implements an age tax. Americans over the age of 50 will be forced to pay up to five times more than what young Americans would pay for coverage. In my district alone, we have roughly 89,000 people between the ages of 50 and 64 who would see their premiums and the cost of their insurance rise significantly. I recently heard from one of my constituents within that age bracket. He is a retired firefighter who served our country for 29 years and is now disabled. So after many years of service, Ted is worried that if the GOP plan becomes the new law, he and his wife would be kicked off their insurance plans simply because their insurance would become unaffordable. If this is what the GOP has offered to fix their disastrous repeal, then I am sad to say, my friends, you have missed the mark once again. According to the Congressional Budget Office, if the GOP repeal is enacted, 14 million Americans nationwide will be kicked off their insurance coverage by the end of this year alone. So let me be clear. The problem with the GOP repeal is that as Americans age, they get less and less coverage. We need to protect those Americans who are fast approaching their Medicare-eligible years but who, for now, are still bearing the heaviest cost of private insurance. My motion to recommit makes this possible by turning this Band-Aid of a bill into something that actually helps drive down costs for older Americans. It does this by allowing insurance companies to take part in the bill's safe harbor protections only if they charge individuals over 55 less than three times as much as younger Americans. Since insurance companies consider these safe harbors critical for their survival, this will reverse one of the worst parts of the Republican health plan, allowing insurance companies to charge older Americans five times or even more for health insurance. I call on my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to show that they aren't tone deaf and that they haven't lost touch with the needs and wants of their constituents, and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the motion to recommit so that we can protect our seniors and the most vulnerable of Americans among us. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my opposition to the repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act. I will be the first to admit that ObamaCare has its flaws, but we should mend the law, not end the law. Because of the ACA, we have seen the uninsured rate in Nevada and in my district reduced by half. The GOP replacement would not only drop 15 million Americans from their insurance and raise healthcare costs on hardworking Nevada families, but it would end funding for Planned Parenthood, taking away affordable healthcare services that so many women in my district rely on. Recently I received a letter from a constituent whose family has a history of breast cancer. She is so concerned that she and her daughter will stop receiving the regular cancer screenings that they need to survive. Mr. Speaker, it is unconscionable for us to vote on a bill that would create a life-or-death situation for millions of Americans across the country.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the House Committee on Armed Services, I rise to voice my full support for the fiscal year 2017 Defense Appropriations bill. This legislation supports our Armed Forces by helping pay our troops and provide care for our men and women in uniform and their families, and it gives our military the resources necessary to combat terrorism, deter our adversaries, and support our allies. The Defense Appropriations bill includes a 2.1 percent pay raise for our servicemen and -women, which will help our military families like those who are currently struggling in Nevada to make ends meet. One of the most important investments proposed is increasing our military readiness, which helps strengthen our national security. The legislation fully funds troop number increases authorized and provides an additional $6.8 billion in procurement spending. This is especially important for helping modernize our Armed Forces by fulfilling unmet requirements for additional ships, weapons, and aircraft, such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters at Nellis Air Force Base and unmanned aerial vehicles flying counter-ISIL operations missions from Creech Air Force Base. Finally, the NDAA helps support programs that strengthen relations with our allies. I urge my colleagues to pass this important legislation.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, on February 14th on roll call vote 89, I was not present because I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``No.''

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 89.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this legislation. In the aftermath of World War II, leaders from both parties, who many in this House revere to this day, developed the principle of civilian control of our Armed Forces and codified it into law. They had seen the rise of fascism and communism, and held this principle dear because they believed it was necessary for the safety of our democracy. It was the outgrowth of a long tradition of thinking about civil-military relations, as old as our Republic itself, going back to the Founders. Yet, almost all of these same leaders and legislators made an exception for General George Marshall; but when they did so, they did not take the action lightly. The exception in 1950 did a number of things that this legislation does not, which my colleagues have spoken about. All are serious, but I want to highlight one. The exception in 1950 named General Marshall by name and applied the exception only to him. This bill does not name General Mattis, and it is written more broadly. The principle of civilian control of the Armed Forces was important to the Greatest Generation and it was an exception in every sense, an exception for an exceptional individual. This matter should not be rammed through Congress. There are serious issues to discuss. I believe civil-military relations remain vitally important to the American people and to the health of our democracy. I believe that General Mattis is an excellent general officer. He has served our Nation well, and he will be a capable Secretary of Defense. My opposition to this legislation is not about General Mattis' capacity to serve in this role. Mr. Speaker, I ask: Why is this legislation written so that it could apply to other individuals and does not name General Mattis and state that this is only for him? We are being asked to rush, without conducting proper oversight, without holding a hearing, and after being prevented by an unelected transition team to hear from General Mattis himself. This is the people's House. The House should have a proper hearing before a decision of this magnitude is made. General Mattis should have been allowed to testify before our committee, as I am told was his desire. If today's legislation addressed these concerns, which could have been achieved, my vote would likely be different today.

Ms. ROSEN. But I cannot, given this process and this language, vote for this legislation today in good conscience.

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. ``. . . the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, . . .''

Ms. ROSEN

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle today in support of this resolution and to lend my name as a cosponsor. The United States alliance with Israel is absolutely critical, and this is not the time to sow uncertainty about the state of our relationship. This resolution does a number of important things, but the most important is that it reaffirms Congress' longstanding support for a bilateral settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and objects to the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334. Paragraph 5 of that resolution is reminiscent of a recent U.N. Human Rights Council resolution that established a database of companies in the settlements, facilitating a boycott. The UNSC resolution does nothing to advance the cause of peace and is, in fact, an obstacle to it. Strongly ensuring the security of Israel is the only pathway to a lasting settlement. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of this resolution.