We use analytics tools to understand how people use the site. They're optional: if you decline, the site works the same, no analytics cookies are set and Google gets only a cookieless, anonymous count signal. Your votes are saved either way; the details are in the privacy policy.
Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions''; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to ''Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications''; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1526) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; and for other purposes.
I rise in opposition to this rule. As many of you might know, for over 2 years now I have been championing the cause to allow new female Members of Congress the right to vote. Some of the American people might be surprised that if you are a female Member and you have a child, that you can't vote.
I am proud to support the provision in the rule that safeguards this Chamber from a take-it-or-leave-it, nonamenable approach to authorize proxy voting.
First of all, I rise in full support of this rule. As I told my good friends in the Rules Committee today, you are not going to lecture me on compassion. You are not going to lecture me on being kind to the poor and the forgotten.
There is an awful lot of stuff in this rule before us. However, let's be clear about one thing that is happening with this rule today, and that is Republican leadership is trying to overturn the democratic process of majority rule.
I rise today in strong opposition to this rule which restricts moms and dads from doing their jobs after welcoming a new child. Like so many of our colleagues, it is one of my greatest honors to be a mom. I have two little boys, a son named Davis who is 5, and my little guy here, Sam, who is now 9 weeks old.
I rise in opposition today to the Republicans' voter suppression act. This bill is not about election integrity. This is not about ensuring that only citizens vote. This is about making it impossible for people and new voters to vote.
My amendment would prevent this bill from being implemented unless we get certification that it would not bar a single married woman in this country who is eligible to vote from the ballot box.
I rise on behalf of the Dads Caucus in support of Representative Luna's and Representative Pettersen's proxy voting bill that will allow new parents to spend a limited time, 12 weeks, with a newborn child. That is all we are asking.
Literally, the Freedom Caucus could teach a clinic on Speaker hostage taking. If you don't like the bill, vote against it. Is the Freedom Caucus the only one with power? Is Chip Roy the only one who sits in these seats with power?
As we stand here today on the House floor, Donald Trump's Secretary of Health is announcing that he is firing over 10,000 healthcare professionals across America. These are the doctors, practitioners, experts, and scientists who keep us safe.
Comments
Comments with insults, hate speech or personal information are removed.