Congressional Record, Volume 167 Issue 45 (Wednesday, March 10, 2021)

[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 10, 2021)]
[House]
[Pages H1303-H1314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

ENHANCED BACKGROUND CHECKS ACT OF 2021

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 188, I call up
the bill (H.R. 1446) to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States
Code, to strengthen the background check procedures to be followed
before a Federal firearms licensee may transfer a firearm to a person
who is not such a licensee, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 188, the bill
is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 1446

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 ``Enhanced Background Checks
Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. STRENGTHENING OF BACKGROUND CHECK PROCEDURES TO BE
FOLLOWED BEFORE A FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEE MAY
TRANSFER A FIREARM TO A PERSON WHO IS NOT SUCH
A LICENSEE.

Section 922(t) of title 18, United States Code is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking clause (ii) and
inserting the following:
``(ii) in the event the system has not notified the
licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person
would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section--
``(I) not fewer than 10 business days (meaning a day on
which State offices are open) has elapsed since the licensee
contacted the system, and the system has not notified the
licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other person
would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section, and the
other person has submitted, electronically through a website
established by the Attorney General or by first-class mail, a
petition for review which--
``(aa) certifies that such other person has no reason to
believe that such other person is prohibited by Federal,
State, or local law from purchasing or possessing a firearm;
and
``(bb) requests that the system respond to the contact
referred to in subparagraph (A) within 10 business days after
the date the petition was submitted (or, if the petition is
submitted by first-class mail, the date the letter containing
the petition is postmarked); and
``(II) 10 business days have elapsed since the other person
so submitted the petition, and the system has not notified
the licensee that the receipt of a firearm by such other
person would violate subsection (g) or (n) of this section;
and''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) The Attorney General shall--
``(A) prescribe the form on which a petition shall be
submitted pursuant to paragraph (1)(B)(ii);
``(B) make the form available electronically, and provide a
copy of the form to all licensees referred to in paragraph
(1);
``(C) provide the petitioner and the licensee involved
written notice of receipt of the petition, either
electronically or by first-class mail; and
``(D) respond on an expedited basis to any such petition
received by the Attorney General.
``(8)(A) If, after 3 business days have elapsed since the
licensee initially contacted the system about a firearm
transaction, the system notifies the licensee that the
receipt of a firearm by such other person would not violate
subsection (g) or (n), the licensee may continue to rely on
that notification for the longer of--
``(i) an additional 25 calendar days after the licensee
receives the notification; or
``(ii) 30 calendar days after the date of the initial
contact.
``(B) If such other person has met the requirements of
paragraph (1)(B)(ii) before the system destroys the records
related to the firearm transaction, the licensee may continue
to rely on such other person having met the requirements for
an additional 25 calendar days after the date such other
person first met the requirements.''.

SEC. 3. GAO REPORTS.

Within 90 days after the end of each of the 1-year, 3-year,
and 5-year periods that begin with the effective date of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
prepare and submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary
of the Senate a written report analyzing the extent to which,
during the respective period, paragraphs (1)(B)(ii) and (7)
of section 922(t) of title 18, United States Code, have
prevented firearms from being transferred to prohibited
persons, which report shall include but not be limited to the
following--
(1) an assessment of the overall implementation of such
subsections, including a description of the challenges faced
in implementing such paragraphs; and
(2) an aggregate description of firearm purchase delays and
denials, and an aggregate analysis of the petitions submitted
pursuant to such paragraph (1)(B)(ii).

SEC. 4. REPORTS ON PETITIONS SUPPORTING FIREARM TRANSFERS NOT
IMMEDIATELY APPROVED BY NICS SYSTEM, THAT WERE
NOT RESPONDED TO IN A TIMELY MANNER.

SEC. 5. REPORT TO THE CONGRESS.

Within 150 days after the date of the enactment of this
Act, the Attorney General, in consultation with the National
Resource Center on Domestic Violence and Firearms, shall
submit to the Congress a report analyzing the effect, if any,
of this Act on the safety of victims of domestic violence,
domestic abuse, dating partner violence, sexual assault, and
stalking, and whether any further amendments to the
background check process, including amendments to the
conditions that must be met under this Act for a firearm to
be transferred when the system has not notified the licensee
that such transfer would not violate subsection (g) or (n) of
section 922 of title 18, United States Code, would likely
result in a reduction in the risk of death or great bodily
harm to victims of domestic violence, domestic abuse, dating
partner violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Act and the amendments made by this Act shall take
effect 210 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill is debatable for 1 hour equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the
Committee on the Judiciary.
The gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Ohio
(Mr. Jordan) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).

General Leave

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material on H.R. 1446.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1446, the Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2021,
is a critical bill to provide law enforcement the necessary time to
keep firearms out of the hands of those who are not legally eligible to
own them.
The 2015 massacre at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, which killed
nine innocent people, stands as a tragic reminder of how current
background check laws sometimes fall short.
Under current law, a licensed gun dealer conducting a background
check on a prospective purchaser is permitted to sell the firearm to
the purchaser if there has been no determination from the background
check system, commonly called NICS, after 3 business days.
This is the case even if the system has not indicated that the person
has actually passed the background check. Often, we refer to this as a
default proceed transaction.
While 96 percent of background checks are processed within 3 business
days, an analysis of FBI data showed that over 35,000 guns were
transferred to prohibited purchasers between 2008

[[Page H1304]]

and 2017 because of the default proceed rule.
On average, over the course of the last decade, 10 prohibited
individuals have been able to purchase guns at licensed firearms
dealers through the default proceed rule every single day.
The cases in which there is a delay are the very cases that ought to
be carefully investigated.
If NICS is unable to return an instant determination--and especially
if there is no report after 3 days--there is cause for concern. There
may be a good reason that these individuals should not own firearms,
but the current system allows the transfer nonetheless.
Under this legislation, as under current law, a sale may proceed
immediately once a background check clears a purchaser, which is the
case in the vast majority of instances.
This bill provides, however, that for checks taking longer to
complete, the FBI will have 10 business days for the initial background
check investigation period. If the check is not completed during this
time, an individual may submit a petition for expedited review. If a
petition is submitted, unless NICS provides an answer within the next
10 business days, either clearing the transaction or stopping it, a gun
dealer has the discretion to complete the sale and transfer the
firearm.
We must ensure that firearms transfers are lawful, and in some
instances, that requires additional time. That is why H.R. 1446 is
needed, to prevent the sale of firearms to prohibited individuals by
providing the FBI with additional time to complete background checks.
H.R. 1446 is a sensible and necessary approach to closing a dangerous
loophole, and I commend our colleague, Congressman Jim Clyburn, the
distinguished Democratic whip, for introducing this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this legislation, and I reserve the
balance of my time.

{time} 1600

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Minnesota (Mr. Stauber).
Mr. STAUBER. Mr. Speaker, I stand here today a retired law
enforcement officer and the victim of two violent gun crimes.
While off duty, a repeat offender shot me through my car window while
I was with my wife, Jodi. While on duty, another violent criminal
pointed his gun at me and pulled the trigger. By the grace of God, his
gun malfunctioned. Mr. Speaker, I was fighting for my life. I am lucky
to be here today to speak to this body.
Criminals who are willing to take someone's life don't care about the
gun legislation we debate in Congress. And the bills we are debating
this week would not have prevented those two criminals from attempting
to take my life.
So let's talk about who is going to be impacted by these bills. The
law-abiding citizens who are looking to protect themselves, their
families, and their communities from death or great bodily harm. They
will be the ones who are penalized for and prevented from exercising
their Second Amendment rights.
Defending my constituents' constitutional rights will be something I
do until my very last day in office, and I implore my colleagues on the
other side of the aisle to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn), the sponsor of this legislation, and the
distinguished majority whip.
Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague on the other
side. I still think about the night of June 17, 2015, when at about
9:00 in the evening, I received a phone call informing me that
something had happened at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston,
South Carolina, a church that I know very well and the members I know
very well.
Much to my dismay, I learned later in the evening that a Bible study
that was taking place at that church had welcomed in a stranger.
I grew up in a parsonage, and I grew up learning that which we find
there in the book of Hebrew, the 11th chapter: Faith is the substance
of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen.
These people were practicing their faith, a faith that taught them to
welcome in a stranger. A stranger came to their door, and they welcomed
him into their Bible study. They sat down, and he sat with them for an
hour. In the further practice of their faith, as they concluded their
Bible study, they rose to pray, and with bowed heads, only to open
their eyes to the sound of gunfire. The stranger that they had welcomed
in opened fire and killed nine of them, one of whom was the pastor, a
former intern of mine.
Now, we later found out that the gentleman who perpetrated this crime
was a white supremacist that studied the history of that church; and
because it was the most historic African-American church in South
Carolina, he targeted that church and its worshippers. However, he
should not have had the gun.
The reason he had the gun is because when he went to purchase it, and
the 3 days expired, as current law allows, they had not been able to
verify the information he had given them and, therefore, could not
complete the background check. But under the law, they had to sell him
the gun after the 3 days, only to find out several days later that the
wrong information had been put into the record.
I sincerely believe that this gentleman's sophistication, he knew he
was not to have a gun. Now, I ask: Did he give the wrong information
intentionally?
I think so. When they found the error, it was too late. Nine souls
had perished.
Now, the gentleman said that he is lucky that the gun didn't go off,
and these laws would not have prevented that. This law would have
prevented that gentleman from getting a gun.
Now, I don't know why the other side continues to misrepresent what
we are trying to do here. All we are saying is if at the end of the 3
days, it ought to move to 10 days. And if the 10 days expire, you can
ask for expedited search. And if that expires, you still have 10 days.
The maximum is 30 days. Nobody is keeping a gun away. Everybody should
be able to wait 30 days.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from South Carolina.
Mr. CLYBURN. I ask the other side: Is a wait of 30 days worth the
death of nine unsuspecting souls?
That alone ought to instruct them on legislation like this.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker indicated that you have
to ask the government to exercise your constitutional right. That is
the problem. What happened in Charleston was terrible, it was wrong,
and wrong as wrong can be. But this bill is not going to stop--the FBI
had 2 months. It didn't do it. It didn't stop this guy. They had 2
months.
What this bill does is shift the burden. It takes it from 3 days to
10 days, and the burden now becomes on the American citizen to be able
to exercise their constitutional right. That is not what the Second
Amendment is supposed to be about. Unfortunately, it is where the
Democrats want to take our country.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina
(Mr. Cawthorn).
Mr. CAWTHORN. Mr. Speaker, if we lose the Second Amendment, then the
First will fall. I want to remind my colleagues of a simple fact that
is far too often swept under the rug by the left. Americans have a
right to obtain a firearm for lawful purposes.
I will say it again louder for those on the left, sleeping in the
back. Americans have a right to obtain firearms. This is my right. And,
Mr. Speaker, this is your right. But let me be clear to everyone in
this Chamber: You will not take this right away from us.
I know it is easy to be sucked into the D.C. bubble, but outside of
here, in real America, when we say, ``Come and take it,'' we damn well
mean it.

This bill would unconstitutionally place the burden of proof for
firearms purchases and transfers on American citizens instead of
placing the burden firmly where it belongs, on the shoulders of the
government.
But let us be clear. The left is not here today to debate this bill,
nor are they here to legislate in the best interests of the American
people. They are here to shove it down our throats. My colleagues and I
on the right have been called here to defend one of our most

[[Page H1305]]

sacred rights because you, Mr. Speaker, think that the Constitution is
just another piece of paper to tear down the middle of and toss aside.
I speak for millions of Americans. I specifically speak for 700,000-
plus Americans in my district when I say that if you think this
bastardization of the Constitution will be met with silence, then you
know nothing of the America I know. You want my guns; I know it. We all
know it. Well, Mr. Speaker, you can come and take them.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.
Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and for
his great leadership of the Judiciary Committee. Thank you for bringing
this important legislation to the floor, Mr. Nadler.
And, again, as an authority on the Constitution, you and I know that
we do respect the right of the gentleman to have a gun. We just want to
make sure that we are keeping people safe.
Mr. Speaker, the gun violence crisis in America is a challenge to the
conscience of our country, one that demands that we act. We know what
must be done. The solutions are clear. They have overwhelming
bipartisan support across the country. These solutions will save lives.
That is why I am so pleased to rise on the floor to support Mr.
Clyburn's legislation, H.R. 1446, the Enhanced Background Checks Act to
ensure that universal background checks do save lives. He explained so
clearly the purpose of his legislation. I associate myself with his
remarks. I know how painful it is because he had friends in that church
whom we have met families of since then.
I also rise to support H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act
of Mr. Mike Thompson. Mr. Thompson is a gun owner. He is a veteran.
He respects the Second Amendment, and he is the chair of the Gun
Violence Prevention Task Force. I thank him for his decades of
leadership on background checks and for the perspective he brings,
again, as a gun owner and a veteran and a hunter.
We all salute the extraordinary work of Mr. Clyburn, the leader of
the Enhanced Background Checks Act, to close the Charleston loophole,
and we respect him for the work he has done in his community to turn
their agony into action, their pain into saving other people's lives.
I thank all the Members who have helped raise a drumbeat on these
priorities, including our colleague, Representative Lucy McBath, who
has been such an inspiration to all of us, bringing her great
generosity of spirit in telling her story, sharing that story of Jordan
with us.
Now, we also have a debt of gratitude to our former colleague, Gabby
Giffords, who when she was having a neighborhood meeting, there was an
attempt on her life. Her courage is an inspiration to the country. Her
leadership to end gun violence is something that is so remarkable.
Under her leadership and that of the Bradys, we were able to meet with
survivors over time to try to pass legislation to make gun laws clear
and better and really adjusting to the realities of technology.
Another colleague, Bobby Rush, lost his son to gun violence as
well. So, again, we hear about the big events that take place, and they
are horrible, but every day people lose their lives.
In fact, let me just see what the statistics are. Since 1994, when
background checks were first created, I had the privilege of being here
at that time and actually serving as a whip for the legislation. Our
leader on the bill was Senator Schumer. Well, right then he was a
Member of Congress, Chuck Schumer, on this legislation. Since 1994,
when background checks were first created, the system has stopped more
than 3 million dangerous people from getting firearms.
Every day, when background checks are used, they stop an estimated
170 felons, 50 domestic abusers, and nearly 20 fugitives from buying a
gun. Every day, Mr. Speaker.

{time} 1615

Yet, over the years, people have exploited and circumvented the
system. Today, someone with a violent criminal record or a history of
abuse can go to a gun show or go online or even to a stranger in person
to purchase a firearm. No background check, no questions asked, all
perfectly legal. It might be legal, but it is not perfect.
Even when a background check has been initiated, it is not always
completed. That is what this legislation before us, Mr. Clyburn's bill,
is about; the horrific case that enabled a hate crime at Mother Emanuel
Church in Charleston in which nine innocent people were murdered while
peacefully worshipping.
Eighty percent of firearms--because of gun shows, online sales and
the rest--80 percent of firearms are sold or transferred without
completed background checks.
So it is in that spirit that I come to the floor, but when I come to
the floor, I bring with me the thoughts of the survivors who we meet
with regularly. We have said to them, We are not stopping until the job
is done.
We respect our Constitution, but we also say that the Constitution
talks about well-regulated.
Again, these bills that we are talking about have bipartisan support
by a vast majority of the American people; over 90 percent of the
public, including more than 90 percent of gun-owning households. Most
of these folks who own guns have passed background checks, they support
background checks, and they are supported by dozens of leading law
enforcement, veterans, local government, public health, and other
groups.
For example, Mr. Speaker, the Major Cities Chiefs Association,
representing the Nation's largest metropolitan law enforcement agencies
writes: ``The lack of a background check for private sales and gun
shows completely contradicts the purpose for which NICS was
established--to keep guns out of the hands of those who do harm.''
For the benefit of those who don't know what NICS is, it is an
important program. Mr. Thompson has been a champion in the funding of
NICS. NICS is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
Next, the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys states: ``H.R. 8 will
help the background check system catch up with changes in technology
and ensure that individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or
possessing a gun cannot easily buy guns online.''
And the U.S. Conference of Mayors writes that H.R. 8 will ``make our
cities safer and in no way compromise gun owners' rights.''
H.R. 8 is very important to us, and it is legislation that has broad
support. It is called the Bipartisan Background Checks Act. That is Mr.
Thompson's bill.
And this bill, H.R. 1446, Mr. Clyburn's bill is the Enhanced
Background Checks Act. So everything I say about one bill applies to
the other in terms of its purpose, in terms of its urgency, and in
terms of its honoring our promise to the survivors and the families who
have lost their loved ones to gun violence, that we are not going away
until this legislation passes and that we will meet the challenge of
the conscience of the country when it comes to the gun violence crisis
in our country.
And I say that with gratitude to Representative Mike Thompson and
our distinguished whip Mr. Clyburn for their leadership, their
determination, their persistence, and soon, hopefully, their success in
turning their legislation into law, so that we can keep our promises to
the survivors, and also, that we can make the world safer for all
children and all people in our country and throughout the world, as we
are an example to the world.
I urge an ``aye'' vote on both of these bills.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Florida (Mrs. Cammack).
Mrs. CAMMACK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1446
and H.R. 8, a/k/a the gun-grabber bills.
Madam Speaker Pelosi, you were elected in 1987, and I was born in
1988. During that time, you say that background checks have saved
millions of lives. But what about the more than 50 million babies that
have been murdered through abortion? So I am just going to leave that
there as we talk about the value of life.
These bills are not about gun safety, and they certainly aren't about
reducing crime. These bills are about control.

[[Page H1306]]

Two weeks ago, Democrats voted to strip religious freedom. Last week,
they voted to defund our police. Today, they are now taking our guns.
In reality, these bills do nothing to improve background checks, as
noted by an Obama official in 2013: ``The effectiveness of universal
background checks depends on requiring gun registration.''
Instead, it would increase our wait times and allow for endless
delays for law-abiding citizens to purchase firearms.
Our communities have seen too many tragedies perpetuated by sick
people intent on committing violence, no matter the weapon.
H.R. 1446 puts the onus on individuals to contact the government if
their background check hasn't been completed in 10 days.
You know who cannot afford to wait? The single mom looking to protect
herself and her children from a violent ex who has just been released
from jail. You think this situation isn't real? It happened last month
in Orlando. And there are thousands more like them.
You know that the more garbage that we find in these bills, the more
I believe that the motto of these Chambers is changing from ``We the
People'' to let's screw the people.
H.R. 8 and H.R. 1446 does nothing but make it more difficult for law-
abiding citizens to protect themselves and their families. Under this
legislation, criminals will do what they do best: Break the law and
perpetuate crime.
So I ask my colleagues considering supporting these bills: Do you
honestly think that punishing law-abiding constituents in your
districts, stripping them of their constitutional rights will make them
safer? Will you be able to look them in the eye as they are the next
victim of crime?

As Members of Congress we swore an oath to defend the Constitution,
and that includes the Second Amendment.
Shall not be infringed.
You and I both took that oath, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair and not to
other Members in the second person.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Georgia (Mrs. McBath).
Mrs. McBATH. Mr. Speaker, I thank Chairman Nadler for yielding, and I
also thank Representative Clyburn, the author of this legislation, H.R.
1446, for this bill.
Mr. Speaker, domestic violence claims the lives of far too many, and
it is especially deadly when it occurs in a household with a gun.
Women, as we know, bear most of this violence.
In the United States there are one million women alive today who have
reported being shot or shot at by an intimate partner, and there are
many more who have been threatened or killed with a gun. And we haven't
even yet discussed what the additional stressors of COVID-19 have done
exponentially around the country in households when there is a gun in
the household.
Closing the Charleston loophole is a critical step to prevent abusers
from obtaining a weapon. This is not about infringing upon anyone's
Second Amendment rights. Law-abiding gun owners who are duly licensed
and permitted, this is not about preventing them from being able to
have a gun.
This is a critical step to prevent abusers from obtaining a weapon, a
weapon that will likely be used to escalate their abuse and a weapon
that may have deadly consequences. And as a survivor of gun violence, I
know what I am talking about.
With this bill and with this amendment we can help prevent abuse,
protect our families, and gather data to inform further steps to keep
every American safe. That is our right. That is not a privilege.
In the next months, we will continue to remember those that we have
lost to gun violence in Charleston and all across America.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Hudson).
Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, Newtown, Parkland, Las Vegas, Sutherland
Springs, Charleston, the attack on our former colleague, Gabrielle
Giffords, these are all tragedies that would not have been prevented by
H.R. 8 or H.R. 1446.
My colleagues across the aisle don't want to admit it, but every
commercial gun sale in America already requires a background check.
In Charleston, there was no loophole. The problem was information
sharing. If the FBI had checked all available databases, then Dylan
Roof wouldn't have been allowed to purchase a firearm. Congressman
Tom Rice of South Carolina has a bill to fix that.
Republicans are serious about ending gun violence and have brought
forward policies that protect public safety without eroding our Second
Amendment rights.
That is why in recent years we have passed measures like the STOP
School Violence Act, the Fix NICS Act, and 21st Century Cures Act.
The bills before us this week would not build upon this progress but
strips away from law-abiding citizens their rights.
H.R. 8 would turn law-abiding citizens into criminals if you store a
gun for a friend or loan a firearm to a neighbor with an abusive ex who
wanted to borrow it for self-protection.
Even worse, H.R. 1446 would extend the waiting period for a firearms
sale from 3 to 10 business days and allow the government to delay a
transfer indefinitely. Indefinitely, as in forever, if a government
bureaucrat says so.
Instead of these gun-grabbing bills, House Republicans are bringing
forward targeted solutions. That is why I introduced the STOP II:
Classrooms Over Conference Rooms Act to double funding for the STOP
School Violence Act to harden schools, to get more mental health
resources in schools, and increase active-shooter training for law
enforcement. And we pay for it by taking money set aside for the
Department of Education to rent conference rooms in Washington, D.C.
However, the left is determined to take away your rights, after
voting to defund the police just last week.
It is no wonder gun sales and concealed carry permits are at all-time
highs. These law-abiding Americans deserve to have their rights
protected.
That is why today, I am calling on my colleagues across the aisle to
stand up for law-abiding citizens and adopt H.R. 38, the Concealed
Carry Reciprocity Act.
H.R. 38 is a bipartisan and commonsense bill that ensures people like
Shaneen Allen, a single mother from south Philly, don't become
criminals for carrying a legally owned firearm across an invisible
State line.
We need H.R. 38 more than ever. And if my colleagues are determined
to pass gun legislation, then let's help people protect themselves.
Mr. Speaker, if we adopt the motion to recommit today, we will
instruct the Judiciary Committee to consider my amendment to H.R. 1446
to include my bill, H.R. 38, the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act.
I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the
Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from North Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Speaker, in 2015, a white supremacist with a
criminal record was allowed to purchase a gun which he used to kill
nine parishioners at Mother Emanuel AME Church in South Carolina.
That shooter, who was prohibited under Federal law from owning a gun,
was able to purchase one because of a loophole that allows the sale of
a gun to proceed if Federal investigators do not complete a background
check within 3 days.
Through November of last year there were more than 5,800 incidents
where people who are legally prohibited--criminals--legally prohibited
from purchasing a firearm still obtained one because of this dangerous
provision, which has come to be known as the ``Charleston loophole.''
H.R. 1446, the Enhanced Background Checks Act, closes the Charleston
loophole. It strengthens background check procedures to ensure that
Federal investigators have enough time to complete background checks
before a gun is transferred to the buyer. Common sense.

[[Page H1307]]

But closing the Charleston loophole is not enough. Current Federal
law only requires a background check for the sale of guns from licensed
gun dealers.
Background checks work. Since the law was enacted, 3\1/2\ million gun
sales were denied, which means 3\1/2\ million people who were
prohibited under Federal law because of a criminal record or some other
disqualifying information were denied the right to buy a gun. They
work. The problem is more than 20 percent of gun sales or gun transfers
happen without a background check.
And that is why H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act requires
background checks on all gun sales, including guns sold by unlicensed
dealers online or at trade shows.
Every day in this country more than 100 people in the United States
are killed with guns. Gun violence is an epidemic that threatens the
public safety in communities all across America. We must not wait for
another tragedy to strike.

{time} 1630

Requiring background checks on all gun sales is a commonsense gun
violence prevention measure that serves as a first line of defense to
keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.
I think we can all agree that dangerous criminals should not be able
to get guns. There has been a lot of discussion today about Second
Amendment gun rights, and we all respect that. But what about my
constituents' right to live a life free from gun violence, to take a
walk in the park, to go to a movie theater, to go to church and pray,
and to be able to do so without the fear of being gunned down and
killed? There is a competing interest here of public safety and
protecting the security of people to live a life free from gun
violence.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1446 and
H.R. 8. Join us in supporting legislation supported by over 90 percent
of the American people who have good common sense. Vote ``yes.'' Help
end the scourge of gun violence in this country.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Alabama (Mr. Palmer).
Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, a bill trampling on the Second Amendment
rights of the American people is a convenient distraction from the
actual crisis in the United States. There are over almost 11,000 people
killed by drunk drivers each year. There were more than 81,000 drug
overdose deaths in the United States in the 12 months ending last May.
But we are here today debating a bill to further restrict the rights of
law-abiding citizens.
I just heard it mentioned about domestic violence. You could have a
woman, threatened by an ex-boyfriend or a husband, who feels her life
is being threatened, who would not be able to acquire a firearm once
she needed it. She would have to wait at least 10 days.
The vast majority of illicit drugs, like heroin and fentanyl, leading
to these 81,000 deaths are crossing our southern border. Instead of
addressing these issues, President Biden has reinstituted catch and
release, and now, we have an overwhelming surge of illegal crossings on
our southern border.
According to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, in 2018
alone, there were 1,641 illegal aliens convicted of homicide. How many
more will it be now that the Democrats have signaled that our borders
are wide open?
This bill reflects an obsession with gun restrictions by my Democrat
colleagues. Meanwhile, in 2018, more than one in six homicides were
committed without a firearm of any type: 1,500 were killed with knives
or cutting instruments, more than 400 with blunt instruments, and more
than 600 with hands and feet. Only 403 died as a result of a rifle of
any kind.
Mr. Speaker, these numbers are dwarfed by the loss of life from the
failure of the Democrats to enforce their laws.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly).
Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, experts estimate that the
Charleston loophole has allowed more than 75,000 guns to fall into the
hands of prohibited gun owners.
The Enhanced Background Checks Act is a necessary and straightforward
fix to close this loophole and allow the FBI to investigate potentially
dangerous individuals.
This bill would simply increase the time Federal investigators have
to complete background checks on gun sales from 3 to 10 days, 1 week's
time. That is all we are asking for, an additional week for
investigators to ensure that there is no reason the person who is
buying a gun should not have one. Think of the lives that could be
saved or could have been saved by allowing that extra 7 days.
Mr. Speaker, I think we can agree that gun ownership is a serious
responsibility. There is no need to rush through a background check
with so much at stake. This bill is an urgently needed tool in gun
violence prevention.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to once again pass H.R. 1446 and
close the Charleston loophole.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for
engaging in this debate today.
Mr. Speaker, there is a higher authority than the law of man. Above
the Speaker's podium are the words, in this great Chamber, ``In God we
trust.''
Do we? Do we recognize that the Biblical record is replete with the
violence of man?
Shall my colleagues on the other side of the aisle admit that law
designed to restrict Second Amendment rights and freedoms are but a
veil to conceal the violence of man born since Adam? The firstborn son
of Adam killed his brother in a violent rage. I am rather certain he
did not use a firearm.
The Second Amendment protections that we have as American citizens
shall not be infringed. Remember these words and that they are born of
a nation that recognized our service to our Lord.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from New York (Mr. Espaillat).
Mr. ESPAILLAT. Mr. Speaker, improving background checks is common
sense. Background checks simply make it harder for guns to end up in
the hands of the wrong people--criminals.
Mr. Speaker, 75,000 guns have ended up in the hands of the wrong
people. The Enhanced Background Checks Act gives the FBI more time to
complete background checks. In doing so, it closes the loophole.
The Framers didn't think about carrying an AK-47 or a semiautomatic
weapon. That is not what they thought about.
Mr. Speaker, these guns are dangerous. They leave a pool of blood on
corners in cities across the United States of America, and having
access to them too soon is a deadly decision. We must pass this
legislation to ensure that communities are safe all over America.
Let me just end by saying that we have a new item, the ghost gun
loopholes. Ghost guns are made to evade law enforcement. There are
ghost guns. We should stop them now, dead in their tracks.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the FBI tells us, in a 4-year time period, 18,000 people
who exercised their Second Amendment liberties to get a firearm who
were denied got that reversed. Those are just the ones who went there
and said, ``You know what, you guys screwed up. It is not really me.''
They had to work it out.
Mr. Speaker, 18,000 times, the system screwed up. In 2017, over
112,000 people were denied, but only 12 people were prosecuted, which
means that, most likely, thousands of law-abiding people were falsely
denied their right to exercise their Second Amendment liberty.
Now what do Democrats want to do? They want to say: Wait a minute.
That all happened in a 3-day time period. We are going to extend that
for 10 days because we know the government bureaucracy will get so much
better in 10 days. We know it will work out if we just give them more
time to screw up more things.
That is what is going to happen. Oh, by the way, that single lady who
needs to protect herself, she is going to have to wait longer now for a
system that had this many screwups to get the firearms she needs to
exercise her Second Amendment liberties to protect herself and her
family. That is what this legislation does.

[[Page H1308]]

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr.
Young), the dean of the House.
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I watched this debate. I have to say, we have
an old saying: ``How do you eat an elephant? A bite at a time.'' We
have had two bites today.
Mr. Speaker, this is not about what everybody is talking about. It is
about the Second Amendment and--I won't call you Democrats. A lot of
you are. Some of you are socialists that believe in taking the right to
protect away--the Second Amendment--from the law-abiding citizens.
This is just a little step forward, the 10-day waiting period instead
of the 3-day waiting period.
The FBI is controlled by the President. He, in fact, can say take 6
months or 6 years for a legal purchase of a weapon. That is what you
are really saying.
Taking away the right to protect your home and your liberty, not just
from criminals but those who would take away your rights as a
government, the Second Amendment is what it is all about, to protect
from the tyranny that could occur by the wrong leaders taking rights
and freedoms away from you.
That is why I, as a board member, support this idea of the Second
Amendment and ask for a ``no'' vote on both of these bills.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Raskin).
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, some of my colleagues are invoking the
Second Amendment quite promiscuously today, but they obviously haven't
read any of the relevant Supreme Court authority because Justice
Scalia, in District of Columbia v. Heller, explicitly upheld
reasonable, commonsense regulations to guarantee that violent criminals
don't get guns.
So, everything that we are doing is perfectly in advance of, in
pursuit of, Second Amendment rights that are exercised coextensively
with the public safety and with the common good.
Here is a regulation that we need, that we have known we have needed
ever since a violent white supremacist killed nine African-American
Christian worshippers at a Bible class in Charleston, South Carolina.
He should have been denied a gun, but he got it because the background
check search wasn't completed in 3 days. He got it automatically,
although he shouldn't have had it, and nine people are dead because of
it.
We say, let's close that loophole. Just like with H.R. 8, let's make
sure that the universal background check is universal.
Mr. Speaker, 90 percent of the American people support it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman very much for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, this is reasonable, commonsense gun safety legislation
contemplated by Justice Scalia, by the Supreme Court, under the Second
Amendment of the Constitution.
It is what America needs so that we don't have a rate of gun violence
and gun deaths 25 times higher than everybody else in the
industrialized world.
Yet, some people are so under the spell of the NRA, a deeply corrupt
organization that is ripping off money from loyal gun owners around the
country, that they are unwilling to stand with the common good.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker used the term
``reasonable.'' This legislation shifts the burden, so you are now
telling an American citizen the burden is on you to exercise your
Second Amendment liberties. They deny the background check, deny you
your ability to purchase a firearm, and the burden is on you.
Mr. Speaker, I would think that a professor of law would understand
that you don't shift the burden when you are talking about a
fundamental liberty that we enjoy under the Constitution. It doesn't
seem reasonable at all to me.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Grothman).
Mr. GROTHMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to, one more time, address
what is going on here and the perceived problem.
Here in the United States, the number of murders from the beginning
of the 1990s until Ferguson had fallen repeatedly, and the murder rate
was half of what it once was with a tough law enforcement stance.

At that time, in the Ferguson shooting, when Officer Wilson, who was
eventually found entirely innocent by the Obama Justice Department,
when that person died, we whipped people into an antipolice frenzy.
Because of the antipolice frenzy, we had the murder rate in this
country go up by 20 percent.
It then began to drop again until last year when we had the horrible
events in Minneapolis. One more time, we whipped people up into a
frenzy, and the number of murders in 1 year in Minneapolis went up 70
percent; in New York, 40 percent; in Chicago, 55 percent; and in
Milwaukee, 95 percent, with the same gun control laws in cities that
are run by mayors who are as antigun as you will find.
The problem here is we whipped the people into an antipolice frenzy.
The police became passive, and a lot of people died. The people who
were whipped into the antipolice frenzy ought to stop and consider the
huge increase in murders.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Dingell).
Mrs. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1446.
This is a commonsense bill that would extend the time allowed for the
completion of background checks for firearm sales from 3 to 10 days,
giving time for a complete background check.
I want to be clear. I lived with a man who slept with a gun under his
pillow until the day he died. He was a responsible gun owner. And I
lived in a home with a man who shouldn't have had a gun, and I remember
the fear that I could die any day and that my siblings would die. A gun
in a household with someone emotionally unstable, angry, is plain and
simply dangerous.
Mass shootings and tragic acts of gun violence have become far too
common in the United States. I think my baby sister is not alive today
because of the trauma of living with someone who should not have had a
gun.
Yet, I don't want to take a gun away from a responsible gun owner.
Every American deserves the right to live safely.

{time} 1645

Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Georgia (Mr. Clyde).
Mr. CLYDE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1446, and
in defense of the constitutional right to bear arms.
This right does not come with caveats, asterisks, or exceptions. It
exists to make sure that the freedom to keep and bear arms is not
unjustly infringed upon by the government.
It is the government that has the legal burden of explaining why it
is restricting the natural rights of the citizen. H.R. 1446 would
reverse that burden and require the law-abiding American to petition
for the right to bear arms if they don't hear back from government
after 10 business days, 7 more than the current law provides.
In response to this unconstitutional action, I will introduce a bill
to allow a Federal firearms licensee to transfer a purchased firearm to
a legitimate buyer within 3 calendar days of contacting the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System, as opposed to the current
law, which requires 3 State government business days.
As a Federal firearms licensee myself, I saw firsthand during the
pandemic how the closure of State government offices across the country
easily infringed upon our right keep and bear arms. With these offices
closed, or purported closed, 3 business days can turn into weeks and
even months before a firearm transfer is allowed to be completed by
government.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 1446.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I want us to be very quiet in this
Chamber, almost to the extent of hearing a pin drop. That is what
happens when you are in prayer: Muslims, Catholics, those of the Jewish
faith, Christians.

[[Page H1309]]

Prayer is the most sacred moment in many faiths, in all faiths.
Imagine that moment in Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal
Church, friends of ours across the Nation. That weekday prayer service
for some is a lifeline for their survival. They are huddled in prayer,
maybe taking care of what they call a broken heart, a bad day at the
office, a need to take care of a wayward child, and in comes this young
man that they saw only as a person in need of prayer.
That is a song we sing. That we are in need of prayer. Just imagine
this pristine, white, old church symbolizing the freedom of slaves,
just imagine these precious souls who were doing nothing but praying.
I want to acknowledge the pain that Whip Clyburn experienced. I saw
him in the aftermath of those days. These were not just his fellow
Americans, they were his neighbors and his friends and interns.
How many remember when the commander in healing, the commander of
bringing people together, President Obama, sang the song Amazing Grace?
That is what life in the midst of a storm is about, and that is what
we are in, in the proliferation of guns.
And my friends on the other side keep throwing darts and bombs about
undermining the Second Amendment. I say it again. From the early stages
of the Founding Fathers in the Bill of Rights, gun usage in America was
regulated. The Heller case does not deny regulation. In fact, there are
aspects that allow it.
So this is a legitimate regulation for safety, not control. Because
Dylann, who went to a gun store and manipulated a gun owner to go and
give him the gun after 3 days because there was something funny about
his information, this will save lives. Ten days is not too long to stop
the loss of life and the bloodshed that was in Mother Emanuel.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to support H.R. 1446 to save lives.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to gentleman from
California (Mr. McClintock).
Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, what is the so-called Charleston
Loophole?
It is a provision that gives the FBI 3 days to provide a background
check for a citizen to buy a gun. Now, 3 days for a background check
doesn't seem unreasonable since a credit card check takes about 3
seconds.
Now, if the FBI fails to give a clear ``yes'' or ``no'' in 3 days,
the sale can proceed. That protects our Second Amendment right from
arbitrary denial by inaction, and the clearance is good for 30 days
from when you begin that transaction.
Now, this bill repeals the 3-day limit and replaces it with a
multistage bureaucratic review process that can span up to 20 business
days.
It is really quite clever. Your clearance is good for 30 calendar
days from the day you begin the transaction, but the clearance can be
delayed for up to 20 business days. So if you applied on January 15 of
this year, 20 business days takes you to February 16. By then, your
purchase window will have expired 2 days earlier, on February 14. You
have to start the process over, applying for a new background check in
a perpetual cycle. They never have to say ``approved.''
Would a government abuse its citizens like that?
I don't know. Maybe we should ask Lois Lerner or Andrew McCabe.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Cline).
Mr. CLINE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1446 and
the last bill we spoke about, H.R. 8.
These bills continue the systematic and coordinated attempt by the
Democratic Party to undermine our Second Amendment rights.
I was sent to Washington by my constituents to uphold and defend the
Constitution. I will not stand by and allow our rights to be stripped
away. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim that these
bills will save lives. However, nothing in them would have stopped any
of the recent mass casualty shootings that have occurred in our
country.

Rather than go after criminals who break the law, Democrats want to
create a false narrative that will criminalize private gun ownership.
Democrats will tell you that these bills close loopholes, but the
loophole they believe exists is that law-abiding Americans are even
able to own guns in the first place.
The sole objective of this gun control package is to remove
constitutional safeguards and put in place criminal penalties that
would unjustly go after responsible gun owners.
The Second Amendment is crystal clear, the right to bear arms shall
not be infringed. Our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to
protect us from a tyrannical government, and wrote the Second Amendment
to ensure that the rights of Americans to protect themselves was
secured.
These outrageous proposals put government between the American people
and their constitutional freedoms to protect themselves, protect their
families, and protect their communities, and I vote ``no.''
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio for
yielding.
Mr. Speaker, there is no gun violence problem from legal gun owners.
And this bill, as well as the prior bill, will do nothing to stop gun
violence because it unnecessarily regulates law-abiding citizens. And
we don't have to define that term, I would think, because they are not
criminals.
The problem is with criminals. And because criminals could care less
about the bills we are talking about today, innocent people will die.
I can think of neighbors of mine out in the country where I live, who
have an ex who would want to cause violence to them. That lady could
come to me and say: I can't get a gun because I have got to wait 10
days, but he could come this weekend. Would you loan me a gun?
Mr. Speaker, what we are doing today wouldn't allow that. This lady
is put at severe risk.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to consider what they are doing.
This will not work. Vote against H.R. 1446 and support the Second
Amendment made by people sometimes wiser than us.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Earlier, we had a couple of the folks who spoke on our side. Earlier
they said the Second Amendment is right next to the First because it is
pretty darn important. I think some of our folks said that.
But it struck me that, you know what, I don't know that the other
side actually cares all that much about the First Amendment.
Think about what has happened this past year. Democrats have told
Americans they can't go to church, can't go to work, can't go to
school, can't go to a loved one's funeral.
Of course, the rules never apply to them. We had a Governor of one of
our largest States--a Governor of our largest State--out at a 5-star
restaurant, having dinner with friends and lobbyists at the same time
he is telling folks in his State that they can't even have Thanksgiving
dinner with their family.
We see the attack on free speech. I mean, just to laugh at this whole
cancel culture phenomena. First it was Kermit the Frog and the Muppets,
then it was Dr. Seuss. I think yesterday it was cartoon characters from
the Looney Tunes. Tack on your right to speak, specifically to speak in
any type of political nature.
We have had Democrat Members of Congress, Mr. Speaker, send a letter
to carriers, asking those carriers not to have certain news networks on
their system. That is frightening. You talk about chilling speech. That
is as scary as it gets--just because they don't like what is being said
on certain news networks? Scary.
And now they are coming after your Second Amendment liberties as
well. I mean, think about your First Amendment rights, your right to
practice your faith, your right to assemble, your right to petition
your government, freedom of the press, freedom of speech. And then the
very next right the Founders mention, your Second Amendment liberties,
they are coming after that, too.

[[Page H1310]]

It wasn't enough to go after your right to practice your faith. It
wasn't enough to go after your right to assemble and be with people you
wanted. Think about some of the things we saw this year. We had
Democrat leaders in States telling Americans you had to be in your home
at a certain time with curfews. You had to be in your home by 10.
We had another State say, when you are in your home, you have to wear
a mask. And then we had States say, well, when you are in your home,
you don't have to wear a mask because you are not allowed to have
anybody over.
Government was limiting your First Amendment right to practice your
religion, your First Amendment right to assemble. And now they are
coming after your First Amendment right to speak and speak in a
political nature. And here we are today, coming after your Second
Amendment liberties.
The Democratic Party is the party that says defund the police, open
the border, attack people's Second Amendment rights to defend
themselves while they are defunding the police and opening the border,
and all the while they are undermining American's First Amendment
liberties as well.
This should frighten everyone.

{time} 1700

This should frighten everyone. This should frighten everyone wherever
they want to go. It is scary. I certainly hope we defeat both of these
bills today when they are offered.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
I have never heard such pernicious nonsense as we have heard today
from our Republican friends.
They say that this legislation will violate gun rights. But all this
legislation does is close a dangerous loophole that puts weapons in the
hands of individuals who should not legally be permitted to purchase
them merely because the FBI is not able to complete the background
check in time.
The FBI under this legislation will have 10 days maybe instead of 3
days to complete the background check and decide whether someone is too
dangerous to have access to guns. That is all this legislation does.
To say that it infringes on the Second Amendment, Mr. Raskin pointed
out that Justice Scalia in the Heller decision upheld this kind of
legislation.
So stop with the nonsense, pass this legislation, and make the
American people safe.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PALMER. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Amendment and
to the underlying legislation which is another attack on our 2nd
amendment rights. This bill trampling on the 2nd Amendment rights of
the American people is a convenient distraction from the other actual
crises in the United States.
There were almost 11,000 people killed by drunk drivers in 2018.
There were more than 81,000 drug overdose deaths in the United States
in the 12 months ending last May . . . but we are here today debating a
bill to further restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens.
This bill endangers women threatened by domestic violence from an ex-
boyfriend or ex-husband. A woman who feels her life is threatened would
not be able to acquire a firearm when she needed one, under this bill
she would have to wait at least 10 days.
The vast majority of the most deadly illicit drugs like heroin and
fentanyl are smuggled across our southern border. Instead of addressing
these issues President Biden has reinstituted catch and release and we
now have an overwhelming surge of illegals crossing our southern
border. According to a report from the Immigration and Customs
Enforcement Agency, in 2018 there were 1,641 illegal aliens convicted
of homicide. How many more will it be now that the Democrats have
signaled that our borders are wide open?
Yet we are here debating a bill to take away the rights of law-
abiding men and women to acquire firearms to protect themselves.
This bill reflects an obsession with gun restrictions by my Democrat
colleagues. In terms of homicides, more than 1 in 6 do not involve a
firearm of any type. According to the FBI, in 2017 over 1,500 people
were killed with knives or cutting instruments, more than 400 were
killed with blunt instruments and more than 600 killed with hands,
fists and feet. There were only 403 homicides committed with a rifle of
any type, including a semi-automatic AR-15 that is the target of many
Democrat anti-gun activists.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment and the underlying
bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Hayes). All time for debate has
expired.
Each further amendment printed in part D of House Report 117-10 not
earlier considered as part of amendments en bloc pursuant to section 9
of House Resolution 188, shall be considered only in the order printed
in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the
report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time
specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent
and an opponent, may be withdrawn by the proponent at any time before
the question is put thereon, shall not be subject to amendment, and
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
It shall be in order at any time after debate for the chair of the
Committee on the Judiciary or his designee to offer amendments en bloc
consisting of further amendments printed in part D of House Report 117-
10, not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as
read, shall be debatable for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled
by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the
Judiciary or their respective designees, shall not be subject to
amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the
question.

Amendments En Bloc Offered by Mr. Nadler of New York

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 188, I offer
amendments en bloc.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendments en
bloc.
Amendments en bloc consisting of amendment Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4,
printed in part D of House Report 117-10, offered by Mr. Nadler of New
York:

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Burgess of Texas

At the end of the bill, add the following:

SEC. _. REPORT ON FIREARM TRANSFERS DENIED AS A RESULT OF A
NICS CHECK.

Within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act,
the Inspector General, Department of Justice, shall prepare
and submit to the Congress a written report on the number of
firearm transactions with respect to which the national
instant criminal background check system established under
the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act has determined that
receipt of a firearm by the prospective firearm transferee
would violate Federal or State law, and which have been
referred to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and
Explosives for investigation.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Levin of California

Page 5, strike line 16.
Page 5, beginning on line 18, strike ``and an aggregate''
and all that follows through line 20 and insert `` with a
description of denials, disaggregated by State and by the
basis for the denial; and''.
Page 5, after line 20, insert the following:
(3) an aggregate analysis of the petitions submitted
pursuant to such paragraph (1)(B)(ii).

Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. McBath of Georgia

Page 6, line 15, insert ``disaggregated by State,'' before
``and whether''.

Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Neguse of Colorado

Page 5, strike line 21 and all that follows through page 6,
line 7 and insert the following:

SEC. 4. REPORTS ON PETITIONS SUPPORTING FIREARMS TRANSFERS
NOT IMMEDIATELY APPROVED BY NICS SYSTEM, THAT
WERE NOT RESPONDED TO IN A TIMELY MANNER.

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall
make an annual report to the public on the number of
petitions received by the national instant criminal
background check system established under section 103 of the
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that were submitted
pursuant to subclause (I) of section 922(t)(1)(B)(ii) of
title 18, United States Code, with respect to which a
determination was not made within the 10-day period referred
to in subclause (II) of such section 922(t)(1)(B)(ii). The
report shall include the following, which shall be
disaggregated by State:
(1) The number of petitions submitted under such section
that were received by the national instant criminal
background check system established under section 103 of the
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.
(2) The number of petitioners who were discovered to be
ineligible under Federal or State law during that 10-day
period.
(3) The number of petitioners who were discovered to be
ineligible under Federal or State law after that 10-day
period.
(4) The basis of the ineligibility of the petitioners
discovered to be ineligible under Federal or State law during
that 10-day period, and the basis of the ineligibility of the
petitioners discovered to be ineligible under Federal or
State law after that 10-day period.
(5) The number of the petitioners whose petitions were
denied and who, within 12

[[Page H1311]]

months after the denial, were prosecuted under Federal,
State, or local law for receiving or attempting to receive a
firearm.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 188, the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr.
Jordan) each will control 10 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 45 seconds.
Madam Speaker, the amendments contained in this en bloc amendment
include important changes to the bill that will provide Congress
additional information to inform our future decisionmaking.
Representative Burgess' amendment would require reporting to Congress
on the number of NICS denials referred for investigation after a
firearm was sold to a person who was later found to be ineligible.
Representative Levin's amendment adds State-level data tracking which
will facilitate our review of which State gun safety measures have been
effective and which should be considered on the Federal level.
Representative McBath's amendment would require critical reporting on
the impact of the bill on victims of domestic abuse.
Lastly, Representative Neguse's amendment makes data available to the
public regarding NICS denials.
These are valuable additions to H.R. 1446.
Madam Speaker, I urge all Members to support them, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, I am going to attempt to
address the hearts and minds of some of my dear friends across the
aisle, and I do have friends: I respect you, I love you, and I admire
you.
I recognize that we have all lived different lives, but let me
clarify that I have a very personal knowledge of the way the street
works. Criminals are not going to follow these laws.
Madam Speaker, you are talking about 10 days--I can have a 10-minute
override from right here and bring you back an illegal gun.
Do you want one?
A couple of hundred bucks, Madam Speaker, I can get you one.
Madam Speaker, it is not intellectually sound to actually believe in
your heart that restricting the Second Amendment rights and freedoms to
purchase, own, and bear firearms of Americans that will follow the laws
you intend to pass is going to impact the decisions that are made by
criminals on the streets. It is just not reality.
This realm is bizarre. Americans are watching this right now. They
get it. They know the criminals are not going to follow the law. This
is not going to impact the criminal realm.
We have deterioration of our society because of the failure to
embrace core principles and American family values. This is what has
happened over the course of a generation on my watch. I am 59. This has
happened to America as I have matured. I am concerned about the future,
but I am certainly recognizing the core freedoms and principled
protections of the constitutional rights of my children and
grandchildren.
We must not allow that to be deteriorated under the guise of
protecting our citizens from crime. Criminals are not going to
recognize these laws.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentleman from California (Mr. Levin).
Mr. LEVIN of California. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the
Enhanced Background Checks Act.
In order to truly prevent bad actors from purchasing guns, we need
more transparency. My amendment to this legislation demands
transparency from government at both the State and Federal level and
ensures that we have complete information about prohibited individuals
attempting to get their hands on guns.
Right now, the background check system relies heavy on States
uploading accurate records. And with this amendment we can better
understand which States are doing a good job of uploading records to
the system and which are not. Without good and reliable information and
without transparency, background checks are much more likely to be
delayed resulting in a higher risk of more tragedies like the one at
Mother Emanuel Church.
With this amendment we can ensure that prohibited individuals won't
be sold a gun before their background check is fully completed. If we
truly want to keep guns out of the hands of violent individuals, my
amendment will get it done.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
Mr. PERRY. Madam Speaker, what we are saying here is that the
American people have to beg their government to avail themselves of
their rights: Oh, Federal Government, can I speak now?
Can I defend myself now, or should I wait a little longer?
That is what we are saying now.
The Constitution says, ``shall not be infringed.'' In Pennsylvania
where I come from, our constitution says, ``shall not be questioned.''
Madam Speaker, we are questioning it today. We are putting our
constituents and we are putting the American people who have the
Constitution enshrining their rights on the defensive, begging their
government to avail themselves of their rights.
Now, my colleagues and my good friends on the other side of the aisle
keep on bringing up the horrific tragedy and the events that happened
at the church. We can't bring that up and say that this is the solution
when this doesn't fix that.
Madam Speaker, you can't say that the FBI couldn't check all the
databases. It chose not to. It could have checked them in those 3 days,
but it chose not to.
Now, those are tragic events for sure, but it is not the American
people's fault that the FBI didn't do their job. Do not punish the
American people. Do not abridge their rights because the FBI and
because the government couldn't get it right. Let's fix the government
and allow the people to be free and enjoy their constitutional rights
and defend themselves when they want to defend themselves.

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Clarke).
Ms. CLARKE of New York. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New
York for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 1446, the Enhanced
Background Checks Act of 2021.
Under current Federal law, unlicensed sellers can sell guns at gun
shows, online, and person to person without conducting any background
check on the purchaser. This loophole has dangerous consequences for
our communities. In fact, up to 80 percent of firearms used for
criminal purposes are obtained without a background check.
I am reminded of my time on the New York City Council where I
witnessed the murder of my colleague and dear friend, Councilman James
E. Davis.
Just earlier this week, a gunman opened fire on two police officers
in my district, hitting one officer in the chest and another in the
leg. Guns are not manufactured in Brooklyn, New York.
Time and time again we have been shaken to the core and heartbroken
by the news of another shooting in our communities that we call home.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
Mr. WALBERG. Madam Speaker, I sit here and listen to my colleagues,
and that is what I want to do; but I become more frustrated with the
fact that I think, Madam Speaker, we are in parallel universes.
We are talking about gun crime. We all agree that gun crime is wrong.
We all agree that the murders that go on with gun crime are horrendous
and we don't want them to continue. But they are not happening as a
result of law-abiding gun owners.
We have background checks now that work. I have gone through those
myself. We have dealt with them.
I grew up on the south side of Chicago. I love Chicago. It pains me
to see that become the murder center that it has become. And now I hear
the report that the reason it is this is because people from Chicago
can come to Michigan, buy illegal guns, and bring them back, that is
the fault.

[[Page H1312]]

No, it is a heart problem.
It is a problem of criminals who are not being prosecuted.
We have FBI who don't follow the background checks and don't do it in
a timely fashion. We have a Justice Department that doesn't prosecute
gun crimes. And we blame it on law-abiding citizens.
What we will do today--as we have attempted other times--is to put
law-abiding citizens under the gun--and I use that word specifically--
further who will not commit a crime, but have to go through onerous
legislation that allegedly makes more transparent gun laws that stomp
on the Second Amendment liberties that we have.
Madam Speaker, that is wrong. That is wrong, and it will not end the
gun problem. We have had a War on Poverty for years and poverty has
increased. Government programs don't work.
Madam Speaker, I appeal to my friends on the other side of the aisle:
I know your hearts are right, but this won't do the job.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Speier).
Ms. SPEIER. Madam Speaker, the gun violence epidemic has robbed us of
our loved ones; our safety in schools, our places of worship and public
spaces; and our children. It has ravaged our communities across America
and touched the Halls of Congress.
It is also very personal to me. I am one of the few Members on this
floor who has been a victim of gun violence, and we know what this is
all about.
This is all about making sure felons don't get guns. It is making
sure that those who are mentally ill don't get guns. And it is making
sure that those who have committed domestic violence don't get guns.
That is all this bill is doing.
But what my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are doing is
bowing to the NRA that contributes to their campaigns and kissing the
rings of those who are the gun manufacturers who contribute to the NRA
anywhere from $10 to $60 million over the course of 5 years. That is
what this is all about.
The American people want to be safe, and we are going to make them
safe.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 1715

Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Speaker, I thank the chairman for his
leadership, and I thank Whip Clyburn for letting us fix the problem of
criminals getting guns.
Do my friends on the other side of the aisle not understand that
Dylann Roof had a criminal background? What happened is that the
storekeeper, in essence, violated the law. He viewed it as not
violating the law because, after 3 days, there was no answer.
Dylann Roof took a gun and became a mass shooter in America. Yes, if
he had not gotten a gun illegally, these souls would be alive today.
In 2018, there were 355 mass shootings. We have evidence that people
with guns have not stopped a mass shooting. So if there was a person
armed with a gun inside Mother Emanuel praying with a gun, I don't
believe that lives could have been saved.
What I do know is that if this bill, H.R. 1446, had been in place,
that would have allowed a 10-day window to be able to determine whether
Dylann Roof needed to have a gun. It is a simple context, simple facts,
and it should be done to save lives.
I rise in enthusiastic support of H.R. 1446. I thank Whip Clyburn for
his long years of persistence. And our sympathy goes to those who lost
their lives at Mother Emanuel in 2015.
We have come now to be able to say no, criminals should not have
guns, and we should have a NICS system that allowed the full review
background check so that he could not have had a gun. What is wrong
with that?
Are we interested in saving lives the right way?
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1446, the ``Enhanced
Background Check Act of 2021,'' which strengthens the background check
procedures federal firearms licensees or dealers follow before selling
or transferring a firearm.
Under current law, firearms dealers are required to run a background
check on prospective buyers using the NICS.
Over 90 percent of checks are completed within 90 seconds so if the
NICS system has not returned an answer to the licensed firearms dealer
within ten days, the prospective firearms purchaser may file a petition
with the Attorney General for review.
After another 10-day period has expired, the licensed firearms dealer
may sell or transfer the firearm to the prospective purchaser if it has
not received a response through the NICS system and the dealer has no
reason to believe that the purchaser is prohibited from obtaining a
firearm under Federal, state, or local law.
Thus, under this measure, licensed firearms dealers could not sell or
transfer under the ``default proceed'' provision until at least 20 days
have passed since the initial background check.
Madam Speaker, the American people are demanding effective action to
reduce, if not prevent altogether, the countless mass shootings and gun
violence in our country that continue to claim so many innocent lives.
Newly released data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and
Prevention found firearm-related deaths rose for the second-straight
year in 2016, largely due to spikes in gun violence.
In 2016, the new CDC report on preliminary mortality data shows that
there were more than 38,000 gun-related deaths in the U.S.--4,000 more
than 2015.
An Associated Press analysis of FBI data shows there were about
11,000 gun-related homicides in 2016, up from 9,600 in 2015.
Congress must act to keep our country safe through gun safety and
violence deterrence.
There was nearly one mass shooting per day in the United States--355
mass shootings in 2018.
In December 2012, a gunman walked into Sandy Hook Elementary School
in Newtown, Connecticut, and killed 20 children, 6 adults, and himself.
Since December 2012, there have been at least 1,518 mass shootings,
with at least 1,715 people killed and 6,089 wounded.
On the night of October 1, 2017, a gunman opened fire on a large
crowd of concertgoers at the Route 91 Harvest music festival on the Las
Vegas Strip, leaving 58 people dead and 527 injured.
And on November 5, 2017, a mass shooting occurred at the First
Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, where the gunman, 26-year-
old Devin Patrick Kelley, killed 26 and injured 20 others.
Every day, on average, 92 Americans are victims of gun violence,
resulting in more than 33,000 deaths annually.
States with higher gun ownership rates have higher gun murder rates--
as much as 114 percent higher than other States.
A recent study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
looking at 30 years of homicide data found that for every 1 percent
increase in a State's gun ownership rate, there is a nearly 1 percent
increase in its firearm homicide rate.
Gun death rates are generally lower in States with restrictions such
as safe storage requirements or assault weapons bans.
Mass shootings stopped by armed civilians in the past 33 years: 0.
Because more than 75 percent of the weapons used in mass shootings
between 1982 and 2012 were obtained legally, stronger legislation is
needed to prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands.
Madam Speaker, enhancing the gun transfer background check system has
consistently garnered broad public support, as high as 92 percent,
because the American people know that the status quo is simply
intolerable and action must be taken to reduce gun violence by keeping
dangerous persons from obtaining deadly weapons.
That begins with passing H.R. 1446, the ``Enhanced Background Check
Act of 2021,'' and I urge all members to join me in voting for its
passage.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Higgins).
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Madam Speaker, let's save a life. I am
going to share with my colleagues an actual story going on right now,
because my citizens have my phone number. I have had the same phone
number since 2004. They know they can reach out to me for help.
A young lady, right now, whose property, her yard, her garage, has
been invaded night after night after night by a strange man. He moves
fast. She is a single mom, a 30-year-old woman, hardworking woman,
American.
Many, many years ago, she pled guilty to a minor drug charge. It is
still on her record. She can't buy a gun, but, by God, she is going to
get one. She is going to get one illegally to defend herself and her
young child.

[[Page H1313]]

Your bill would make this story commonplace from sea to shining sea.
I beg for you to stand for the people who we serve and recognize what
you are attempting to do.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their
remarks to the Chair.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close. I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. JORDAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
I oppose both bills and the amendments for all the reasons we have
stated today. I think my colleague from Pennsylvania said it best. We
are now going to have to wait 10 days to exercise your Second Amendment
rights.
One of the previous speakers, Madam Speaker, on the Democrat side
said that felons don't get guns. They are felons. They are not going to
follow the law.
We all know what this is. This is going to make it more difficult for
law-abiding Americans to exercise a fundamental liberty guaranteed in
the United States Constitution, the second right they have, the Second
Amendment to the Constitution. It is going to make it more difficult
for them to exercise their fundamental liberty. That is what this is
about.
The FBI had 2 months in the Charleston situation to get it right.
They couldn't. Somehow we think now extending it from 3 days to 10
days, a system that messed up as much as it has, somehow that is going
to help, and then shifting the burden so that if this system that has
falsely denied people their right to purchase a firearm, time and time
again, if the system does it again, the burden is on you.
Since when do we ever do that? When are you presumed guilty by the
government? Only now. Only now are you presumed guilty. You are not
going to be able to exercise your rights.
Those are our concerns with both of these bills and the amendments
that are in front of us today.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Our Republican friends insist on misreading the bill. They insist on
talking about things that aren't in the bill.
The bill takes away the rights of nobody except those who have
threatened their wives, threatened their former wives, threatened other
people in the community. Those are all the people who are affected.
Yes, we extend the NICS system from 3 days to 10 days. That means
that if the NICS system hasn't reported back within 3 days, the FBI
gets up to 10 days. At the end of 10 days, they can't stop you from
getting a weapon unless the records show that you are not entitled to
get the weapon because you are a danger to the community. That is what
this bill does.
To misread it and say it gives any rights to felons, or to gun
buyers, or to people who are criminals because they disobey the law, of
course people who disobey the law are criminals. But that is not what
the bill deals with.
The bill simply says that it effectuates a system that says that
people who are threats to the community may not get guns. And it does
not limit the time beyond 10 days to make that decision.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 188, the
previous question is ordered on the amendments en bloc offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler).
The question is on the amendments en bloc.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. HIGGINS of Louisiana. Madam 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.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 225,
nays 202, not voting 3, as follows:

[Roll No. 73]

YEAS--225

Adams
Aguilar
Allred
Auchincloss
Axne
Barragan
Bass
Beatty
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Blunt Rochester
Bonamici
Bourdeaux
Bowman
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brown
Brownley
Bush
Bustos
Butterfield
Carbajal
Cardenas
Carson
Cartwright
Case
Casten
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Cooper
Correa
Costa
Courtney
Craig
Crist
Crow
Cuellar
Davids (KS)
Davis, Danny K.
Dean
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
DelBene
Delgado
Demings
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Escobar
Eshoo
Espaillat
Evans
Fitzpatrick
Fletcher
Foster
Frankel, Lois
Gallego
Garamendi
Garcia (IL)
Garcia (TX)
Gimenez
Golden
Gomez
Gonzalez, Vicente
Gottheimer
Green, Al (TX)
Grijalva
Grothman
Haaland
Harder (CA)
Hastings
Hayes
Higgins (NY)
Himes
Horsford
Houlahan
Hoyer
Huffman
Jackson Lee
Jacobs (CA)
Jayapal
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (TX)
Jones
Kahele
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Khanna
Kildee
Kilmer
Kim (NJ)
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Krishnamoorthi
Kuster
Lamb
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lawson (FL)
Lee (CA)
Lee (NV)
Leger Fernandez
Levin (CA)
Levin (MI)
Lieu
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Luria
Lynch
Malinowski
Malliotakis
Maloney, Carolyn B.
Maloney, Sean
Manning
Matsui
McBath
McCollum
McEachin
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Mfume
Moore (WI)
Morelle
Moulton
Mrvan
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neguse
Newman
Norcross
O'Halleran
Ocasio-Cortez
Omar
Pallone
Panetta
Pappas
Pascrell
Payne
Perlmutter
Peters
Phillips
Pingree
Pocan
Porter
Pressley
Price (NC)
Quigley
Raskin
Reed
Rice (NY)
Ross
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan
Sanchez
Sarbanes
Scanlon
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schneider
Schrader
Schrier
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Sewell
Sherman
Sherrill
Sires
Slotkin
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Soto
Spanberger
Speier
Stanton
Stevens
Strickland
Suozzi
Swalwell
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tlaib
Tonko
Torres (CA)
Torres (NY)
Trahan
Trone
Underwood
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wexton
Wild
Williams (GA)
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NAYS--202

Aderholt
Allen
Amodei
Armstrong
Arrington
Babin
Bacon
Baird
Balderson
Banks
Barr
Bentz
Bergman
Bice (OK)
Biggs
Bilirakis
Bishop (NC)
Boebert
Bost
Brady
Brooks
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Budd
Burchett
Burgess
Calvert
Cammack
Carl
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cawthorn
Chabot
Cheney
Cline
Cloud
Clyde
Cole
Comer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Curtis
Davidson
Davis, Rodney
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Duncan
Dunn
Emmer
Estes
Fallon
Feenstra
Ferguson
Fischbach
Fitzgerald
Fleischmann
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franklin, C. Scott
Fulcher
Gaetz
Gallagher
Garbarino
Garcia (CA)
Gibbs
Gohmert
Gonzales, Tony
Gonzalez (OH)
Good (VA)
Gooden (TX)
Gosar
Granger
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Green (TN)
Greene (GA)
Griffith
Guest
Guthrie
Hagedorn
Harris
Harshbarger
Hartzler
Hern
Herrell
Herrera Beutler
Hice (GA)
Higgins (LA)
Hill
Hinson
Hollingsworth
Hudson
Huizenga
Issa
Jackson
Jacobs (NY)
Johnson (LA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson (SD)
Jordan
Joyce (OH)
Joyce (PA)
Keller
Kelly (MS)
Kelly (PA)
Kim (CA)
Kinzinger
Kustoff
LaHood
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Latta
LaTurner
Lesko
Long
Loudermilk
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Mace
Mann
Massie
Mast
McCarthy
McCaul
McClain
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
Meijer
Meuser
Miller (IL)
Miller (WV)
Miller-Meeks
Moolenaar
Mooney
Moore (AL)
Moore (UT)
Mullin
Murphy (NC)
Nehls
Newhouse
Norman
Nunes
Obernolte
Owens
Palazzo
Palmer
Pence
Perry
Pfluger
Posey
Reschenthaler
Rice (SC)
Rodgers (WA)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rose
Rosendale
Rouzer
Roy
Rutherford
Salazar
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sessions
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smucker
Spartz
Stauber
Steel
Stefanik
Steil
Steube
Stewart
Stivers
Taylor
Tenney
Thompson (PA)
Timmons
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Drew
Van Duyne
Wagner
Walberg
Walorski
Waltz
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Williams (TX)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Young
Zeldin

NOT VOTING--3

Donalds
Tiffany
Waters

{time} 1808

So the en bloc amendments were agreed to.

[[Page H1314]]

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. WATERS. Madam Speaker, I was unavoidably delayed by a constituent
on the phone. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on
rollcall No. 73.

MEMBERS RECORDED PURSUANT TO HOUSE RESOLUTION 8, 117TH CONGRESS

Allred (Davids (KS))
Amodei (Kelly (PA))
Babin (Norman)
Baird (Walorski)
Barragan (Beyer)
Beatty (Lawrence)
Bush (Ocasio-Cortez)
Cardenas (Gomez)
Cleaver (Davids (KS))
Cohen (Beyer)
DeFazio (Davids (KS))
Grijalva (Garcia (IL))
Hastings (Wasserman Schultz)
Johnson (TX) (Jeffries)
Kahele (Case)
Kirkpatrick (Stanton)
Langevin (Lynch)
Lawson (FL) (Evans)
Lieu (Beyer)
Lofgren (Jeffries)
Lowenthal (Beyer)
McEachin (Wexton)
McHenry (Banks)
Meng (Clark (MA))
Moore (WI) (Beyer)
Morelle (Tonko)
Moulton (Rice (NY))
Napolitano (Correa)
Payne (Wasserman Schultz)
Pingree (Kuster)
Porter (Wexton)
Roybal-Allard (Leger Fernandez)
Ruiz (Aguilar)
Rush (Underwood)
Steube (Franklin, C. Scott)
Strickland (DelBene)
Thompson (MS) (Butterfield)
Watson Coleman (Pallone)
Wilson (FL) (Hayes)
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Hayes). The previous question is
ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

March 10, 2021, on page H1314, the following appeared: The
question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill, as
amended.

The online version has been corrected to read: The question is
on engrossment and third reading of the bill.

========================= END NOTE =========================

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

Motion to Recommit

Mr. HUDSON. Madam 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. Hudson moves to recommit the bill H.R. 1446 to the
Committee on the Judiciary.

The material previously referred to by Mr. Hudson is as follows:
At the end of the bill, add the following:

SEC. _. RECIPROCITY FOR THE CARRYING OF CERTAIN CONCEALED
FIREARMS.

(a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 926C the
following:

``Sec. 926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain
concealed firearms

``(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State
or political subdivision thereof (except as provided in
subsection (b)) and subject only to the requirements of this
section, a person who is not prohibited by Federal law from
possessing, transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm,
who is carrying a valid identification document containing a
photograph of the person, and who is carrying a valid license
or permit which is issued pursuant to the law of a State and
which permits the person to carry a concealed firearm or is
entitled to carry a concealed firearm in the State in which
the person resides, may possess or carry a concealed handgun
(other than a machine gun or destructive device) that has
been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign
commerce, in any State that--
``(1) has a statute under which residents of the State may
apply for a license or permit to carry a concealed firearm;
or
``(2) does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms
by residents of the State for lawful purposes.
``(b) This section shall not be construed to supersede or
limit the laws of any State that--
``(1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or
restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their
property; or
``(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on
any State or local government property, installation,
building, base, or park.
``(c)(1) A person who carries or possesses a concealed
handgun in accordance with subsections (a) and (b) may not be
arrested or otherwise detained for violation of any law or
any rule or regulation of a State or any political
subdivision thereof related to the possession,
transportation, or carrying of firearms unless there is
probable cause to believe that the person is doing so in a
manner not provided for by this section. Presentation of
facially valid documents as specified in subsection (a) is
prima facie evidence that the individual has a license or
permit as required by this section.
``(2) When a person asserts this section as a defense in a
criminal proceeding, the prosecution shall bear the burden of
proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the conduct of the
person did not satisfy the conditions set forth in
subsections (a) and (b).
``(3) When a person successfully asserts this section as a
defense in a criminal proceeding, the court shall award the
prevailing defendant a reasonable attorney's fee.
``(d)(1) A person who is deprived of any right, privilege,
or immunity secured by this section, under color of any
statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State
or any political subdivision thereof, may bring an action in
any appropriate court against any other person, including a
State or political subdivision thereof, who causes the person
to be subject to the deprivation, for damages or other
appropriate relief.
``(2) The court shall award a plaintiff prevailing in an
action brought under paragraph (1) damages and such other
relief as the court deems appropriate, including a reasonable
attorney's fee.
``(e) In subsection (a):
``(1) The term `identification document' means a document
made or issued by or under the authority of the United States
Government, a State, or a political subdivision of a State
which, when completed with information concerning a
particular individual, is of a type intended or commonly
accepted for the purpose of identification of individuals.
``(2) The term `handgun' includes any magazine for use in a
handgun and any ammunition loaded into the handgun or its
magazine.
``(f)(1) A person who possesses or carries a concealed
handgun under subsection (a) shall not be subject to the
prohibitions of section 922(q) with respect to that handgun.
``(2) A person possessing or carrying a concealed handgun
in a State under subsection (a) may do so in any of the
following areas in the State that are open to the public:
``(A) A unit of the National Park System.
``(B) A unit of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
``(C) Public land under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of
Land Management.
``(D) Land administered and managed by the Army Corps of
Engineers.
``(E) Land administered and managed by the Bureau of
Reclamation.
``(F) Land administered and managed by the Forest
Service.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for such
chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 926C the following:

``926D. Reciprocity for the carrying of certain concealed firearms.''.

(c) Severability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act, if any provision of this section, or any amendment
made by this section, or the application of such provision or
amendment to any person or circumstance is held to be
unconstitutional, this section and amendments made by this
section and the application of such provision or amendment to
other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act.

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. HUDSON. Madam 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.
Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of H.R.
1446 is postponed.

____________________