March 9: Congressional Record publishes “SUSPENDING ENERGY IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA ACT.....” in the House of Representatives section

By North OC Times

Mar 18, 2022

Young Kim was mentioned in SUSPENDING ENERGY IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA ACT..... on pages H1394-H1405 covering the 2nd Session of the 117th Congress published on March 9 in the Congressional Record.

The publication is reproduced in full below:

SUSPENDING ENERGY IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA ACT

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 973, I call up the bill (H.R. 6968) to prohibit the importation of energy products of the Russian Federation, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 973, the bill is considered read.

The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 6968

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTS OF THE

RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

(a) In General.--

(1) Prohibition of energy products.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all products of the Russian Federation classified under chapter 27 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States shall be banned from importation into the United States, other than products imported on or before 11:59 p.m. eastern daylight time on the date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(2) Authority to allow importation under contract.-- Notwithstanding the prohibition under paragraph (1), the President may allow certain products described in such paragraph to be imported into the United States if the importation of such products is pursuant to a written contract or agreement that was entered into before the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) National Interest Waiver.--

(1) In general.--The President is authorized to waive the prohibition under subsection (a) with respect to one or more of the products of the Russian Federation described in the matter preceding paragraph (1) of subsection (a) if the President certifies that such waiver is in the national interest of the United States and includes in such certification a description of the product or products to which the waiver is proposed to apply. Such waiver shall take effect beginning on the date that is 90 calendar days after the date of submission of such certification, unless there is enacted into law during such 90-day period a joint resolution of disapproval.

(2) Congressional consultation.--

(A) Prior justification.--The President shall, not later than 15 calendar days before submitting a certification described in paragraph (1), submit to the appropriate congressional committees a justification for the waiver proposed under such paragraph.

(B) Appropriate congressional committees.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term ``appropriate congressional committees'' means--

(i) the Committee on Ways and Means, the Committee on Financial Services, and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and

(ii) the Committee on Finance, the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate.

(1) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term

``joint resolution of disapproval'' means only a joint resolution--

(A) which does not have a preamble;

(B) the title of which is as follows: ``Joint resolution disapproving the President's proposed waiver under section 2(b)(1) of the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act.''; and

(C) the matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows: ``That Congress disapproves the proposed waiver of the President under section 2(b)(1) of the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act, submitted to Congress on ___'', the blank space being filled in with the appropriate date.

(2) Introduction in the house of representatives.--During a period of 5 legislative days beginning on the date that a certification under subsection (b)(1) is submitted to Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the House of Representatives by the majority leader or the minority leader.

(3) Introduction in the senate.--During a period of 5 days on which the Senate is in session beginning on the date that a certification under subsection (b)(1) is submitted to Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the Senate by the majority leader (or the majority leader's designee) or the minority leader (or the minority leader's designee).

(4) Floor consideration in the house of representatives.--

(A) Reporting and discharge.--If a committee of the House to which a joint resolution of disapproval has been referred has not reported such joint resolution within 10 legislative days after the date of referral, that committee shall be discharged from further consideration thereof.

(B) Proceeding to consideration.--Beginning on the third legislative day after each committee to which a joint resolution of disapproval has been referred reports it to the House or has been discharged from further consideration thereof, it shall be in order to move to proceed to consider the joint resolution in the House. All points of order against the motion are waived. Such a motion shall not be in order after the House has disposed of a motion to proceed on a joint resolution with regard to the same certification. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion. The motion shall not be debatable. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is disposed of shall not be in order.

(C) Consideration.--The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order against the joint resolution and against its consideration are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion except two hours of debate equally divided and controlled by the sponsor of the joint resolution (or a designee) and an opponent. A motion to reconsider the vote on passage of the joint resolution shall not be in order.

(5) Consideration in the senate.--

(A) Committee referral.--A joint resolution of disapproval introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee on Finance.

(B) Reporting and discharge.--If the Committee on Finance has not reported such joint resolution of disapproval within 10 days on which the Senate is in session after the date of referral of such joint resolution, that committee shall be discharged from further consideration of such joint resolution and the joint resolution shall be placed on the appropriate calendar.

(C) Motion to proceed.--Notwithstanding Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, it is in order at any time after the Committee on Finance reports the joint resolution of disapproval to the Senate or has been discharged from its consideration (even though a previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to) to move to proceed to the consideration of the joint resolution, and all points of order against the joint resolution (and against consideration of the joint resolution) shall be waived. The motion to proceed is not debatable. The motion is not subject to a motion to postpone. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the joint resolution of disapproval is agreed to, the joint resolution shall remain the unfinished business until disposed of.

(D) Debate.--Debate on the joint resolution of disapproval, and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours, which shall be divided equally between the majority and minority leaders or their designees. A motion to further limit debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit the joint resolution of disapproval is not in order.

(E) Vote on passage.--The vote on passage shall occur immediately following the conclusion of the debate on the joint resolution of disapproval and a single quorum call at the conclusion of the debate, if requested in accordance with the rules of the Senate.

(F) Rules of the chair on procedure.--Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating to the application of the rules of the Senate, as the case may be, to the procedure relating to the joint resolution of disapproval shall be decided without debate.

(G) Consideration of veto messages.--Debate in the Senate of any veto message with respect to the joint resolution of disapproval, including all debatable motions and appeals in connection with such joint resolution, shall be limited to 10 hours, to be equally divided between, and controlled by, the majority leader and the minority leader or their designees.

(6) Procedures in the senate.--Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the following procedures shall apply in the Senate to a joint resolution of disapproval to which this subsection applies:

(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a joint resolution of disapproval that has passed the House of Representatives shall, when received in the Senate, be referred to the Committee on Finance for consideration in accordance with this subsection.

(B) If a joint resolution of disapproval to which this section applies was introduced in the Senate before receipt of a joint resolution of disapproval that has passed the House of Representatives, the joint resolution from the House of Representatives shall, when received in the Senate, be placed on the calendar. If this subparagraph applies, the procedures in the Senate with respect to a joint resolution of disapproval introduced in the Senate that contains the identical matter as the joint resolution of disapproval that passed the House of Representatives shall be the same as if no joint resolution of disapproval had been received from the House of Representatives, except that the vote on passage in the Senate shall be on the joint resolution of disapproval that passed the House of Representatives.

(7) Rules of the house of representatives and senate.--This subsection is enacted by Congress--

(A) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the Senate and the House of Representatives, respectively, and as such are deemed a part of the rules of each House, respectively, but applicable only with respect to the procedure to be followed in that House in the case of legislation described in those sections, and supersede other rules only to the extent that they are inconsistent with such rules; and

(B) with full recognition of the constitutional right of either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner, and to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that House.

SEC. 3. COOPERATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE WORLD TRADE

ORGANIZATION.

The United States Trade Representative shall use the voice and influence of the United States at the WTO to--

(1) condemn the recent aggression in Ukraine;

(2) encourage other WTO members to suspend trade concessions to the Russian Federation; and

(3) consider further steps with the view to suspend the Russian Federation's participation in the WTO.

SEC. 4. MODIFICATIONS TO AND REAUTHORIZATION OF SANCTIONS

UNDER THE GLOBAL MAGNITSKY HUMAN RIGHTS

ACCOUNTABILITY ACT WITH RESPECT TO HUMAN RIGHTS

VIOLATIONS.

(a) Definitions.--Section 1262 of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by striking paragraph (2).

(b) Sense of Congress.--

(1) In general.--The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by inserting after section 1262 (as amended by subsection (a)) the following new section:

``SEC. 1262A. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

``It is the sense of Congress that the President should establish and regularize information sharing and sanctions- related decisionmaking with like-minded governments possessing human rights and anti-corruption sanctions programs similar in nature to those authorized under this subtitle.''.

(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of contents in section 2(b) and in title XII of division A of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-328) are each amended by inserting after the items relating to section 1262 the following:

``Sec. 1262A. Sense of Congress.''.

(1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 1263 of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (Subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended to read as follows:

``(a) In General.--The President may impose the sanctions described in subsection (b) with respect to any foreign person that the President determines, based on credible information--

``(1) is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in, serious human rights abuse;

``(2) is a current or former government official, or a person acting for or on behalf of such an official, who is responsible for or complicit in, or has directly or indirectly engaged in--

``(A) corruption, including--

``(i) the misappropriation of state assets;

``(ii) the expropriation of private assets for personal gain;

``(iii) corruption related to government contracts or the extraction of natural resources; or

``(iv) bribery; or

``(B) the transfer or facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption;

``(3) is or has been a leader or official of--

``(A) an entity, including a government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, any of the activities described in paragraph (1) or (2) during the tenure of the leader or official; or

``(B) an entity whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this section as a result of activities during the tenure of the leader or official;

``(4) has materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of--

``(A) an activity described in paragraph (1) or (2) that is conducted by a foreign person;

``(B) a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this section; or

``(C) an entity, including a government entity, that has engaged in, or whose members have engaged in, an activity described in paragraph (1) or (2) conducted by a foreign person; or

``(5) is owned or controlled by, or has acted or been purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, a person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this section.''.

(2) Consideration of certain information.--Subsection

(c)(2) of such section is amended by striking ``violations of human rights'' and inserting ``corruption and human rights abuses''.

(3) Requests by congress.--Subsection (d)(2) of such section is amended--

(A) in subparagraph (A)--

(i) in the subparagraph heading, by striking ``Human rights violations'' and inserting ``Serious human rights abuse''; and

(ii) by striking ``described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a)'' and inserting ``described in subsection (a) relating to serious human rights abuse''; and

(B) in subparagraph (B)--

(i) in the matter preceding clause (i), by striking

``described in paragraph (3) or (4) of subsection (a)'' and inserting ``described in subsection (a) relating to corruption or the transfer or facilitation of the transfer of the proceeds of corruption''; and

(ii) by striking ``ranking member of--'' and all that follows through the period at the end and inserting ``ranking member of one of the appropriate congressional committees.''.

(d) Reports to Congress.--Section 1264(a) of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (5), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a semicolon;

(2) in paragraph (6), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

``(7) a description of additional steps taken by the President through diplomacy, international engagement, and assistance to foreign or security sectors to address persistent underlying causes of serious human rights abuse and corruption in each country in which foreign persons with respect to which sanctions have been imposed under section 1263 are located; and

``(8) a description of additional steps taken by the President to ensure the pursuit of judicial accountability in appropriate jurisdictions with respect to those foreign persons subject to sanctions under section 1263 for serious human rights abuse and corruption.''.

(e) Repeal of Sunset.--

(1) In general.--Section 1265 of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is repealed.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ways and Means or their respective designees.

The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Neal) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) each will control 30 minutes.

The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.

General Leave

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration before us.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection.

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I stand here today in a moment of great sorrow as the Ukrainian people continue to endure the brutal and unprovoked assault by Russia upon their independence.

We have all witnessed the heartbreaking footage of this war's innocent victims. We heard the harrowing stories of families who have been torn apart and forced to leave their country. We have watched with admiration as the Ukrainian people have courageously defended their homeland.

Madam Speaker, tonight, we are all Ukrainians. This unprovoked, unjustified invasion is a horrific stain on humanity. This evening, we here in this Congress will firmly condemn Putin's aggression with the legislation that is before us. Inaction is not an option.

I am very pleased, once again, that the Committee on Ways and Means, in a bipartisan manner, has led the development of this package that will take decisive action to exact economic pain on Putin and his regime.

The Russian regime relies on energy sales to fund many of its offenses. This bill will cut off some of the revenue with a ban on the import of Russian oil and energy products into the United States. The more economic pain we inflict on Putin, the more pressure he will feel to finally end this brutal campaign of terror on the Ukrainian people. I don't think tonight the people of Ukraine think that Vladimir Putin is a genius.

Madam Speaker, this legislation also takes steps to review Russia's participation in the World Trade Organization. This is an international organization comprised of 150 nations. Membership is a privilege that comes with responsibilities, and bad actors who destabilize global security should not enjoy the economic benefits of belonging to that body.

Madam Speaker, I am committed to providing and punishing Russia at the WTO as we proceed. Broad bipartisan support exists in this Congress for these meaningful actions to hold Putin accountable and full support for the Ukrainian people. With this legislation, we reaffirm our commitment to peace and to democracy.

Madam Speaker, I urge our colleagues to support this consequential moment and act accordingly, and I look forward to its swift passage into law.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, while missiles and machine guns rain down death on innocent Ukrainians, President Zelensky is pleading with America and all free nations to stop buying Russian oil to fund this inhumane war.

This weekend, America should know that both parties in Congress came together, worked together in agreement to immediately ban purchases of Russian energy. I was proud to have helped lead that bipartisan effort of the House Committee on Ways and Means and Senate Committee on Finance, and pleased that President Biden, who fought the Russian energy ban tooth and nail, finally relented and accepted the moral choice to stand with the people of Ukraine.

The bill before us is certainly not as strong an energy ban as what Congress crafted, nor does it include Congress' crucial economic sanctions to revoke favorable trade relations with Russia and Belarus, which would have targeted all the products America buys from Russia. But President Biden insisted that these economic sanctions be dropped so that nearly half of all Russian imports to the U.S. will go untouched. For some reason, he is insisting we treat Russia, the invader, the same as Ukraine, the invaded.

{time} 1930

It's puzzling why Russian diamonds and vodka deserve continued special treatment here in America. Those revenues all help strengthen Russia's economy to fund the war against Ukraine. President Biden insisted, regrettably, in this bill they remain protected. Our allies will certainly get a laugh.

This bill directs our trade representative to urge other nations to revoke the special trading status for Russia, even though America refuses to do it at this time. That is not a profile in courage.

I wish our President was as committed to crippling economic sanctions as neighboring Canada, which banned both Russian oil and revoked the special trading treatment for Russian products. To be clear, neither the President's executive ban nor this bill takes any action to replace Russian oil with Made-in-America energy.

Nothing in this bill includes Republican-led proposals to extend secondary sanctions on Russian energy purchases in financing around the world--as we already impose on Iran and North Korea. Nothing in this bill creates access to more American-made energy on and offshore. Nor does it approve American pipelines that could easily replace Russian oil with U.S. and Canadian energy, or accelerate approval for delayed permits for American export facilities to help the rest of the world wean themselves from the grip of dirty Russian energy.

Answer this question: Why is our country begging Venezuela and Iran, terrorist nations and thug regimes, to produce more dirty oil to send to America when America is fully capable of producing all the cleanest oil and gas in the world that we need right here at home?

As expected, the President is blaming everyone and everything for high prices and inflation--including the war. Higher prices, as you know, have hammered Americans for a solid year, all starting with the President's $2 trillion unpaid-for COVID stimulus that ignited inflation, paid people not to work, and fueled the worst inflation in 40 years.

Thanks to the White House, America is in a dangerous wage-price spiral, and as a result of the President's failed economic leadership more and more experts are predicting a recession this year. No wonder most Americans believe our economy is already in a recession or depression and have lost faith in the President's ability to rebuild our economy.

To close, I will tell you this. The ban on Russian oil alone is worth our support. Ukraine is waiting, as Chairman Neal points out. After this bill, I urge Congress to do more: to revoke Russia's special trade status and unleash America's own ability to be energy independent, to replace Russian oil with American sources, and use our energy strength to wean the world from Russian energy.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Madam Speaker, I just want to reassure the gentleman that I remain committed to the position he has offered as it relates to the World Trade Organization and a suspension of Russia's partnership in WTO. Making sure that we do that in the right procedure I think is the challenge before us, but I agree with the point that the gentleman has made.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. DOGGETT. Madam Speaker, in the face of death and destruction, President Zelensky and the Ukrainians are showing the world the true meaning of courage.

While the most immediate need is for additional military equipment, we could respond tonight by taking another step to isolate Russia from the world economy and ensure that Americans are no longer contributing the revenue to fund his war machine. To take the energy out of Putin's brutal assault, we place energy on our sanctions list. It may cost more to fill your tank, but we must work to stop Putin's tanks from crushing families and freedom.

Our legislation also calls for expelling Russia from the World Trade Organization. Russia should not be permitted to benefit from the world order and stability that it is destroying with each bomb dropped and each Ukrainian murdered. The financial pain we are imposing cannot ease the pain of Ukrainian families, but it is one way for us to demonstrate our solidarity with them.

Putin and his apologists here in America and abroad must know that those who support democracy and combat aggression are united like never before. As the flow of Ukrainian dead and wounded grows, so must the economy of Russia shrink.

This bill is both more and less than the original version which Representative Blumenauer and I introduced the week before last in immediate response to Russian aggression. It now omits the most-favored nation treatment provision.

Throughout Putin's initial saber rattling and subsequent bomb dropping, the administration has wisely rejected the go-it-alone approach that lead America to disaster under previous administrations. The President has united our allies and is determined to keep them united. I believe as he continues to work with our allies we will be able to move forward, as Canada has, as our original bill proposed, and eliminate this most-favored nation status for Russia.

I am very pleased that the bill adds to what we had initially, the extension and revitalization of the Global Magnitsky Act. This has done a tremendous job in reducing human rights abuses, and with its inclusion in this bill we reauthorize it remaining united against aggression.

Mr. BRADY. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith), the Republican leader of the Trade Subcommittee.

Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.R. 6968, the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act.

This bill Democrats have brought to the floor, although important, is not what it actually could be. It is actually a missed opportunity to address our trade relationships with Russia and Belarus, and it is a missed opportunity to bolster domestic American-produced energy in a serious fashion so that we can address energy prices here at home.

Every Member of this body knows that we could and should be voting on the stronger bipartisan product that leaders on the Ways and Means and Senate Finance Committees agreed to merely days ago. It was bipartisan and bicameral. It revoked permanent normal trade relations for Russia and normal trade relationships for Belarus.

It also included an energy import ban and instead of loopholes, provided an off-ramp should Russia reverse course in Ukraine and earn back our trust. The text we have before us today is obviously not that bill.

The President demanded a lesser path and the House Democrats have chosen to support him in that effort. However, I do know that doing nothing is not an option.

I will support this bill, and I urge my Democratic colleagues to join Republicans in our push to use the trade tools at our disposal to address Vladimir Putin's unacceptable tyrannical aggression against Ukraine.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon

(Mr. Blumenauer).

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the underlying bill, but I want to acknowledge the comments from my colleagues about the bipartisan approach that we originally advanced. It is, I think, unfortunate that we are not stripping away the most-favored trade status from the Russians. I am convinced that we will be able to get there with the expression that we have had on both sides of the aisle. I think it is important that we can remain committed to advancing this in terms of tightening the economic noose around Russia.

Mr. Speaker, I am a little disappointed with the rhetoric that we have heard attacking the administration for not coming forth with fanciful efforts to increase domestic production. As has been documented on the floor repeatedly in the course of this debate, there are ample leases that are unused now, some 9,000 such leases.

Everything that my friends on the other side of the aisle are talking about is not going to produce one additional gallon of oil next year or two years afterwards. These are longer-term issues that relate to the mechanics of production, the economics of the industry.

Where our salvation is going to rise is taking advantage of the elements that the Democrats have advanced in terms of clean energy production. This is reliable, sustainable, and not subject to the whims of international global petrochemical arguments and disputes.

In the meantime, I strongly urge support of the legislation and renew my commitment to work on a bipartisan basis to be able to strip away the most-favored nation status, working together to accomplish this in as expeditious a fashion as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the cooperation of the chairman of the committee being able to move and take advantage of the expressions of my friends on the other side of the aisle.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas

(Mr. Arrington).

Mr. ARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, unfortunately President Biden continues to be inexcusably feckless in his response to global threats from our adversaries.

Now, in the moment of truth, when America can send a clear and unequivocal message to dictators and democracies alike by banning Russian oil imports to the United States, the President has failed once again to rise to the occasion.

This anemic response would remove the commonsense conditions for lifting the ban like Russia's full and immediate withdrawal from Ukraine and their ceasing to threaten other NATO countries.

The most egregious aspect of this proposal is that the President and the Democrat leadership refused to revoke Russia's permanent normal trade relation status, which will continue to allow them low-tariff access to the United States market--a privilege only allies of freedom should receive.

Consistent with Biden's timid response, I fear that these half-

measures will not only fail to deter Vladimir Putin, but will invite other tyrants around the world to follow suit.

Mr. Speaker, we must unload the full arsenal, the full force of America's economic arsenal on the Russian Federation and their rogue leader.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Chu).

Ms. CHU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of this bill to isolate and stop sending our money to Russia.

Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine has already caused countless deaths and injuries while forcing 1.5 million innocent refugees to flee their homes. There must be consequences for this belligerence.

That is why I support cutting off Russia's oil and gas imports to the U.S., seeking to suspend their participation in the World Trade Organization, and extending our ability to implement further sanctions. Global trade, the wealth it helps generate and the needs it helps to meet, is a benefit of the very international order that Russia is trying to undermine.

If Putin is declaring war on global peace and stability, then he should also not be able to benefit from global peace and stability.

I believe that the promise of being able to once again profit from global trade is a powerful incentive for Putin to end his war of choice. I am proud to support using our economic influence for peace.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Ferguson), the chief deputy whip for the Republican Conference.

Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. Speaker, the war on American energy independence began on day one of President Biden's administration. That war has hit Americans hard in the pocketbook, and the cost at the pump, and for everything else they buy has gone up as a result of this administration's policies.

All too often we look across the globe and see the cost of those policies, and we see that in Ukraine right now. Every single barrel of Russian oil that we buy has at least a quarter of Ukrainian blood in it. It is time to put an end to it.

Now we have a bill that has been much watered-down, it doesn't have the teeth in it that it should because this administration does not seem willing to stand up to this dictator. Now that we are having a discussion about ending a relationship with one dictator, it seems that the administration is willing to trade one for three, buying oil from Venezuela, Iran, and now Saudi Arabia.

This war on pricing has got to come to an end. The war on American energy independence has to come to an end. It is time for this administration to open up American energy independence.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).

Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6968, suspending energy imports in response to Russia's barbaric, inhumane, and unprovoked attacks on Ukraine and the Ukrainian people. These imports include crude oil, petroleum, coal, coal products, natural gas, and other products.

On March 8, President Biden issued an executive order to prohibit energy imports from Russia, which I totally agree with. Mr. Speaker, I support and urge passive of H.R. 6968.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Rice), the Republican leader of the Oversight and Reform Committee.

Mr. RICE of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Brady, Mr. Neal, and Mr. Doggett for their leadership on this bill to sanction Russian energy exports, which I support, but I must express my frustration that this bill does not go far enough.

{time} 1945

On February 7, President Biden stated that if Russia invaded Ukraine, the United States would impose crippling sanctions. Yet, here we are, 2 weeks after Biden finally found the courage to call it an invasion, and the sanctions are still being rolled out piecemeal.

Only last week, the administration was telling us that sanctioning Russian oil and gas imports was not on the table. In the face of inaction, Democrats and Republicans in Congress came together to impose the crippling sanctions the President had promised but not followed through on. The bipartisan bill would have banned Russian oil imports and enabled the imposition of tariffs on all remaining Russian imports to America. But the White House intervened, and my Democrat friends withdrew their support.

Instead, this bill bans only oil. The remaining half of Russian trade remains. American purchases will keep funding Russia's cruel invasion, and Russia will keep its most-favored-nation status in the World Trade Organization.

In this bill, we ask our allies to penalize Russian imports, but we refuse to do so ourselves. Now, that is not leadership. I cannot understand why America would maintain trade relations with a nation that only last night bombed a children's hospital in Mariupol, Ukraine.

Mr. President, how many more innocent Ukrainians need to die before you do what you promised? Stop projecting weakness, and just do what you say.

China is watching. The world is watching.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Himes). Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Panetta).

Mr. PANETTA. Mr. Speaker, I support tonight's bills because we must fund the government, and of course, we must support Ukraine.

As the American people get out of COVID, get back to work, and get on with our lives, they are yearning to help Ukrainian lives. Tonight's bills do that by providing aid and armaments so that the Ukrainians can continue to punch Putin right in the face.

This bill, H.R. 6968, also punches Putin right in the gut by banning imports of Russian oil, by taking steps to remove Russia from the WTO, and by holding Putin accountable for his violating of rights with tougher sanctions.

The last thing we want is war with Russia. However, in order to stop Putin's paranoid adventurism, we need to bolster our commitment to NATO, and we must bleed him of his resources to wage war by crumpling his ruble and collapsing his economy. This will affect us, and it will force all of us to play our part.

But despite these costs, we must continue to be as united as we are inspired by this fledgling democracy that has flourished under fire. That is why we must play our part and pass this legislation to support the livelihoods of Americans, to support the lives of Ukrainians, and to ensure that Putin pays his price for his attacks on a peaceful democracy.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Smucker), who is a member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. SMUCKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start my comments by saying that I really do believe that there is no daylight between our parties on our commitment to cripple Putin's ability to wage war in Ukraine. We stand with the people of Ukraine, Democrats and Republicans alike.

I want to thank Chairman Neal and Ranking Member Brady for putting together a strong bill to stop financing Putin's aggression. This was a bill that was bipartisan and bicameral that would have stopped providing financial support to Russia and put an end to importing Russian oil. Unfortunately, that bill that they worked so hard on is not the bill that we are debating here tonight.

Now, I plan to vote in support of this bill because I believe it is important that we stand with Ukraine. But I want to make it clear to the White House and to Democratic leadership: You know that we could have done better, yet for some reason, the White House intervened, and I don't understand.

I would like someone to answer the question: Why are we running a product that replaced another product that would have put an end to favored-trade status for Russia and Belarus? Why are we voting on a product that will not be taken up by the Senate?

We had a better deal.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney).

Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation banning Russian oil and gas imports and imposing additional sanctions to punish Putin and his cronies for their war of aggression in Ukraine, which has caused more than 2 million Ukrainians to flee their country.

President Biden has already imposed swift and severe consequences, including yesterday's executive action. However, it is the duty of Congress to join the President, enact a congressional ban on Russian oil and gas imports to the U.S., and send a strong message to the Kremlin that none of our money will be used to bankroll shelling of Ukrainian families.

Yesterday, the Oversight and Reform Committee held a bipartisan briefing with U.S. and Ukrainian Government officials. The message was clear: Putin's regime must be denied these crucial oil revenues while we continue to provide urgently needed aid to Ukraine.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this legislation for the good of the United States and the support of Ukraine.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Murphy).

Mr. MURPHY of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, today is day 14 of Putin's ruthless, senseless war on Ukraine. Yet, with all eyes on the United States, President Biden has still failed to impose the necessary full economic penalties on the Russian economy.

This week, Ways and Means Republicans and Democrats negotiated a strong bipartisan bill that added additional, much-needed economic punishments on Putin's war effort, a historic deal that stopped both U.S. imports of Russian oil and suspended normal trade relations with Belarus and Russia--that is, before the White House got involved.

To be clear, the only reason the White House is doing anything is because it is being politically expedient. They stopped and stalled negotiations.

The White House has subsequently watered down negotiations where now 40 percent of nonenergy imports from Russia can still continue under this plan, fueling his war efforts.

While banning U.S. imports of Russian oil is critical, this weakened legislation fails to go the distance and truly hold Putin accountable for his shameful war crimes.

There is a special place in hell for evil despots who bomb children's hospitals. We must do everything at our disposal to support Ukraine and prove to the world that a strong America will not allow brutal dictators to reign on this Earth without swift and ferocious consequences.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio

(Ms. Kaptur), who represents 50,000 Ukrainian Americans.

Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Neal and Congressman Lloyd Doggett for allowing me this time tonight to rise in strong support of liberty by suspending energy imports from Russia to help crush Putin for his crimes against humanity.

Putin is murdering innocent men, pregnant women, children, and the elderly. He is bombing them into pieces. The brutal savagery unleashed by Putin and allowed by his treacherous oligarchs requires crushing and unflinching retribution.

The time has come to terminate the flow of Russia's blood-soaked oil into our land. We must also suspend Russia from the World Trade Organization. And let us sanction Putin and his enablers as far into the pits of hell as we possibly can.

As the gold standard for freedom and democracy, the world is watching America right now. This is not the time for holdouts or cowards. Every Member of this body must rise up without delay and lead by example.

Pass this legislation. Hit Putin and his enablers where it hurts. The just cause of liberty demands nothing less.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), who is a longtime leader on human rights.

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, Russian oil and gas is absolutely financing Putin's horrific war of aggression. I am for this bill, but there are provisions in this one in particular that should not be in here.

Mr. Speaker, I am the prime sponsor of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act which we added to the 2017 NDAA.

Under the act, an actionable offense occurs only when there is a gross violation of internationally recognized human rights which has the meaning given to it in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

Specifically, the Foreign Assistance Act includes torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges and trial, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, and other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, or the security of person.

H.R. 6968, however, radically strikes and replaces the current definition of what constitutes an actionable offense with language that is not defined--and this being done tonight without the benefit of hearings or due diligence.

Under the new language, the President may impose sanctions on an individual if responsible for or complicit in or has directly or indirectly engaged in what they call serious human rights abuse.

Exactly what does that mean?

There is no definition.

How is that phrase defined?

How elastic is it, especially when it is not linked to any international treaty or covenant?

What does directly engaged mean?

How indirect?

Guilt by association?

The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act got it right. It was bipartisan, and it links sanctions to internationally recognized human rights.

I hope the Senate will take a look at this. This is an egregious mistake.

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

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas

(Mr. Cloud).

Mr. CLOUD. Mr. Speaker, Putin's decision to bring this horrific tragedy upon the people of Ukraine is rightly to be condemned, and it is right at this moment in history that we do not fund this aggression by proxy through the purchase and importing of Russian oil.

But it is also tragic that the Biden administration and Democrats in this Chamber would rather turn to dictatorial, terrorist-sponsoring regimes to fill the energy gap rather than the world-renowned work ethic and innovation of the American people.

This administration should be doing everything it can to ramp up production and increase energy exports. Back home in Texas, we know that one of the best ways this can be achieved is by investing in our ports, like the Port of Corpus Christi in my district.

Increasing U.S. energy exports can provide relief and hope for the Ukrainian people. It can give Europe the assurance it needs to break away from Russian energy. And it can provide relief and economic opportunity for American families.

It is past time to stop Biden's assault on American energy and restore America's energy dominance.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Kim).

Mrs. KIM of California. Mr. Speaker, I share concerns that others have raised on the process of our getting here, but I rise today in favor of banning Russian energy imports. And I urge the Biden administration to work on an all-of-the-above domestic energy strategy.

While I am glad that we are stopping the flow of U.S. capital to the Kremlin, I am concerned that prices will rise without a plan to support domestic energy production. Our national security will also continue to be at risk as the administration looks to countries like Iran and Venezuela to fuel our communities.

The more we rely on authoritarian regimes, the more we hurt our economy, national security, and environment.

Energy security is national security. We need responsible energy solutions to expand domestic energy supply chains and lower costs for consumers.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Clyde).

Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, the Suspending Energy Imports from Russia Act has a great name, but the bill doesn't live up to its name.

Let me just read a little from the text because it is the text that matters.

On page 2, ``Prohibition of Energy Products'': This bill bans nothing until 45 days after enactment. Ukraine doesn't have 45 days.

Under section 2(a)(2), titled ``Authority to Allow Importation Under Contract'': Why are we even having this section when the idea was to ban Russian oil, not to allow importation?

It states: ``The President may allow certain products . . . to be imported into the United States . . . pursuant to a written contract .

. . that was entered into before the date of enactment of this act.''

So the bold statement from paragraph 1, that all oil products from the Russian Federation shall be banned from importation, just got eviscerated and shot full of holes. It is leakier than a sieve because every barrel of oil coming into the United States is covered under a contract, so every barrel is exempted for the length of the contract.

No business makes millions of dollars of purchases without a contract. This bill is smoke and mirrors intent on deceiving the American people that the Democrat majority and the Biden administration are doing something bold when, in reality, it is a false start and a penalty on the field.

{time} 2000

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett).

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, Putin thought he could divide us because our last President served Russian interests so very well--fawning over Putin, unrelenting criticism of our allies, undermining NATO, preferring Putin's word over American patriots, repeatedly pitting one American against another.

Recently, as Putin amassed tanks on the Ukrainian border, President Biden was not the one who hailed Putin's action as ``genius.''

As Putin ordered troops into Ukraine, it wasn't President Biden who called Putin's terror a ``peacekeeping mission'' and who then called Putin ``very savvy.''

Last Friday, as Russian bombs were killing hundreds of Ukrainians, it was not Biden's trusted adviser who said Putin had been ``too gentle'' and called President Zelensky ``a puppet'' and blamed him for failing to appease Putin by declaring a ``neutral Ukraine.''

As Biden has tried to unite, Trump and his cronies cannot stop licking Putin's boots, even as Putin was using those boots to kick Ukrainians in the teeth. Sadly, many of those who come to criticize our President and his efforts to bring us together have been sadly and totally mute, unable to voice a word of disapproval of those who would divide us, Putin's apologist-in-chief here in America.

Let's unite and stand with Ukrainian patriots and approve this bill.

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I will just point out, all of that was nonsense. The truth of the matter is, it was Democrat President Clinton who forced Ukraine to turn over 1,800 nuclear weapons to Russia and President Obama who stood by when Putin took over parts of Ukraine. Now, under President Biden, we stand by while he looks to invade and take over a sovereign nation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves).

Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, it is very interesting where we find ourselves right now. Just a few years ago--in fact, within the last year--we have advocated for banning Russian oil. We have advocated for it. Guess who has opposed it, on the record, voting against banning Russian oil? It is a really interesting place where we find ourselves where, all of a sudden, things have turned and folks have realized, oh, my goodness, we have got to change our position, we have got to flip-

flop, and we now have to ban Russian oil.

Mr. Speaker, look at the policies of this administration. Look at the policies of my friends on the other side of the aisle. We have seen record high prices, we have seen record increases in greenhouse gas emissions, and we have seen record energy insecurity as a result of these policies.

We have letters from Democrat Members of Congress to the administration begging them to work with OPEC Plus nations to increase their oil and gas production. We have had a more than doubling of our importation of crude oil from Russia under this administration.

The administration's failed policies have limited us to what they will tell you are two options and only two options. We can either buy Russian oil and fund the aggression of Putin into Ukraine, or we can pay higher prices in the United States.

This bill fails to address the underlying problem and actually provide a solution.

Mr. Speaker, you have seen these administration officials. Who are they talking to right now to backfill their production from Russia? Who are they talking to? They are talking to Venezuela. They are talking to Iran. They are talking to the Saudis. We are going to find ourselves right back in this situation.

The good news is, we have a solution for you. We can actually do what the President said in this very Chamber last week. We can buy American. We can buy American energy. Let's buy American energy, not Saudi, not Venezuela, not Russian. Let's buy American energy, because we have 38 billion barrels of oil we can produce here and trillions of cubic feet of natural gas.

We can do it safer here. We can do it cleaner here. That is what the motion to recommit allows. It allows us to unleash American energy opportunities, to unleash jobs in America, to unleash opportunities for Americans to go back to work and unleash the economic activity associated with it.

We can export liquefied natural gas from America to our allies in Europe and not have them 40 percent dependent upon energy from Russia, from Vladimir Putin continuing to this day to fund his activities attacking Ukraine and causing human rights violations all over that country.

I want to remind you, Mr. Speaker, it was President Biden that lifted the sanctions that effectively facilitated the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and it was President Biden who more than doubled the importation of crude oil from Russia.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support of the motion to recommit.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

This evening's debate is about holding Putin accountable for his unprovoked attack on the Ukrainian people. What we are talking about here is responsible use of trade policy as a powerful tool not only to condemn Putin's aggression and pursue peace but to act.

I hope in this moment, when we are in such a dire state, we would not use the opportunity just for partisan argument but try to focus very hard on the real task at hand, which is holding Putin accountable.

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

Mr. BRADY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for the purpose of closing.

Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill to the Committee on Ways and Means.

I will also ask to have my amendment, that suspends permanent normal trade relations with Russia, included in the Record.

While there is broad agreement to stop imports of Russian energy, to stand with Ukraine, Congress does need to do more. That is what this motion does.

As we talked earlier, when we talked about amending the rule to offer American-made energy production, the idea of doing sanctions without American energy production is incomplete at best.

But when it comes to trade with Russia, we also need to take stronger steps, stronger bipartisan steps. We had a good, bipartisan agreement that stopped oil imports from Russia but also removed preferential trade on other products from Russia.

The bill we are voting on today allows about 40 percent of the total products we buy from Russia to receive preferential trade treatment. That is why we are so disappointed and puzzled about why this provision was removed from the bill, because I believe that there is sincerely broad, strong bipartisan support in Congress to remove and suspend that.

I know that Chairman Neal is committed to working together toward that goal. By not revoking PNTR, Russia enjoys the same preferential trade status and lower tariffs as all of our American allies.

Ironically, unless we change the bill, Russia will maintain the same trade status on nonenergy products, like Russian diamonds and vodka, as Ukraine, the country they invaded. That is not right by any measure. We need to be tougher together.

Congress can lead by passing this motion to recommit, which simply substitutes the bipartisan agreement we reached that both shuts down Russian oil imports and removes the preferential trade status for all of the other products we import from Russia.

America needs to lead, Congress needs to lead, to take this important bipartisan step and vote ``yes'' on the motion to recommit.

I strongly believe the effort in this bill to immediately stop purchases from Russia has support and should have support from every American, but we need to do more.

I urge my colleagues and I urge our President to stand with us with strong economic sanctions and more American-made energy to replace Russian oil.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, our trade policy is a powerful tool, and this evening we will have an opportunity not only to condemn Putin's aggression, but just as importantly, to act upon it.

This legislation to ban the import of Russian energy products and evaluate Russia's access to the WTO will help to hold this brutal dictator accountable. We can and will do more.

I will continue to explore, as Mr. Brady noted, how we can utilize the full jurisdiction of the committee to stand up to Putin and to protect the Ukrainian people.

Let me, however, take a moment to congratulate Joe Biden for the manner in which he has assembled a multilateral alliance across the globe to condemn and to combat this dictator. When you consider that not only have our traditional allies in NATO--which was condemned at one time--we now can understand why it has been so enduring.

Just as importantly, beyond Western Europe and NATO, the Swiss, the Finns, the Swedes, the Japanese, the Kenyans, like most of the rest of the civilized world, have stood with us in this moment of challenge. Tonight, let us all stand with the Ukrainian people and support this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 6968 which will cut off oil and other energy imports from Russia which provide key support to Putin's war machine.

This bill stands in solidarity with the proud Ukrainian people fighting for their homeland and builds on President Bidens executive actions to ban Russian energy imports.

The crippling sanctions the Biden Administration has coordinated with our allies have isolated Russia to an unprecedented degree: are weakening Russia's ability to fund their illegal military offensive.

I believe that we can and should do even more. Although our European allies have moved quickly to support punishing sanctions against Russia and its corrupt leaders, other countries are providing aid and comfort by actually stepping up trade with Russia.

As we look to ratchet up the pressure on Russia to force them to stop the needless bloodshed, we need to ensure that every country is doing their part to help end this war and hold Russia accountable.

Mr. Speaker, as an original cosponsor of this bill, I urge my colleagues to vote yes to send a strong unified message that we are committed to doing everything we can to fight Russian aggression, stand with the Ukrainian people, and provide the military assist Ukraine desperately needs to defend itself.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 6968, the ``Suspending Energy Imports From Russia Act.''

I support this legislation because it demonstrates the commitment of the United States in assembling and leading an international coalition of the world's leading nations to ensure that all nations refuse to recognize the illegal invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation and to ensure that the Russian Federation is held accountable and sustain maximum economic damage from the imposition of sanctions as a consequence of its utter disregard for international law and norms.

Specifically, H.R. 6968 bans the importation into the United States of Russian crude oil and certain petroleum products, liquefied natural gas, and coal.

Last year, the U.S. imported nearly 700,000 barrels per day of crude oil and refined petroleum products from Russia so this step will deprive Russia of billions of dollars in revenues from U.S. drivers and consumers annually.

The bill also bans new U.S. investment in Russia's energy sector, which will ensure that American companies and American investors are not underwriting Vladimir Putin's efforts to expand energy production inside Russia.

Finally, the bill bans Americans from financing or enabling foreign companies that are making investment to produce energy in Russia.

The Russian ruble is now worth less than a penny and has hit an all-

time low after losing almost half of its value since Putin announced his further invasion of Ukraine.

By isolating Russia's Central Bank and cutting off the largest Russian banks from the international financial system, Russia has been disarmed his war chest of foreign reserves and left Putin to soften the blow of our sanctions.

U.S. and allied export controls are impacting industrial production in Russia, Russian commercial aviation, and other key sectors of the Russian economy.

The United States and governments all over the world are going after Putin's cronies and their families by identifying and freezing the assets they hold in our respective jurisdictions--their yachts, luxury apartments, money, and other ill-gotten gains.

The United States strongly supports efforts to assist Ukraine to defend its territory against military aggression by the Russian Federation and by separatist and paramilitary forces.

Ukraine was the second-most populous and powerful of the fifteen republics of the former and disintegrated Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the hub of the union's agricultural production, defense industries, and military arsenal.

In the three decades since gaining its independence, Ukraine has sought to forge its own path as a sovereign state and sought closer economic, social, and political ties with the free market and democratic nations of the West.

Since 2013, the Russian Federation has undertaken a campaign of political, economic, and military aggression against Ukraine, including the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, a civilian airliner, by Russian-backed Ukrainian separatists using a Russian-made missile taking the lives of all 298 innocent persons on board.

In February 2014, the military of the Russia Federation, without merit or cause, invaded the eastern part of the free and independent country of Ukraine, including the Crimean Peninsula, and backed a separatist insurgency in the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, where fighting has killed over 14,000 people.

The United States, a strategic ally of Ukraine, reacted swiftly to the Russian invasion, condemning the military action in strong and bipartisan fashion, and providing military, humanitarian, and non-

military financial assistance to the determined but beleaguered nation of Ukraine, which since 2014 has totaled approximately $1.5 billion.

On September 14, 2014, the House of Representatives adopted H. Res. 726, a resolution supporting the right of the people of Ukraine to freely determine their future, including their country's relationship with other nations and international organizations, without interference, intimidation, or coercion by other countries, and committed itself to solidarity with the people of Ukraine.

Interference and unprovoked aggressions by the Russia Federation ordered and led by Vladimir Putin continued unabated, including the mobilization and stationing of 150,000 Russian troops surrounding Ukraine and armed forces positioned in Belarus to attack Ukraine from the north, including war planes and offensive missile systems, and the movement of Russian naval vessels in the Black Sea to Ukraine's south, including amphibious assault ships, missile cruisers, and submarines, and the positioning of blood and medical equipment into position on their border.

Vladimir Putin sought authorization from the Russian parliament to use military force outside of Russian territory by staging a fraudulent on-camera meeting of his Security Council to grandstand for the Russian public and by recognizing sovereign Ukrainian territory as so-called independent republics in clear violation, again, of international law, all of which was intended to set the stage for further pretexts and further provocations by Russia Federation to make further aggressions against Ukraine by military action.

Vladimir Putin rejected every good-faith effort the United States and its allies and partners made to address mutual security concerns through dialogue to avoid needless conflict and avert human suffering.

On February 23, 2022, the Russia Federation military, at the direction of Vladimir Putin, began a premeditated brutal assault on the people of Ukraine without provocation, without justification, without necessity, making outlandish, false, and baseless claims that Ukraine was about to invade and launch a war against Russia and that Ukraine was prepared to use chemical weapons, and that Ukraine had committed a genocide.

These actions were taken by Vladimir Putin at the very moment that the United Nations Security Council was meeting to stand up for Ukraine's sovereignty to stave off invasion, culminating in missile strikes on historic cities across Ukraine, followed by air raids and the invasion of Russian tanks and troops.

Mr. Speaker, through this legislation the United States strongly condemns and opposes the unprovoked invasion and egregious act of aggression against sovereign state of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, the most provocative and destabilizing act of foreign aggression since the 1938 invasion of the Sudetenland by the Third Reich led by Adolph Hitler.

This legislation visits the costs of the unprovoked aggression and invasion ordered by Vladimir Putin, the authoritarian head of the Russian Federation against the sovereign nation of Ukraine on the Russian economy.

The United States is strongly committed to the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of Ukraine.

I ask all members to join me in voting for H.R. 6968 to support the right of the people of Ukraine to freely determine their future, including their country's relationship with other nations and international organizations, without interference, intimidation, or coercion by other countries.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.

Pursuant to House Resolution 973, the previous question is ordered on the bill.

The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.

Motion to Recommit

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

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit.

The Clerk read as follows:

Mr. Brady moves to recommit the bill, H.R. 6968, to the Committee on Ways and Means.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Brady is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be known as the ``Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds the following:

(1) The United States is a founding member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and is committed to ensuring that the WTO remains an effective forum for peaceful economic engagement.

(2) Ukraine is a sovereign nation-state that is entitled to enter into agreements with other sovereign states and to full respect of its territorial integrity.

(3) The United States will be unwavering in its support for a secure, democratic, and sovereign Ukraine, free to choose its own leaders and future.

(4) Ukraine acceded to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO Agreement) and has been a WTO member since 2008.

(5) Ukraine's participation in the WTO Agreement creates both rights and obligations vis-a-vis other WTO members.

(6) The Russian Federation acceded to the WTO on August 22, 2012, becoming the 156th WTO member, and the Republic of Belarus has applied to accede to the WTO.

(7) From the date of its accession, the Russian Federation committed to apply fully all provisions of the WTO.

(8) The United States Congress authorized permanent normal trade relations for the Russian Federation through the Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (Public Law 112-208).

(9) Ukraine communicated to the WTO General Council on March 2, 2022, urging that all WTO members take action against the Russian Federation and ``consider further steps with the view to suspending the Russian Federation's participation in the WTO for its violation of the purpose and principles of this Organization''.

(10) Vladimir Putin, a ruthless dictator, has led the Russian Federation into a war of aggression against Ukraine, which--

(A) denies Ukraine and its people their collective rights to independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity;

(B) constitutes an emergency in international relations, because it is a situation of armed conflict that threatens the peace and security of all countries, including the United States; and

(11) The Republic of Belarus, also led by a ruthless dictator, Aleksander Lukashenka, is providing important material support to the Russian Federation's aggression.

(12) The Russian Federation's exportation of goods in the energy sector is central to its ability to wage its war of aggression on Ukraine.

(13) The United States, along with its allies and partners, has responded to recent aggression by the Russian Federation in Ukraine by imposing sweeping financial sanctions and stringent export controls.

(14) The United States cannot allow the consequences of the Russian Federation's actions to go unaddressed, and must lead fellow countries, in all fora, including the WTO, to impose appropriate consequences for the Russian Federation's aggression.

SEC. 3. SUSPENSION OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS WITH THE RUSSIAN

FEDERATION AND THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS.

(a) Nondiscriminatory Tariff Treatment.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning on the day after the date of the enactment of this Act, the rates of duty set forth in column 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States shall apply to all products of the Russian Federation and of the Republic of Belarus.

(b) Authority to Proclaim Increased Column 2 Rates.--

(1) In general.--The President may proclaim increases in the rates of duty applicable to products of the Russian Federation or the Republic of Belarus, above the rates set forth in column 2 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.

(2) Prior consultation.--The President shall, not later than 5 calendar days before issuing any proclamation under paragraph (1), consult with the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate regarding the basis for and anticipated impact of the proposed increases to rates of duty described in paragraph (1).

(3) Termination.--The authority to issue proclamations under this subsection shall terminate on January 1, 2024.

SEC. 4. PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTS OF THE

RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all products of the Russian Federation classified under chapter 27 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States shall be banned from importation into the United States, other than products imported on or before 11:59 p.m. eastern daylight time on the date that is 45 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(b) Termination Upon Extension of Normal Trade Relations With the Russian Federation.--The prohibition under subsection (a) shall terminate on the date on which the President grants permanent nondiscriminatory tariff treatment

(normal trade relations) to the products of the Russian Federation pursuant to section 5(b)(3).

SEC. 5. RESUMPTION OF APPLICATION OF HTS COLUMN 1 RATES OF

DUTY AND RESTORATION OF NORMAL TRADE RELATIONS

TREATMENT FOR THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND THE

REPUBLIC OF BELARUS.

(a) Temporary Application of HTS Column 1 Rates of Duty.--

(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law

(including the application of column 2 rates of duty under section 3), the President is authorized to temporarily resume, for one or more periods not to exceed 1 year each, the application of the rates of duty set forth in column 1 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to the products of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus, or both, if the President submits to Congress with respect to either or both such countries a certification under subsection (c) for each such period. Such action shall take effect beginning on the date that is 90 calendar days after the date of submission of such certification for such period, unless there is enacted into law during such 90-day period a joint resolution of disapproval.

(2) Consultation and report.--The President shall, not later than 45 calendar days before submitting a certification under paragraph (1)--

(A) consult with the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate; and

(B) submit to both such committees a report that explains the basis for the determination of the President contained in such certification.

(b) Restoration of Normal Trade Relations Treatment.--

(1) In general.--The President is authorized to resume the application of the rates of duty set forth in column 1 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States to the products of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus, or both, if the President submits to Congress with respect to either or both such countries a certification under subsection (c). Such action shall take effect beginning on the date that is 90 calendar days after the date of submission of such certification, unless there is enacted into law during such 90-day period a joint resolution of disapproval.

(2) Consultation and report.--The President shall, not later than 45 calendar days before submitting a certification under paragraph (1)--

(A) consult with the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of the Senate; and

(B) submit to both such committees a report that explains the basis for the determination of the President contained in such certification.

(3) Products of the russian federation.--If the President submits pursuant to paragraph (1) a certification under subsection (c) with respect to the Russian Federation and a joint resolution of disapproval is not enacted during the 90- day period described in that paragraph, the President may grant permanent nondiscriminatory tariff treatment (normal trade relations) to the products of the Russian Federation.

(4) Products of the republic of belarus.--If the President submits pursuant to paragraph (1) a certification under subsection (c) with respect to the Republic of Belarus and a joint resolution of disapproval is not enacted during the 90- day period described in that paragraph, the President may, subject to the provisions of chapter 1 of title IV of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2431 et seq.), grant nondiscriminatory tariff treatment (normal trade relations) to the products of the Republic of Belarus.

(1) specifies the action proposed to be taken pursuant to the certification and whether such action is pursuant to subsection (a)(1) or (b)(1) of this section; and

(2) contains a determination of the President that the Russian Federation or the Republic of Belarus (or both)--

(A) has withdrawn its forces and ceased all acts of aggression against Ukraine;

(B) poses no immediate threat of aggression to any North Atlantic Treaty Organization ally or partner; and

(C) recognizes a free and independent Ukraine, including with respect to the ability of its people to choose their own government.

(d) Joint Resolution of Disapproval.--

(1) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term

``joint resolution of disapproval'' means only a joint resolution--

(A) which does not have a preamble;

(B) the title of which is as follows: ``Joint resolution disapproving the President's certification under section 5(c) of the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act.''; and

(C) the matter after the resolving clause of which is as follows: ``That Congress disapproves the certification of the President under section 5(c) of the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act, submitted to Congress on ___'', the blank space being filled in with the appropriate date.

(2) Introduction in the house of representatives.--During a period of 5 legislative days beginning on the date that a certification under section 5(c) is submitted to Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the House of Representatives by the majority leader or the minority leader.

(3) Introduction in the senate.--During a period of 5 days on which the Senate is in session beginning on the date that a certification under section 5(c) is submitted to Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval may be introduced in the Senate by the majority leader (or the majority leader's designee) or the minority leader (or the minority leader's designee).

(4) Floor consideration in the house of representatives.--

(5) Consideration in the senate.--

(A) Committee referral.--A joint resolution of disapproval introduced in the Senate shall be referred to the Committee on Finance.

(7) Rules of the house of representatives and senate.--This subsection is enacted by Congress--

SEC. 6. COOPERATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY AT THE WORLD TRADE

ORGANIZATION.

The United States Trade Representative shall use the voice and influence of the United States at the WTO to--

(1) condemn the recent aggression in Ukraine;

(2) encourage other WTO members to suspend trade concessions to the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus;

(3) consider further steps with the view to suspend the Russian Federation's participation in the WTO; and

(4) seek to halt the accession process of the Republic of Belarus at the WTO and cease accession-related work.

SEC. 7. REAUTHORIZATION OF GLOBAL MAGNITSKY HUMAN RIGHTS

ACCOUNTABILITY ACT.

Section 1265(a) of the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act (subtitle F of title XII of Public Law 114-328; 22 U.S.C. 2656 note) is amended by striking ``6 years'' and inserting ``12 years''.

SEC. 8. ENERGY SECURITY PLAN.

The Natural Gas Act is amended by inserting after section 3A (15 U.S.C. 717b-1) the following:

``energy security plan

``Sec. 3B. Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this section, and biennially thereafter, the President shall transmit to Congress an energy security plan which shall include--

``(1) an evaluation of United States crude oil, petroleum product, and natural gas imports and exports;

``(2) an energy security risk assessment, by country of origin, of importing crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas to the United States; and

``(3) strategies, including changes to Federal policies and regulations, to encourage increased domestic production of crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas in order to offset any amounts of crude oil, petroleum products, and natural gas imported to the United States from Russia.''.

SEC. 9. KEYSTONE XL AUTHORIZATION.

(a) Authorization.--TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P., may construct, connect, operate, and maintain the pipeline facilities at the international border of the United States and Canada at Phillips County, Montana, for the import of oil from Canada to the United States described in the Presidential Permit of March 29, 2019 (84 Fed. Reg. 13101).

(b) No Presidential Permit Required.--No Presidential permit (or similar permit) under Executive Order 13867 (3 U.S.C. 301 note; relating to the issuance of permits with respect to facilities and land transportation crossings at the international boundaries of the United States), Executive Order 12038 (42 U.S.C. 7151 note; relating to the transfer of certain functions to the Secretary of Energy), Executive Order 10485 (15 U.S.C. 717b note; relating to the performance of functions respecting electric power and natural gas facilities located on United States borders), or any other Executive order shall be required for the construction, connection, operation, or maintenance of the pipeline facilities described in subsection (a).

SEC. 10. ADVANCING UNITED STATES GLOBAL LEADERSHIP.

Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b) is amended--

(1) by striking subsections (a) through (c);

(2) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections

(a) and (b), respectively;

(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (c), and moving such subsection after subsection (b), as so redesignated;

(4) in subsection (a), as so redesignated, by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows: ``(1) The Commission shall have the exclusive authority to approve or deny an application for the siting, construction, expansion, or operation of a facility to export natural gas from the United States to a foreign country or import natural gas from a foreign country, including an LNG terminal. Except as specifically provided in this Act, nothing in this Act is intended to affect otherwise applicable law related to any Federal agency's authorities or responsibilities related to facilities to import or export natural gas, including LNG terminals.''; and

(5) by adding at the end the following new subsection:

``(d)(1) Nothing in this Act limits the authority of the President under the Constitution, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), part B of title II of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6271 et seq.), the Trading With the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. 4301 et seq.), or any other provision of law that imposes sanctions on a foreign person or foreign government (including any provision of law that prohibits or restricts United States persons from engaging in a transaction with a sanctioned person or government), including a country that is designated as a state sponsor of terrorism, to prohibit imports or exports.

``(2) In this subsection, the term `state sponsor of terrorism' means a country the government of which the Secretary of State determines has repeatedly provided support for international terrorism pursuant to--

``(A) section 1754(c)(1)(A) of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (50 U.S.C. 4318(c)(1)(A));

``(B) section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

(22 U.S.C. 2371);

``(C) section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2780); or

``(D) any other provision of law.''.

SEC. 11. PROHIBITION ON MORATORIA OF NEW ENERGY LEASES ON

CERTAIN FEDERAL LAND AND ON WITHDRAWAL OF

FEDERAL LAND FROM ENERGY DEVELOPMENT.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:

(1) Critical mineral.--The term ``critical mineral'' means any mineral included on the list of critical minerals published in the notice of the Secretary of the Interior entitled ``Final List of Critical Minerals 2018'' (83 Fed. Reg. 23295 (May 18, 2018)).

(2) Federal land.--

(A) In general.--The term ``Federal land'' means--

(i) National Forest System land;

(ii) public lands (as defined in section 103 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702));

(iii) the outer Continental Shelf (as defined in section 2 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331)); and

(iv) land managed by the Secretary of Energy.

(B) Inclusion.--The term ``Federal land'' includes land described in clauses (i) through (iv) of subparagraph (A) for which the rights to the surface estate or subsurface estate are owned by a non-Federal entity.

(3) President.--The term ``President'' means the President or any designee, including--

(A) the Secretary of Agriculture;

(B) the Secretary of Energy; and

(b) Prohibitions.--

(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President shall not carry out any action that would prohibit or substantially delay the issuance of any of the following on Federal land, unless such an action has been authorized by an Act of Congress:

(A) New oil and gas leases, drill permits, approvals, or authorizations.

(B) New coal leases, permits, approvals, or authorizations.

(D) New critical minerals leases, permits, approvals, or authorizations.

(2) Prohibition on withdrawal.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President shall not withdraw any Federal land from forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws, location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, or disposition under laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal leasing or mineral materials unless the withdrawal has been authorized by an Act of Congress.

SEC. 12. OIL AND NATURAL GAS LEASING.

(a) Onshore Lease Sales.--

(1) Requirement to immediately resume onshore oil and gas lease sales.--

(A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior (referred to in this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall immediately resume oil and gas lease sales in compliance with the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.).

(B) Requirement.--The Secretary shall ensure that any oil and gas lease sale under subparagraph (A) is conducted immediately on completion of all applicable scoping, public comment, and environmental analysis requirements under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).

(2) Annual lease sales.--

(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in accordance with the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.), beginning in fiscal year 2022, the Secretary shall conduct a minimum of 4 oil and natural gas lease sales annually in each of the following States:

(i) Wyoming.

(ii) New Mexico.

(iii) Colorado.

(iv) Utah.

(v) Montana.

(vi) North Dakota.

(vii) Oklahoma.

(viii) Nevada.

(ix) Any other State in which there is land available for oil and natural gas leasing under that Act.

(B) Requirement.--In conducting a lease sale under subparagraph (A) in a State described in that subparagraph, the Secretary shall offer all parcels eligible for oil and gas development under the resource management plan in effect for the State.

(C) Replacement sales.--If, for any reason, a lease sale under subparagraph (A) for a calendar year is canceled, delayed, or deferred, including for a lack of eligible parcels, the Secretary shall conduct a replacement sale during the same calendar year.

(b) Offshore Lease Sales.--

(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct all lease sales described in the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program (November 2016) that have not been conducted as of the date of enactment of this Act by not later than December 31, 2022.

(2) Gulf of mexico region annual lease sales.-- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning in fiscal year 2022, the Secretary shall conduct a minimum of 2 region-wide oil and natural gas lease sales annually in the Gulf of Mexico Region of the outer Continental Shelf, which shall include the following areas described the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program (November 2016):

(A) The Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area.

(B) The Western Gulf of Mexico Planning Area.

(3) Alaska region annual lease sales.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, beginning in fiscal year 2022, the Secretary shall conduct a minimum of 2 region-wide oil and natural gas lease sales annually in the Alaska Region of the outer Continental Shelf, as described the 2017-2022 Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Proposed Final Program

(November 2016).

(4) Requirements.--In conducting lease sales under paragraphs (2) and (3) the Secretary shall--

(A) issue leases to the highest responsible qualified bidder or bidders; and

(B) include in each lease sale all unleased areas that are not subject to restrictions as of the date of the lease sale.

(5) Outer continental shelf oil and gas leasing program.-- Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1344) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a), in the first sentence of the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking ``subsections (c) and

(d) of this section'' and inserting ``subsections (c) through

(f)'';

(B) by redesignating subsections (f) through (h) as subsections (g) through (i), respectively; and

``(f) Subsequent Leasing Programs.--

``(1) In general.--Not later than 36 months after conducting the first lease sale under an oil and gas leasing program prepared pursuant to this section, the Secretary shall begin preparing the subsequent oil and gas leasing program under this section.

``(2) Requirement.--Each subsequent oil and gas leasing program under this section shall be approved not later than 180 days before the expiration of the previous oil and gas leasing program.''.

SEC. 13. STRATEGIC PRODUCTION RESPONSE PLAN.

Section 161 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6241) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

``(k) Plan.--

``(1) In general.--Except in the case of a severe energy supply interruption described in subsection (d), the Secretary may not execute the first drawdown of petroleum products in the Reserve after the date of enactment of this subsection, whether through sale, exchange, or loan, until the Secretary has developed a plan to increase the percentage of Federal lands (including submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf) under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Secretary of Defense leased for oil and gas production by the same percentage as the percentage of petroleum in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve that is to be drawn down in that first and subsequent drawdowns, subject to the limitation under paragraph (2).

``(2) Limitation.--The plan required by paragraph (1) shall not provide for a total increase in the percentage of Federal lands described in paragraph (1) leased for oil and gas production in excess of 10 percent.

``(3) Consultation.--The Secretary shall prepare the plan required by paragraph (1) in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Secretary of Defense.''.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XIX, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit.

The question is on the motion to recommit.

The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.

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

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(s) of House Resolution 8, the yeas and nays are ordered.

Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question are postponed.

____________________

SOURCE: Congressional Record Vol. 168, No. 42(1), Congressional Record Vol. 168, No. 42(2)

The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.

House Representatives' salaries are historically higher than the median US income.

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

State of California

!RECEIVE ALERTS

The next time we write about any of these orgs, we’ll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Sign-up

DONATE

Help support the Metric Media Foundation's mission to restore community based news.

Donate

MORE NEWS

Politics

Rep. Correa votes ‘No’ on bill to ban the Federal Reserve from establishing a Central Bank Digital Currency

Politics

Which California political committees received the most contributions during March?

Politics

Who made the biggest political contributions during week ending April 20?

Politics

Which political committees received the most in contributions during week ending April 20?

Politics

Who made the biggest political contributions during week ending Feb. 24?

North OC Times