PA-08*: January-June 2018
House of Representatives
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick’s VOTES
A note on using this guide…
This is a mid-year update on the 2017 Fitzpatrick votes guide published at the end of last year.
Please don’t be daunted by the length!
Most readers will want to review the first few pages, where you will
find assessments divided by topic (like Environment, Human Rights, Information
Technology) followed by a table of individual votes that fall under each topic.
For those who may want more information, each bill number contains a clickable
link that will bring you to a detailed summary. Once you have reviewed the
summary, you can click on the “back to table” link to return you to the topic
assessment section.
This guide does not contain every vote taken by the House of
Representatives. Procedural votes and
post office renaming bills have been purposely excluded. But it does cover all
votes recapped in the 2018 Member of Congress Reports to date.
I hope this helps inform your letter writing, canvassing, Member of Congress
calls, and any other resistance activities in preparation for the 2018
election! If you have any questions
about this content, please do not hesitate to contact me. And don’t forget to keep reading the weekly
MoCTrack reports to keep up-to-date on new legislation and votes as we head
into the election season.
-Kierstyn P. Zolfo
KierstynPZ@gmail.com
MoCTrack Report editor and contributor
PA Together - PA Statewide Indivisible
* On the usage of “PA-08” - until the 116th Congress goes into session
in January 2019, we still live in Congressional district PA-08. The current Congressional election is for the
representation of the new PA-01, but Brian Fitzpatrick still currently
represents PA-08. Thus we will use that
designation until the new district map goes into
effect for representation purposes in January 2019.
|
Budget/Taxes/
Appropriations bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Continuing resolution - funding the
government for 3 weeks |
01-18-18 |
230-197 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Continuing resolution - funding the
government for 6 weeks |
02-06-18 |
245-182 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
"Omnibus spending
package" funding the government for 6 months |
03-20-18 |
211-207 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
reconciling the Senate version of
the 6 month funding bill |
03-22-18 |
256-167 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
"Rescission" bill to cut
some spending (half from CHIP) from the recently passed omnibus spending
bill, at Trump's request |
06-07-18 |
210-206 |
No |
No |
|
|
The Farm Bill, with work
requirements for SNAP |
05-18-18 |
198-213 |
No |
No |
|
|
The Farm Bill, still with work
requirements for SNAP |
06-21-18 |
213-211 |
No |
No |
|
|
Defense appropriations through
09/30/18 |
01-30-18 |
250-166 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Defense authorization for 2019 |
05-24-18 |
350-66 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Defense appropriations for 2019 |
06-28-18 |
359-49 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Environmental
Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
lower clean air standards, allows
higher mercury emissions |
03-08-18 |
215-189 |
No |
No |
|
|
uses flawed study that would harm
endangered animals for ue in creating hydro power
plan |
04-25-18 |
225-189 |
No |
No |
|
Healthcare
Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Lets veterans leave the VA
system to receive covered healthcare elsewhere |
05-16-18 |
347-70 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
School safety
Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Post-Parkland response, lots on
reporting and security, NOTHING about guns |
03-14-18 |
407-10 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Deregulation |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
lets payday lenders and other
high-interest loan providers bypass usury laws in states |
02-14-18 |
245-181 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
lets big banks
increase their borrowing and reduce the private capital held to protect the
public against megabank failures |
02-27-18 |
245-169 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
chips away at the CFPB ability to
work for consumers, by adding more review burdens |
03-06-18 |
264-143 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Forces government regulators (all
areas) to report on new rules implemented in the last seven years and tailor
them to limit burdens on industry |
03-14-18 |
247-169 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Gives exemptions from reporting
requirements that used to go to small, community banks to larger banks |
03-15-18 |
246-170 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
adds a new layer of appellate
process to the CFPB so banks can appeal supervisory decisions |
03-15-18 |
283-133 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
exempts brokerage and investment
firms (NBFIs - non bank financial institutions) from more than 1 stress test
per year |
03-20-18 |
395-19 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
reduces the number of Dodd-Frank
mandated stress tests for banks |
04-11-18 |
245-174 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Removes auto-lenders from CFPB
anti-discriminatory oversight |
05-08-18 |
234-175 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Reduces federal oversight of big
corporate mergers, and forces the FTC to oppose mergers through the courts
(as opposed to administrative review) |
05-09-18 |
230-185 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Changes regulatory oversight for
mid-size ($50-$250 billion) banks and exempts them from the Volcker Rule |
05-22-18 |
258-159 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Removing FDA oversight into access
to trial drugs for the terminally ill |
03-21-18 |
267-149 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Removing FDA oversight into access
to trial drugs for the terminally ill |
05-22-18 |
250-169 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Government
Reform/Procedural Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Tables the impeachment of Donald
Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors |
01-19-18 |
355-66 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Tables the censuring of Rep. Gosar, who called ICE on DACA recipients invited to the
State of the Union |
02-06-18 |
231-187 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
A Balanced Budget amendment (needs
2/3 vote to pass) |
04-12-18 |
233-184 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Tables the creation of an inquiry
into Speaker Ryan forcing the House Chaplain to resign |
05-08-18 |
223-182 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Forces the Justice Department to
turn over sensitive materials to the House Intelligence Committee (which
could damage Rosenstein and the Mueller Investigation |
06-28-18 |
226-183 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Human
Rights/Civil Liberties Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
FISA Reauthorization rewrite, to
reform the secretive warrantless spy program |
01-11-18 |
183-233 |
No |
no party line vote |
|
|
Full FISA reauthorization |
01-11-18 |
256-164 |
Yes |
no party line vote |
|
|
Extends mandatory reporting
requirements for sexual abuse to additional professional classes |
01-29-18 |
406-3 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Guts provisions of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, limits rights to sue businesses who do not comply with
accessibility rules |
02-15-18 |
225-192 |
No |
No |
|
|
Publicly reports personally
identifiable information of people in pretrial programs who have NOT been
convicted of crimes |
05-09-18 |
221-197 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Makes attacks on law enforcement
officials and first responders a hate crime |
05-06-18 |
382-35 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Opioid Crisis
Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Creates a process for faster
classification of synthetic drugs |
06-15-18 |
239-142 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Lets hospices and caregivers
destroy unused opiates |
06-12-18 |
398-0 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Awards grants to fund model opioid
treatment centers |
06-12-18 |
383-12 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Sets aside public housing vouchers
for people in recovery |
06-14-18 |
230-173 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Creates new standards for US Postal
Service screening for drugs |
06-14-18 |
352-52 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Creates an interagency task force
to help families and kids impacted by opioid abuse |
06-13-18 |
409-8 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Changes rules for health records
disclosures related to substance use disorders |
06-20-18 |
357-57 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Increases Medicaid coverage for
inpatient, outpatient and transitioning care for substance use disorders |
06-20-18 |
261-155 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Locates outlier over-subscribers of
opiates and offers them pain management training |
06-19-18 |
voice vote |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Sets up a new program for disposal
of unused opiates |
06-19-18 |
342-13 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
|
Comprehensive plan including
changes to Medicare and Medicaid to support screening, treatment and research |
06-22-18 |
396-14 |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Immigration
Bills |
Topic |
Date |
Vote result |
Fitzpatrick
Vote |
with GOP? |
|
Trump-supported immigration plan,
deeply conservative |
06-21-18 |
193-231 |
No |
No |
|
|
So-called "compromise"
bill, but only a compromise between moderate and xenophobic wings of the GOP |
06-27-18 |
121-302 |
Yes |
No |
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h33
The
Republican-controlled Congress has been unable to create, negotiate and pass a
budget since the last one ran out in September. They have passed short-term ‘continuing
resolutions’ (CRs) three times since then. The
latest CR legislation, passed right before the holiday recess, was due to run
out on 01/19/18. Any bill created to fund the government past that deadline
would need to have some level of Democratic support, as it would need to
achieve the filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate. Democrats have made clear
that to gain their support, any funding legislation
would need to include a solution for the Dreamers as well as reauthorization
for the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The infamous 01/11/18 immigration meeting, at
which the president uttered the now-notorious racist profanity, was an attempt
to negotiate a part of the solution to this situation.
As the deadline
approached, the House Leadership decided to set aside any attempt to pass a
long-term fix, but instead pushed yet another short-term CR (this one through mid February). To entice Democrats to support it, the GOP
leadership included six years of funding for CHIP. In a devious move, they
conspicuously left the Dreamers out of the CR, forcing a difficult choice on
the Democrats. This bill passed the House on 01/18/18, 230-197. Fitzpatrick voted YES. The vote did not split along purely party
lines, as 6 Democrats voted YES, and 11 Republicans voted NO. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr695
Originally this bill
was to establish a national criminal history background check system and
criminal history review program for people who have access to children, the
elderly or individuals with disabilities in the course of their work. But in the past weeks the bill was amended to
become the vehicle for passing the defense appropriations for the fiscal year
ending 09/30/18. It came to the floor of the House for a vote on 01/30/18 and
passed 250-166. Fitzpatrick voted YES. It
now goes back to the Senate because of the changes made to its content. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h60
There are so many
potential nicknames for this situation: Yet Another
Continuing Resolution (CR), or perhaps Fast Five–the Littlest Shutdown?
Regardless of how the parties are spinning it, several facts are unassailable:
the government shut down again because one senator got feisty and
obstructionist, the GOP-led Congress just failed to pass a long-term funding
deal for the fifth consecutive time, and the Dreamers are still in limbo. Let’s
break down what happened.
We are all getting
used to the idea that the leaders in the Congress like to take already-pending
bills and then tack on other materials. This bill started out as the “Honoring
Hometown Heroes Act,” but the Bipartisan Budget was pasted onto it. The
additions would fund the government from February 9, 2018, through March 23,
2018. It also added on $80 billion in
disaster recovery assistance, $6 billion in funding toward opioid and mental
health treatment, and $7 billion in funding and a two-year reauthorization for
community health centers among other
provisions. The first House vote on this funding
measure was taken on 02/06/18, and it passed 245-182. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
After five
consecutive short-term spending bills since last September, the Congress has
finally passed a bill to fund the government for 2018. As this is from nearly
two weeks ago, it feels like ancient history. As such, I’ll minimize the
recapping. If you would like to read more about the bill’s contents, see this Vox explainer. If you want to learn
more about Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and his attempt to stall the bill, see this
article from the New York Times. And for more on President Trump’s unfulfilled threat to veto the bill,
please read this Slate
piece.
On Mar. 20, 2018,
the House took its first
vote, to consider the bill for no more than
one hour and to disallow any amendments. This passed narrowly, 211–207. Most of
the Republican “Freedom Caucus” joined with all but one Democrat (Rep.
Fitzpatrick’s “bipartisan
valentine, #CupidOnTheHill" Rep Kyrsten Sinema
[D-Ariz.]) to oppose this maneuver. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
After the Senate
passed a revised version, the newly revised 2,200-plus-page omnibus spending
bill then came before the House. That vote was also held on Mar. 22, 2018, and it passed 256–167. The vote breakdown was
surprising: Democrats voted 111 for and 77 against, while Republicans voted 145
for and 90 against. Fitzpatrick voted
YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h205
This is the “Farm Bill,” a massive piece of legislation
that gets worked on every five years or so. It sets subsidy levels for
agricultural products, addresses crop insurance and covers the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps. This
iteration of the farm bill was a giant departure from farm bills past. Usually
working on the bill is a long-negotiated process with a bipartisan result. This
time, the GOP dropped a fully formed bill on the House Agriculture Committee —
one that included work requirements for SNAP. The
Washington
Post
reports that, in response to that provision, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi
said, “Republicans are taking food out of the mouths of families struggling to
make ends meet.” The run-up to the House vote on the bill turned into a scrap
over immigration and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The GOP’s
so-called “freedom caucus” demanded that a deeply conservative immigration bill
be brought to the floor for debate as the price for their support for the farm
bill. The same Washington Post
article notes that, “The House leadership put the bill on the floor gambling it
would pass despite unanimous Democratic opposition. They negotiated with
members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus up to the last minutes. But
their gamble failed.” The vote was taken on May 18, 2018, with a final result
of 198–213. Fitzpatrick voted NO. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h284
This bill is also
known as the Farm Bill. It is the measure passed every five years that sets the
framework for crop insurance, subsidies and the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps. A massive piece
of legislation, the bill contains $860 billion in funding and allotments. Even
the summary is 122 pages long. This bill is usually one of the last bastions of
bipartisanship, and the result of months of negotiation from the Agriculture
Committee. This time, however, it was introduced and passed out of committee
with no Democratic input or support. The main sticking point was a work
requirement for SNAP that would affect between 5 and
7 million households that currently receive the benefit. It is believed that
this new provision, along with tighter eligibility requirements, would cause
around 400,000 households to lose food assistance altogether. The bill was
brought up for a vote back in May and failed, 198–213. No Democrats supported
the original version of the Farm Bill. Its failure fell on the shoulders of the
Freedom Caucus, the deeply conservative wing of the Republican party.
In the immediate
aftermath of the failed vote on the Goodlatte One immigration
bill, Speaker Ryan pivoted to bring up the Farm Bill again. In the weeks since
the initial failure, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) secured enough support for the
H.R. 2 version of the Farm Bill to move it forward. It came up for a vote on
June 21, 2018, and it passed, 213–211. Fitzpatrick
voted NO. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h230
This bill authorized
$717 billion in defense spending for 2019. While the final vote makes it appear
that this was a non-controversial vote, the amendment process was heated. In an article titled “House easily passes $717B defense authorization bill”, The Hill reports that “...prior to the
vote, Democrats argued for amendments eventually voted down on immigration, gun
control and limiting nuclear spending, but ultimately backed the bill over
readiness concerns.” Another issue
covered was President Trump’s coveted military parade. USA
Today reports:
The
House defense bill gives its endorsement to a military parade as a way of
expressing appreciation and admiration for the men and women in uniform. The
legislation authorizes spending for the display of small arms and munitions,
but it does place some restrictions on which hardware can be put on parade.
Operational units and equipment would be barred from taking part if the Defense
secretary believes their use will hamper military readiness.
What’s
more, the bill says, the focus of the parade should be the nation’s veterans —
many of whom served in Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan but have been
“denied the public display of gratitude their service deserves.”
On May 24, 2018, the
bill passed in a 351–66 vote. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h243
Back in 1974 the
Congress passed the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act,
legislation that allows a President to request that Congress rescind funds from
an appropriations bill that has already passed (for more on rescission, page
down to this week’s “Learning about Legislation” section). The President sent a rescission
request to Congress this past May. The package would take back about $15 billion from the $1.3 trillion omnibus
spending package passed earlier this year.
While that works out to a little more than 1% being taken back, the big
problem is that almost half of the funds are being clawed back from the
Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
The bill narrowly passed with a 210-206 vote taken on 06/7/18. Fitzpatrick
voted NO. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h313
The House voted this
week on a 2019 defense appropriations bill that will cost $675 billion. Included in this package is funding for two
new aircraft carriers, 93 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, and 12 new Navy
ships. The bill also calls for
increasing the staffing of the armed forces by 15,600 active-duty and Reserve
troops this year and giving a pay raise of 2.6% to personnel. During the amendment process Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) proposed an amendment that would,
according to POLITICO, “bar funding for the Pentagon to procure goods and services from ZTE
and Huawei, which Democrats and Republicans alike have called a risk to
national security.” The same article further explains:
The
Trump administration stirred up controversy earlier this month when it struck a
deal with ZTE to lift sanctions on the company. And since then, lawmakers have
sought to limit the companies, which have ties to the Chinese government.
Defense policy legislation passed by the House and Senate contain varied bans
on the Pentagon and other government agencies doing business with ZTE and
Huawei.
That amendment
passed by a voice vote. Other amendments related to over $1 billion in
additional funding for a new submarine, failed. The final bill passed on
06/28/18 with a vote of 359-49. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h101
This bill was
introduced by Rep. Ken Rothfus (R-Pa.) early last
year. It lowers clean air standards for plants that use coal refuse to produce
energy, and lets them emit higher levels of mercury than was previously
permitted. This bill is one chapter in a much a longer story about the EPA’s
efforts to regulate toxic power plant emissions, the energy industry’s desire
to evade those regulations, the court system’s rulings on this topic, and an
industry-friendly Congress legislating away environmental protections. If you
would like more detail, this Sierra Club article titled “Ideology, Common Sense, and Poisoned Children” recaps
the saga concisely. On Mar. 8, 2018, the
Congress passed this dangerous reduction in air quality with a 215-189
vote. Fitzpatrick voted NO. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h153
This is a bill that
looks mundane, but actually has at its center the choice between protecting
endangered animals or promoting hydro-power. On its
face, the bill indicates that the power authority in the area must maintain
some dam facilities in a manner consistent with a particular biological study.
The Capital Press, an agricultural website for the northwest, explains the issues at the
heart of this bill:
...it
forces use of a 2014 biological opinion that was found to be “flawed” by a
federal judge. In May 2016, U.S. District Judge Michael Simon ruled that the
biological opinion did not satisfy requirements of the Endangered Species Act
and violated the National Environmental Policy Act. The court ordered the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation and Bonneville Power Administration to conduct
a review of the river system to develop a new opinion, slated to be in place
September 2021.
This bill would
provide inadequate protection for endangered animals in the area for three to
four years. In a vote taken on April 25, 2018, this bill passed the House,
225–189. Fitzpatrick voted NO. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h189
This bills had gone through several
non-descriptive names, but it actually addresses giving veterans access to
covered medical care outside the Veterans’ Affairs (VA) system. The bill refers
to a “Veterans Community Care Program,” which simply means that veterans could
use hospitals, medical services and extended care services that are not part of
the VA, but the VA would handle payment and “the establishment of a mechanism
to receive medical records from non-Department providers.” President Trump is a
vocal supporter of this change to the VA system. Earlier this month he
tweeted, “Choice is vital, but the program
needs work & is running out of $. Congress must fix Choice Program by
Memorial Day so VETS can get the care they deserve. I will sign immediately!” A
number of veterans groups support this initiative. Those who object to it seem
to do so on the same grounds as objections to school
vouchers/charter schools; they fear that a program like this will reduce the
funding given to the struggling public system, which will cause more difficulty
fixing the current problems. The bill, which already passed the Senate via
unanimous consent in March, came to the floor for a vote on May 16, 2018. It
passed, 347–70. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr3299
This bill was
introduced in the House last July by Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC). The Republicans have presented this as a bill that will help address “market
uncertainty” caused by a circuit court decision about lending rates. In
reality, the bill “makes it easier for payday lenders and other nonbanks to use
rent-abank arrangements to ignore state interest rate
caps and make high-rate loans,” notes a letter sent to Congress in opposition to this bill, signed by 152 state and
national organizations, from groups as
diverse as Habitat for Humanity to the National Consumer Law Center to the
Philadelphia Unemployment Project. They
argue that this bill makes it possible for lenders to ignore the maximum
interest rate set by a state law by selling the loan to an out-of-state lender
in whichever state has the most lenient banking laws.
This bill came up for a vote on the House floor on Feb. 14, 2018. It passed with a final vote of 245-181, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h89
This bill was
introduced in November by Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer
(R-Mo.). It relates to some of the regulations on banks that were put into
place after the 2007-2008 financial crisis to prevent
a future one. At that time, some financial institutions collapsed was that they
were over-leveraged — that is, they did not have enough liquid assets relative
to the risk they had accrued. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act mandated “operation risk capital requirements” to prevent such
collapses. When H.R. 4296 was introduced, a American Bankers
Association Banking Journal article referred to this bill as “regulatory relief” that “would prohibit the
establishment of operational risk capital requirements,” basically nullifying
the portion of Dodd-Frank that would prevent financial collapse due to
over-leverage positions. The Americans for Financial Reform wrote a letter opposing H.R. 4296, in which they said the proposed new law “is a
transparent effort to boost big bank profits by pressuring regulators to weaken
public protections. If it were passed, major Wall Street banks could increase
their borrowing and reduce the private capital they hold to protect the
financial system and the public against the effects of a megabank
failure.” As one might expect from this
anti-regulatory GOP Congress, the bill passed in a 245-169 vote on Feb. 27,
2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h95
This bill was
introduced by Rep. Kenneth Loudermilk (R-Ga.) in
December. The bill creates a framework where the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau (CFPB) must
review its regulations every seven years with an eye towards eliminating overly
burdensome ones. In a letter in support of this bill, the Consumer Bankers Association applauded the
Congress for making the CFPB “identify redundant or unduly burdensome
regulatory requirements imposed on depository institutions, increasing the reviews
of these rules from a 10-year to a 7-year cycle will help regulators modify,
streamline, and repeal outdated regulations.”
While reviewing legislation is not inherently nefarious, with this
particular Congress and its ardent anti-regulatory stance, coupled with the
banking industry’s support, one does need to be concerned that this chips away
at the CFPB’s ability to protect consumers and could drain away protective
resources and redirect them towards regulatory review. This bill passed 264-143
on 03/06/18, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h108
According to the
Library of Congress, this bill requires government regulatory agencies to
“tailor any regulatory actions so as to limit burdens on the institutions
involved” and to report to Congress on any such regulatory actions. That
reporting requirement is retroactive and forces the agency to report on the
actions taken in the past seven years. This bill came up for a vote on Mar. 14,
2018, and passed, 247–169. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h110
This bill raises the
minimum rate under which some securities are exempt from reporting requirements.
On Mar. 15, 2018, this passed in a 246–170 vote, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h112
This bill changes
banking review processes at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). It
“requires the establishment of an independent internal agency appellate process
at the CFPB for the review of supervisory determinations made at institutions
supervised by the CFPB.” On Mar. 15,
2018, it passed in a 283–133 vote, and Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h119
This bill changes
the Dodd-Frank financial regulation package to exempt “nonbank financial
institutions” (NBFIs, i.e., brokerage and investment firms) from undergoing
stress tests more than once per year. This passed in a 395–19 vote on Mar. 20,
2018, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h137
This bill, introduced
by Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), is a continuation of the
banking regulatory push that resulted in the passage of several related bills
last week. In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank bill of
2010 mandated that certain banks undergo regular stress
tests. A stress test is a procedure where both
the bank’s risk management group and the Federal Reserve performs
an analysis “under unfavorable economic scenarios designed to determine whether
a bank has enough capital to withstand the impact of adverse developments.”
This bill reduces the number of stress tests the banks must perform. In
response to this bill, Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Ca.) noted, “When we crafted Dodd-Frank, we mandated these stress tests and put in
place other enhanced prudential guardrails for large banks to not only prevent
damage to our economy but also help grow our economy. And they are working. But
H.R. 4293 weakens the rigor and frequency of those stress tests, a move that
simply makes no sense.” The bill passed
in a 245–174 vote on April 11, 2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h139
This bill was
introduced by Rep. French Hill (R-Ark.).
The Volcker
Rule, named after a former chairman of the
Federal Reserve, is a part of the Dodd-Frank bill that prevents depository
banks (the kind most of us use) from investing in hedge funds, private equity
groups or other risky enterprises. The rule was put into place to curb some of
the excesses that led to the banking crisis. This bill exempts banks with less
than $10 billion in assets from the rule altogether, and gives all rule-making
authority over the Volcker Rule to the Federal Reserve, an agency led by a
political appointee. The American
Bankers Association lauded the bill, saying it
“provides proper safeguards while streamlining the process." Their
executive vice president, James Ballantine, added, “this
much needed reform is long overdue.” The bill passed in a 300–104 vote on
04/13/18. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h171
If the long name of
that legislation sounds somewhat familiar, it is because this resolution was
fast-tracked after a vote in the Senate a few weeks ago. At the time I noted
that this is a somewhat complicated path for legislation and warrants a bit of
procedural background. In 2013 the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
introduced a rule that limited discriminatory auto lending practices. Then, in
late 2017 the Government Accountability Office ruled that although this rule
had been in effect for four years, the Congress could exert oversight of the
rule via the Congressional Review Act. That’s the tool they used to get rid of
Obama-era laws related to gun
control and wildlife
protection. Senator Toomey was active in supporting
the current effort to keep the CFPB from continuing to implement this
anti-discriminatory rule. In the
statements on his website, Toomey refers to the CFPB’s action regarding auto lending as
“overreaching” and “overstepping.” The Senate voted on April 18, 2018, to quash
this CFPB regulation in a 51–47 vote. Casey
voted NO and Toomey voted YES. This passed the House on May 8, 2018, with a
234–175 vote. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h177
This bill was
introduced last April by Rep. Karen Handel (R-Ga.), the winner of last year’s
special election against Jon Ossoff. This is a
seriously wonky bit of legislation (for all the nerdy details, see this piece) that would reduce government oversight into big corporate mergers. It
would also require the Federal Trade Commission to oppose proposed mergers
through federal court instead of just performing a quicker and less expensive
administrative review. This kind of bill makes it easier for monopolies to
flourish. The Open Markets Institute, a center-left think-tank that spun off of
the New America Foundation to address anti-trust issues, sent a spirited
letter opposing the bill to the House. It said,
in part:
After
close review, the Open Markets Institute has concluded that the bill would
dangerously reduce the Federal Trade Commission’s ability to protect American
citizens from concentrations of power that threaten them politically and
economically. Worse, it would do so exactly at a moment when we need a stronger
and more active FTC… Increasing monopolization is a main driver of destructive
trends ranging from increasing regional and personal inequality to the loss of
privacy and the erosion of institutions essential to democracy. Consolidation
and monopolization affect every aspect of our political economy... H.R. 5645
would be a major step in the wrong direction. It would curtail the FTC’s
ability to address such consolidation just when this authority is most
essential.
The House voted on
this bill on May 9, 2018, and it passed, 230–185. As would be expected for a pro-corporate,
anti-regulation measure, Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h216
This bill passed the
Senate earlier this year. The bill was introduced by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho),
who chairs the Senate Banking Committee. It is a highly divisive piece of
legislation: Supporters say it will help community banks struggling under
Dodd-Frank regulations, while opponents say that it chips away at the
protections put in place to protect us from future financial meltdowns.
GovTrack provided a
useful summary of the bill, which:
● Permits
banks with between $50–$250 billion in assets to run with
less regulatory oversight from the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC).
● Exempts
banks with less than $10 billion in assets from some rules entirely, most
notably the so-called Volcker Rule, which bans banks from making some forms of
speculative trades.
● Requires the Federal Reserve to take bank size into account
when crafting regulations, rather than writing “one size fits all” regulations,
as critics contend the Fed has been doing for the past decade.
● Allows huge foreign banks to avoid regulations by tallying
their U.S. assets in ways that keep them under that $250 billion threshold. An
amendment offered by Democrats to close this loophole was rejected.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.) has been one of the bill’s most vocal critics. Politico
reports her saying that, “The people in Congress may have forgotten the crash
10 years ago, but I guarantee that people across this country have not
forgotten the pain that these giant banks caused. They do not want to see
Congress move toward deregulating these banks.” The same article said that Warren, “...accused her colleagues of backing the legislation
because of years of sustained bank lobbying in the wake of Dodd-Frank’s
enactment.” Moderate Democrats, especially
those in red states who are up for re-election this year, provided a different
perspective. In the run-up to the final vote, Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.) said
via CNN:
“After years of bipartisan work to advance regulatory relief for the community
banks and credit unions across Indiana, I'm pleased that the full Senate will
debate the legislative package I negotiated. This legislation would make it
easier for Hoosier families to gain access to mortgages and small businesses to
access capital, and it also includes important new consumer protections, such as
free credit freezes, in response to the Equifax data breach.” If you would like to read more about what
this bill could mean for consumers, please see this MarketWatch article titled “How the rollback of Obama-era financial regulations could affect
you.”
The bill came up for
a vote in the House on May 22, 2018, and passed, 258–159. Fitzpatrick voted YES.
President Trump has already signed it into law. The Philadelphia Inquirer commented on the passage of the bill in an article and said that it “...allowed Trump to fulfill his campaign pledge of
dismantling the landmark Dodd-Frank law.”
Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h121
This bill was
introduced by our own Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick. The idea behind the bill — to let
terminally ill patients have access to unapproved drugs that are still going
through trials at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) — sounds noble and
good. However, the FDA already has an extended access (compassionate use)
program, and more than
99 percent of those who apply to that program are granted access
to experimental treatments. Since the vast majority of people who want access
to these drugs can already get them through the FDA’s compassionate use
program, the practical purpose of the new bill is somewhat vague. Hundreds of
medical ethicists, patient advocates and doctors signed a
letter opposing the new right-to-try bill,
noting that “this legislation sells vulnerable patients and families false hope
at the expense of weakening the FDA’s critical role in making sure that all
Americans can have confidence in the safety and effectiveness of our medical
products.” The letter adds, “Because the FDA is not the obstacle to patient
access to investigational drugs and plays a vital role in ensuring proper
patient safeguards are in place, we implore the Committee to not pass
legislation that would remove the FDA from the initial authorization process
for accessing an investigational therapy outside of a clinical trial.” An additional
concern about this bill is that while it
indemnifies any drug manufacturers, sponsors, their agents and representatives
from legal liability from the use of experimental treatments, that
indemnification excludes treating doctors, medical assistants, nurses,
pharmacies — so big business is protected, but the individuals actually
treating patients are not. Despite these serious concerns, this bill passed on
Mar. 21, 2018, in a 267–149 vote. As might be assumed for a bill he sponsored, Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
Readers may wonder why this bill is placed here in deregulation as opposed to
healthcare. While the topic may be
access to pharmaceuticals in test phase, the ultimate goal of this bill is to
undermine the authority of the Food and Drug Administration, thus it fits in
with the general GOP deregulatory agenda.
Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h214
This issue has been
a focus of Representative Fitzpatrick’s legislative advocacy for the past year,
but this is not the bill that he authored. Right to Try
is a widely popular movement supported by many in the Trump administration, but
it does not hold up under close scrutiny. The Food and Drug Administration
already grants more than 98 percent of applications for access to experimental
pharmaceuticals under its Compassionate Use program. This bill would remove the
FDA protections from the process of obtaining investigational drugs that have
completed phase-one trials. Investigational drugs must go through three phases
of clinical trials before FDA will approve them. CBS News explained the problems with the bill in a piece titled “Right to try bill passes, but will it help terminally ill patients?”:
Despite
good intentions – and the legislation's name – right to try legislation grants
no rights. It would merely grant permission for a patient to try to get
experimental medication from a pharmaceutical company. Patients would be
allowed to try experimental drugs, but nothing in the legislation would make it
mandatory for pharmaceutical companies to provide these medications.
The
reasons for a company to withhold a drug are many. Giving access to
pre-approval drugs can be costly, particularly given the limited supply, and
almost no medical insurance will cover experimental treatments. Access to the
drugs will likely only be feasible for wealthy
Americans who can afford to pay for the treatment, as well as the consequences
of any negative side effects out of pocket.
Over a hundred
patient advocacy groups, medical provider associations and medical ethicists objected to this legislation. Art Caplan, director of the Division of Medical
Ethics at the New York University School of Medicine, summarizes the situation
best in an article from CNN titled
“Right-to-try' bill passes Congress,” observing, “...at the end of the day,
creating a world in which you say there's a right to try, if it's nothing more
than a right to beg a company, that right already exists, and you're really not
doing much to help anybody gain access to much of anything."
The bill passed with
a 250–169 vote on May 22, 2018. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h35
This resolution was introduced by Rep. Al Green (D-TX), who also
introduced the previous set of articles of impeachment that were voted upon
last fall (H. Res. 646). Both of these bills cited the President’s racism and
bigotry as the main reason for the need for impeachment. From the newer
version:
“In his capacity as President of the United States, unmindful of the
high duties of his high office, of the dignity and proprieties thereof, and of
the harmony, and respect necessary for stability within the society of the
United States, Donald John Trump has with his bigoted statements done more than
simply insult individuals and groups of Americans, he has harmed the American
society by attempting to convert his bigoted statements into United States
policy and by associating the presidency and the people of the United States
with bigotry…”
This new version includes the profane statements the President made at
the 01/11/18 immigration meeting. Like
the last impeachment motion introduced by Rep. Green, this one was also
defeated. The House voted to table the motion on 01/19/18; in this situation a
YES vote means that the Representative does NOT want the bill to go forward.
The motion to table the bill passed 355-66, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Nine more people supported this impeachment
motion than the prior one in 2017. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h53
In the run-up to the
State of the Union Address, Rep.
Paul Gosar (R-AZ) tweeted out a series of statements. In them, he “contacted the U.S. Capitol
Police, as well as Attorney General Jeff Sessions, asking that they consider
checking identification of all attending the State of the Union address and
arresting any illegal aliens in attendance” and went on to add “any illegal aliens
attempting to go through security, under any pretext of invitation or
otherwise, should be arrested and deported.”
In response to this,
Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) introduced a resolution in the House to
censure Rep. Gosar. In that resolution she observes
that, “Representative Gosar's comments explicitly
targeted the DACA recipients that Members of Congress brought as their guests
to the State of the Union…[and] Representative Gosar's actions to inappropriately pressure the U.S.
Capitol Police to detain and deport Dreamers, who are staying in the country
according to U.S. Department of Homeland Security regulations, intimidated
these young people who are already facing fear and uncertainty.” The resolution concludes by noting that all
members of the House are supposed to behave in a “manner that shall reflect
creditably on the House”
and that the House should condemn Rep. Gosar
for “his inappropriate actions that intimidated State of the Union guests and
discredited the House of Representatives.”
This resolution was
brought to the floor on 02/06/18. The
motion was to table this resolution, so a “yes” vote means that the legislator
believes that this resolution should not even be considered. The vote was strictly party-line. It passed
231-187, so Rep. Gosar, despite threatening people
who are in the United States legally, was NOT condemned for his actions. Fitzpatrick voted YES along with the
rest of his party, to protect Rep. Gosar, despite his
boorish and undignified behavior. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h138
This is a
constitutional amendment proposed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte
(R-Va.). This bill would require a supermajority of three-fifths of both houses
to approve a budget where spending exceeds government revenue. Similarly, it
would require a three-fifths vote to raise the debt limit. An exception in the
bill waives these requirements if a declaration of war is in effect. The
resolution was brought to the floor on April 12, 2018, under a “suspension of the
rules,” so it needed two-thirds of the House to vote for the bill for it to
pass. The motion did not get the required two-thirds, so it failed in a 233–184
vote. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h172
About two weeks ago,
the chaplain of the House of Representatives offered a letter of resignation at
the behest of the Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan. For more on that tempest,
this CNN
article is a good source. The chaplain
has since been reinstated. Last week,
Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-N.Y.) introduced a resolution that would have created an
ethics investigation into the events that culminated in the resignation. On May
8, 2018, a motion to table this resolution was brought to the floor; that means
they were voting on dismissing the resolution so that there would be no ethics
investigation into Speaker Ryan’s action. Apparently this motion to table led
to some heated
exchanges on the floor, including shouting, finger
pointing and table banging. The motion to table passed in a 223–182 vote. Fitzpatrick
voted YES (against the investigation).
Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h306
This is a somewhat
complicated Republican maneuver to discredit Deputy Attorney General Rod
Rosenstein (who oversees the Mueller investigation with Attorney General
Sessions recused) and potentially set him up for dismissal. This is a
non-binding resolution introduced by Freedom Caucus leader Rep. Mark Meadows
(R-S.C.) that demands the Justice Department produce sensitive and classified
documents to Rep. Devin Nunes and the House
Intelligence Committee. Just a reminder, those are the folks who already
decided there was no evidence of Trump-Russia
collusion in the run-up to the 2016 election. If Mr. Rosenstein doesn't provide
the requested documents within seven days, it is an excuse to put him in
contempt of Congress. This resolution was agreed to on 06/28/18 in a 226-183
party line vote. Fitzpatrick votes YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/s139
FISA stands for
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
These rules allow our intelligence agencies to collect information from
foreign sources, but also permit them to collect (without warrants) and keep
some information on Americans as well.
This program is highly controversial, and the support breakdown does not
fall along party lines. If you would
like to read a quick explainer on the program, CNN
Politics compiled one this week. Before the bill
came to a vote, Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) offered an
amendment that would replace the entire text of the FISA Reauthorization with
the text of the USA Rights bill, a bipartisan effort to reform the “secretive
warrantless spy program” (as the authors describe it). The Amash
amendment failed in a 183-233 vote, and Fitzpatrick
voted NO. The unamended
FISA reauthorization itself then came to the table. It was reauthorized by a vote of 256-164 on
01/11/18. Fitzpatrick voted YES to reauthorize the bill. This bill now moves on to the Senate. They have already voted to proceed on it, and
a final vote is expected on 01/16/18. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h45
In the past few
weeks, a flood of news about a sexual abuse scandal has rocked the US
gymnastics establishment. More than 150
young girls were abused by the team doctor, Larry Nassar. For years, his abuse had been reported to
various adults in the gymnastics establishment, but a decade passed after the
first reports were made before they were finally taken seriously and the
offender brought to justice. This bill,
introduced in the Senate last year by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, would extend
mandatory reporting responsibilities to “adults who are authorized to interact
with minor or amateur athletes at a facility under the jurisdiction of a
national governing body.” In other
words, it would not be left to the adult who hears such a report to dismiss the
allegations (which happened a number of times in the Nassar case). Instead, the adult would be required to bring
the issue to law enforcement for a thorough and professional
investigation. This bill passed the
Senate by unanimous consent last autumn.
It came before the House on 01/29/18 and it passed 406-3. Fitzpatrick
votes YES. Because of some small
changes, the bill will return to the Senate for a second vote before it goes to
the President. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h80
This bill would gut
several provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). To read the
perspective of a disabled person on this bill, please see the MoC Twitter
Action segment below. Honorable mention went to a series of tweets from Senator
Tammy Duckworth, a double-amputee who explained how this bill would allow
businesses to bypass rules about ramp inclines and stair heights, and how that
would affect the quality of life for disabled people. This article
from Newsweek also explains how this
bill would make it easier for businesses to ignore provisions in the ADA. The
GOP leadership presented this as a part of their efforts to reduce regulations
that they believe stifle business. The bill came up for a House vote on Feb.
15, 2018 and passed 225–192. Fitzpatrick
voted NO. This now moves on to the Senate.
Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h175
This is a bill that
Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) introduced in April. The Leadership Conference on Human
and Civil Rights has serious
concerns about the bill:
The
Citizens’ Right to Know Act requires jurisdictions receiving funds from the
Department of Justice (DOJ) to report to the Attorney General the names, arrest
records, and appearance failures for those participating in DOJ funded pretrial
services programs. The legislation allows the Attorney General to make public
the names, arrest records, and failure appearances that jurisdictions report….
The bill requires that the Attorney General penalize noncompliant jurisdictions
by denying them 100 percent of the DOJ grant program funds that are used to
support pretrial services programs.
The Professional Bail Agents of
the United States aggressively supported
this bill. In a letter urging members to call their Congresspeople to express
that support, they claimed “passage of HR 2152 could stop the ‘bail reform’
movement in its tracks.” On the other side of the issue, the American
Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) sent a letter to
Congress opposing the bill. Among their concerns were “...that the Citizens’
Right to Know Act would collect and publicly report personally identifiable
information of individuals participating in pretrial services
programs—individuals who have not been convicted of a crime given their
pretrial status.“ The ACLU also feels this bill would adversely
affect the bail reform movement:
The
Citizens’ Right to Know Act is inconsistent with bipartisan efforts to reform
money bail systems, like the Pretrial Integrity and Safety Act, which the ACLU
endorses. By collecting and reporting only certain data about pretrial services
programs and those participating in them, the Citizens’ Right to Know Act will
depict a one-sided picture of pretrial services programs and participants. For
example, the legislation’s focus on when an individual has failed to appear
promises a negative narrative around the pretrial stage. If this bill were
serious about measuring the true impact of pretrial services programs, it would
collect a more robust data set and not that which is of interest only to the
bail bonds industry. The ACLU supports
bail reform that corrects the injustice of basing a defendant’s release on how
much money the person has. Instead of considering the Citizens’ Right to
Know Act, the Committee should take up the Pretrial Integrity and Safety Act.
This legislation would incentive jurisdictions to reform their money bail
systems through federal resources rather than penalize them like the Citizens’
Right to Know Act, which denies DOJ grants to noncompliant jurisdictions.
Despite these
serious concerns, the bill passed the House in a 221–197 vote on May 9, 2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h188
This law makes it a federal crime to target law enforcement
officers. It puts police officers into a protected class. Targeting them would
be like targeting someone for race or religion. The American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU) and a coalition of 45 other civil rights organizations — including
Lambda Legal, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
(NAACP), Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), the Anti-Defamation League and
National Organization for Women (NOW) — sent a
letter to Congress opposing this bill. It
states, in part:
Extending hate crimes protections to law
enforcement officers is a profoundly inappropriate and misguided proposal for
several reasons. First, police already have substantial protections under
federal and state law, rendering this bill superfluous. Second, hate crimes
laws are intended to extend protection to historically persecuted groups that
have experienced a history of systemic discrimination based on a personal
characteristic, such as race,religion, sexual
orientation, gender, gender identity, and disability; law enforcement officers
are not a historically persecuted group. Third, this bill signals that there is
a “war on police,” which is not only untrue, but an unhelpful and dangerous
narrative to uplift. Fourth, bills similar to Protect and Serve that have been
introduced in states around the country—so called “Blue Lives Matter”
bills—appear to be a political response to the growing national movement for
police accountability in the face of continued killings and assaults of unarmed
African Americans; therefore, this bill is divisive and will have a negative
impact on the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they
serve.
This bill came to the floor for a vote on May 6, 2018. It
passed, 382–35. Fitzpatrick voted YES.
Back
to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h282
In the past months,
support in Congress had grown for a discharge
petition to bring potential immigration solutions
to the floor. As of this week, the issue had 216 supporters of the 218 votes needed to initiate Queen
of the Hill proceedings that would allow the House
to vote on several immigration bills; the one that received the most votes
would move on to the Senate. . To avoid this procedural embarrassment to the
leadership, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) agreed to bring two immigration bills
to the floor. One was to be a deeply
conservative bill that included all of President Trump’s “four
pillars”:
a wall; legal status (but not a path to citizenship) for a severely
limited number of Dreamers; an end to the diversity lottery; and an end to
so-called “chain migration,” also known as family reunification. The second
bill was supposed to be a compromise bill, but that term should not be taken seriously. The compromise was
between the moderate and Trump wings of the Republican party,
with no involvement of Democrats. Back to table
This week, the House
considered the deeply conservative bill, H.R. 4760, also known as “Goodlatte One.”
C-SPAN offers full coverage of the debate preceding the vote. An interesting development during the debate
concerned speeches and time allotment. Each party is given an equal amount of
time to support its position, which a member assigned to the task can give out
in minute-long chunks as he or she sees fit. With all Democrats lined up
against the bill, they scarcely had enough time to allow every representative
to get on the record opposing the legislation. Many had to talk quite rapidly
to get their points in. On the other hand, the Republicans had trouble getting
enough people to speak in support of the bill. The GOP speeches were made
slowly in order to eat up the extra time. At one point the Democrat assigning
time asked the Republican if he could have the GOP’s extra time since the
Republicans had so few people who wanted to speak and the Democrats had so
many. That request was, obviously, denied.
In a vote on June
21, 2018, the bill failed, 193–231. Fitzpatrick voted NO, as did 40 other
Republicans. No Democrats voted for this
bill. In the aftermath of that failure, Speaker Ryan made the decision to hold
off on the vote on the so-called compromise bill’ Politico reports that Ryan was “...delaying a vote on a ‘compromise’ immigration
package until next week, as GOP leaders search for a way to get 218 votes to
pass the measure. Ryan told lawmakers that leadership may add an E-Verify
mandate — an online system that allows employers to confirm the eligibility of
employees to work in the United States — as well as other provisions called for
by rural state lawmakers to the package.”
Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h297
After last week’s
defeat of the immigration bill known as ‘Goodlatte
One’, House Speaker Paul Ryan delayed the vote on the second immigration
option, the so-called “compromise bill” in order to garner more support. Despite its name, this bill was no true
compromise, as its crafting only involved the moderate and xenophobe wings of
the Republic Party and excluded the Democrats altogether. Amongst the provisions
included in this ‘compromise’ were a drastic redefinition
of who would constitute a Dreamer, with only 420,000 of the 1.8 million people
eligible for the DACA program included in a path to legal residence in this
bill. The legislation also included billions
of dollars for both Trump’s wall and massive increases to Customs and Border
Patrol staffing and funding. Under this
bill the rules for granting asylum would have been curtailed significantly. The bill came to the floor for a vote on
06/27/18 and it failed, 121-302. Fitzpatrick
voted YES, for the Trump-endorsed
position. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h268
This bill creates a
new process for faster classification and scheduling of synthetic drugs, so
that law enforcement doesn’t have to wait months or years for new drugs, like
fentanyl, to fall under their purview. The bill passed, 239–142, on June 15,
2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h259
This bill gives
hospices and caregivers the right to destroy unused pain medications after a
hospice patient passes away, helping to keep those drugs from being diverted
into the community. The bill passed, 398–0, on June 12, 2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h258
This bill directs
the Department of Health and Human Services to award grants to at least 10
model opioid treatment centers, which will use Food and Drug
Administration-approved medications and evidence-based treatments and generate
data to create additional comprehensive plans for model opioid recovery plans.
The bill passed, 383–13, on June 12, 2018. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h266
This bill sets up a program to set
aside public housing vouchers for the use of supportive and transitional
housing for individuals recovering from substance use disorders. The bill
passed, 230–173, on June 14, 2018. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h265
This bill sets new
standards for reviewing all incoming international mail for the presence of
drugs by requiring the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to transmit advance
electronic data (AED) to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on all
international packages by 2020. It also creates a new $1 fee to be added to all
inbound shipments to the United States. The bill passed, 352–52, on June 14,
2018. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h264
This bill sets up an
interagency task force to develop a strategy for supporting families and
children impacted by the opioid crisis. The task force will include
representatives of the departments of Health and Human Services (HHS);
Education; Agriculture; and Labor. It will solicit input from people impacted
by the crisis and local groups dealing with it first hand.
The bill passed, 409–8 on June 13, 2018. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr6082
This bill changes
and improves the rules related to disclosure of medical information,
particularly related to people with substance use disorder (SUD). It increases
the penalties if SUD information is disclosed, and forbids discrimination based
on SUD status. It passed 357–57 on June 20, 2018, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr5797
This bill changes Medicaid rules to give
people with a SUD full coverage for 30 days of care at an institution for
mental diseases (IMD) per year. It also includes provisions for states to
improve both access to outpatient care and transitioning from inpatient to
outpatient care. The bill passed 261–155 on June 20, 2018, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr5796
This bill was
sponsored by our own Rep. Fitzpatrick. It requires the Department of Health and
Human Services to identify medical providers who are high prescribers of
opioids and offer them new training on pain management that includes methods
other than opioids. This measure passed the House by voice vote on June 19,
2018, so no talley was kept. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr5687
This bill requires
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to create a new program for the return
or destruction of unused Schedule II or III opioids. It will also encourage the
use of packaging that may reduce overprescribing, diversion or abuse of
opioids. In a vote on June 19, 2018, this bill passed 342–13. Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr6
This bill is the
most expansive effort of all of the legislation in the push to address the
opioid crisis. A detailed summary can be found here. In brief, it makes major changes to Medicare and Medicaid to support
screening, treatment, research and management programs for SUDs. It also
requires other insurance to cover services provided by certified opioid
treatment programs, and expands programs to support increased detection and
monitoring of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids. The bill passed 396–14 on
June 22, 2018, and Fitzpatrick voted YES. Back to table
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2018/h106
This bill was
Congress’s first attempt at finding a solution to the plague of school
shootings our country has experienced. As one might expect from legislation
negotiated by the GOP leadership, it contains very little content related to
common-sense gun safety legislation and much more about school security. The
abbreviation from the bill name stands for “Student, Teachers, and Officers
Preventing (STOP) School Violence.” TIME Magazine has the most succinct recap of what is — and is not — included in the
bill. They report that this legislation “provides $50 million per year to:
● Create
and operate an ‘anonymous reporting systems for threats of school violence,
including mobile telephone applications, hotlines, and internet websites’
●
Implement improvements to school security infrastructure.
● Develop student, teacher and law
enforcement training to prevent violence”
The bill contains
absolutely no language related to gun control. For more extensive analysis of
the wrangling that led to the bill, this Vox article titled “As student activists rally outside, the House passes a
narrow school safety measure” is a good place to start.
The GOP leadership
brought this bill to the floor under a House procedure called “suspension of
the rules” that allowed them to bypass debate if they could get a supermajority
of two-thirds to approve the bill. The vote took place on Mar. 14, 2018, the
same day as the school walkouts around the country, and it passed 407–10. Fitzpatrick
voted YES. Back to table