Last Week In Congress: How Cascadia’s U.S. lawmakers voted (October 28th-31st)

Good morn­ing! Here’s how Cascadia’s Mem­bers of Con­gress vot­ed on major issues dur­ing the leg­isla­tive week end­ing Thurs­day, Octo­ber 31st.

In the United States House of Representatives

ADOPTING RULES FOR IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS: Vot­ing 232 for and 196 against, the House on Octo­ber 31st adopt­ed a res­o­lu­tion (H. Res 660) offered by major­i­ty Democ­rats set­ting ground rules for pub­lic hear­ings that will be the next phase of the ongo­ing inquiry into poten­tial impeach­ment of Don­ald Trump.

The res­o­lu­tion was sup­port­ed by all but two of the 234 Democ­rats who vot­ed and opposed by all 196 Repub­li­cans who vot­ed. Four rep­re­sen­ta­tives did not vote.

The Democ­rats vot­ing no were Jeff Van Drew of New Jer­sey and Collin Peter­son of Min­neso­ta. Inde­pen­dent Justin Amash of Michi­gan vot­ed yes.

The Select Per­ma­nent Com­mit­tee on Intel­li­gence will begin pub­lic hear­ings and is autho­rized to release tran­scripts of the tes­ti­mo­ny it has already tak­en in closed ses­sions. The pan­el will report its find­ings to the Judi­cia­ry com­mit­tee, which would decide in addi­tion­al pub­lic hear­ings whether to send arti­cles of impeach­ment to the full House. Any House vote(s) on impeach­ment could occur in December.

If the House vot­ed to impeach, the Sen­ate would con­duct a tri­al to deter­mine if Trump would be removed from office.

Democ­rats said the pro­ce­dure will be sim­i­lar to that used in pre­vi­ous impeach­ments, includ­ing the House Repub­li­can major­i­ty’s 1998 impeach­ment of Pres­i­dent Bill Clin­ton. The res­o­lu­tion pro­vides Intel­li­gence com­mit­tee Repub­li­cans the same oppor­tu­ni­ty as Democ­rats to ques­tion wit­ness­es, with staff attor­neys for each par­ty allot­ted 45 min­utes per wit­ness before law­mak­ers ask questions.

How­ev­er, Democ­rats would main­tain con­trol of inquiry since major­i­ty votes would be need­ed to call wit­ness­es and issue subpoenas.

Trump and/or his coun­sel will be able to par­tic­i­pate when the pro­ceed­ings reach the Judi­cia­ry com­mit­tee. They can present a defense case, respond to evi­dence, cross-exam­ine wit­ness­es, raise objec­tions and request addi­tion­al evi­dence and tes­ti­mo­ny. But they can only call wit­ness­es if major­i­ty Democ­rats agree that the tes­ti­mo­ny is “nec­es­sary or desir­able to a full and fair record” of the proceedings.

If Trump declines to coop­er­ate with the Judi­cia­ry Com­mit­tee, he could lose some of the rights grant­ed to him at the outset.

Speak­er Nan­cy Pelosi, D‑California, said: “These open hear­ings, seek­ing the truth and mak­ing it avail­able to the Amer­i­can peo­ple, will inform Con­gress on the very dif­fi­cult deci­sion we will have to make in the future as to whether to impeach the pres­i­dent. That deci­sion has not been made. That is what the inquiry will inves­ti­gate, and then we can make the deci­sion based on the truth. I don’t know why the Repub­li­cans are afraid of the truth.”

Minor­i­ty Leader Kevin McCarthy, R‑California, said the House “is using its pow­er to dis­cred­it democ­ra­cy. By using secret inter­views and selec­tive leaks to por­tray the pres­i­den­t’s legit­i­mate actions as an impeach­able offense. Democ­rats are con­tin­u­ing their per­ma­nent cam­paign to under­mine his legit­i­ma­cy. For the last three years, they have pre­de­ter­mined the pres­i­den­t’s guilt, they have nev­er accept­ed the vot­ers’ choice to make him president.”

A yes vote was to adopt the resolution.

	Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
	Vot­ing Aye (4): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader Vot­ing Nay (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden
	Vot­ing Aye (7): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck Vot­ing Nay (3): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 11 aye votes, 6 nay votes

DECLARING ARMENIAN MASSACRE A GENOCIDE: Vot­ing 405 for and 11 against, the House on Octo­ber 29th adopt­ed a res­o­lu­tion (H. Res 296) offi­cial­ly rec­og­niz­ing Turkey’s killing of up to 1.5 mil­lion Arme­ni­ans in the fad­ing Ottoman Empire in 1915–16 as a geno­cide. Three mem­bers answered “present,” which indi­cates they par­tic­i­pat­ed in the roll call with­out tak­ing a stand.

They were Repub­li­can Paul Gosar of Ari­zona and Democ­rats Ilhan Omar of Min­neso­ta and Eddie Ber­nice John­son of Texas.

More than thir­ty coun­tries and forty-nine U.S. states have for­mal­ly declared the killings a delib­er­ate, pre­med­i­tat­ed exter­mi­na­tion, or geno­cide, as opposed to Turkey’s asser­tion that the deaths were col­lat­er­al dam­age of World War I.

For the Unit­ed States to offi­cial­ly declare an Armen­ian geno­cide, this mea­sure would have to pass the Sen­ate and gain Pres­i­dent Trump’s signature.

Brad Sher­man, D‑California, said: “It is crit­i­cal that we coun­ter­act Turkey’s geno­cide denial, because geno­cide denial is the last act of a geno­cide — first you oblit­er­ate a peo­ple, then you seek to oblit­er­ate their mem­o­ry, and final­ly you seek to oblit­er­ate the mem­o­ry of the oblit­er­a­tion.… We must rec­og­nize this geno­cide to remove the stain on Amer­i­ca’s hon­or because, up until now, we have refused to acknowl­edge truth and we have been silent, all in an effort at appease­ment” of Turkey.

Chris Smith, R‑New Jer­sey, said: “The Armen­ian geno­cide is the only geno­cide of the 20th cen­tu­ry where sur­vivors, fam­i­ly, and all those who care about this impor­tant issue have been sub­ject­ed to the ongo­ing out­rage of a mas­sive, well-fund­ed, aggres­sive cam­paign of geno­cide denial, open­ly sus­tained and lav­ish­ly fund­ed by… the gov­ern­ment of Turkey.”

No mem­ber spoke against the resolution.

	Vot­ing Aye (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
	Vot­ing Aye (5): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, and Kurt Schrad­er; Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden
	Vot­ing Aye (10): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck; Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 17 aye votes

SANCTIONING TURKEY OVER ITS INVASION OF SYRIA: Vot­ing 403 for and 16 against, the House on Octo­ber 29th passed a bill (H.R. 4695) to penal­ize Turkey and Edro­gan’s gov­ern­ment if it resumes or con­tin­ues attacks on Kur­dish forces and civil­ians in north­east­ern Syr­ia that began when Don­ald Trump reduced Amer­i­ca’s mil­i­tary pres­ence there in ear­ly October.

The bill would freeze the U.S. assets of top gov­ern­ment offi­cials and can­cel their U.S. visas while impos­ing sanc­tions on cer­tain Turk­ish banks.

In addi­tion, the bill would block the sale of U.S. arms that Turkey could use in its Syr­i­an offen­sive and require the admin­is­tra­tion to devel­op a strat­e­gy for pre­vent­ing a resur­gence of Islam­ic-state mil­i­tary strength in the region.

Gus Bili­rakis, R‑Florida., said the bill would send “a uni­fied, bipar­ti­san mes­sage to Turkey that, if you want to be con­sid­ered a strate­gic ally of the Unit­ed States, a true ally, you have to act like one.”

No mem­ber spoke against the bill.

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

	Vot­ing Aye (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
	Vot­ing Aye (5): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, and Kurt Schrad­er; Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden
	Vot­ing Aye (10): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck; Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Jaime Her­rera-Beut­ler, Dan New­house, and Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 17 aye votes

PROHIBITING MINING NEAR GRAND CANYON NATIONAL PARK: Vot­ing 236 for and 185 against, the House on Octo­ber 30th passed a bill (H.R. 1373) that would make per­ma­nent a tem­po­rary mora­to­ri­um on the issuance of new min­ing claims on fed­er­al­ly owned land sur­round­ing Grand Canyon Nation­al Park in north­ern Ari­zona. Dur­ing the House­’s debate on the leg­is­la­tion, there was dis­cus­sion of ground­wa­ter pol­lu­tion attrib­uted to an inop­er­a­tive ura­ni­um mine that was opened in 1986 in near­by Kaibab Nation­al Forest..

Ed O’Haller­an, D‑Arizona, said: “Poten­tial con­t­a­m­i­na­tion of the water by ura­ni­um min­ing would have a rip­ple effect that would dev­as­tate the 40 mil­lion peo­ple that rely on the Col­orado Riv­er and local aquifers. Unfor­tu­nate­ly, areas in and near the [Grand Canyon] are plagued by the tox­ic lega­cy of ura­ni­um min­ing to this day.”

Paul Gosar, R‑Arizona, said the bill would “pre­vent access to the high­est grade and largest quan­ti­ty of ura­ni­um reserves in the coun­try. In doing so, [it] has seri­ous defense and ener­gy secu­ri­ty impli­ca­tions” because ura­ni­um “is a source of renew­able ener­gy and also an irre­place­able appli­ca­tion in defense and medicine.”

A yes vote was to send the bill to the Senate.

	Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Russ Fulcher and Mike Simpson
	Vot­ing Aye (4): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzanne Bonam­i­ci, Earl Blu­me­nauer, Peter DeFazio, Kurt Schrader Vot­ing Nay (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Greg Walden
	Vot­ing Aye (8): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Rep­re­sen­ta­tives Suzan Del­Bene, Rick Larsen, Derek Kilmer, Prami­la Jaya­pal, Kim Schri­er, Adam Smith, and Den­ny Heck; Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Jaime Herrera-Beutler Vot­ing Nay (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Dan Newhouse Not Vot­ing (1): Repub­li­can Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Cathy McMor­ris Rodgers

Cas­ca­dia total: 12 aye votes, 4 nay votes, 1 not voting

In the United States Senate

LOWERING HEALTHCARE COVERAGE STANDARDS: The Sen­ate on Octo­ber. 30th failed, 43 for and 52 against, to adopt a Demo­c­ra­t­ic res­o­lu­tion (S.J. Res 52) that would pro­hib­it states from offer­ing in their health-insur­ance exchanges dilut­ed ver­sions of the cov­er­age required by the Patient Pro­tec­tion Act.

The mea­sure sought to block a Trump regime rule under which states could obtain waivers to offer short-term poli­cies that omit or weak­en Patient Pro­tec­tion Act require­ments in place since law was enact­ed in 2010.

The law’s stan­dards are intend­ed to guar­an­tee cov­er­age for indi­vid­u­als with pre-exist­ing con­di­tions while requir­ing PPA poli­cies to cov­er “essen­tial health ben­e­fits” such as pedi­atric care, men­tal health and sub­stance-abuse treat­ments, emer­gency care, out­pa­tient ser­vices and mater­ni­ty care. Back­ers of the admin­is­tra­tion’s waiv­er pol­i­cy said it gives states flex­i­bil­i­ty to devel­op low­er-priced cov­er­age alternatives.

But crit­ics call such poli­cies “junk insur­ance” that would destroy the health law by siphon­ing off healthy and younger policyholders.

Jeanne Sha­heen, D‑New Hamp­shire, said: “I think it is impor­tant to under­stand the short­com­ings of these junk plans that the admin­is­tra­tion is pro­mot­ing. These plans are allowed to deny cov­er­age to some­one who has a pre­ex­ist­ing condition.”

John Baras­so, R‑Wyoming, claimed in response: “Repub­li­cans remain one hun­dred per­cent com­mit­ted to pro­tect­ing peo­ple with pre­ex­ist­ing con­di­tions. We will pro­tect them today, tomor­row, and always.”

A yes vote was to adopt the resolution.

	Vot­ing Nay (2): Repub­li­can Sen­a­tors Jim Risch and Mike Crapo
	Vot­ing Aye (2): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley
	Vot­ing Aye (2): Demo­c­ra­t­ic Sen­a­tors Maria Cantwell and Pat­ty Murray

Cas­ca­dia total: 4 aye votes, 2 nay votes

Key votes ahead

The Sen­ate will debate appro­pri­a­tions bills and judi­cial nom­i­na­tions dur­ing the week of Novem­ber 4th, while the House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives will be in recess.

Edi­tor’s Note: The infor­ma­tion in NPI’s week­ly How Cas­ca­di­a’s U.S. law­mak­ers vot­ed fea­ture is pro­vid­ed by Votera­ma in Con­gress, a ser­vice of Thomas Vot­ing Reports. All rights are reserved. Repro­duc­tion of this post is not per­mit­ted, not even with attri­bu­tion. Use the per­ma­nent link to this post to share it… thanks!

© 2019 Thomas Vot­ing Reports.