On Tuesday evening, the House reconvened, expecting to take up several measures, including a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also known as FISA.
Tuesday evening the House first voted on the Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act, H.R. 5856, to reauthorize the Trafficking Victims Protection Act for five years and expand anti-trafficking programs. The bill passed by a vote of 414-11. Next, the House took up the partisan resolution to impeach Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas (H.Res.863), which, as you may remember, failed in the House just last week. Once again, I voted no. This time, however, it passed by a vote of 214-213.
It was really disappointing to see this baseless, partisan impeachment move forward. And it especially true where Congress has the responsibility to help address the situation at the border and the failings of our immigration with legislation. Instead, Speaker Johnson and Republican leaders announced last week that they would reject a bipartisan border security deal that Senators have worked on for months—at the request of the Republican conference. Instead of working with Democrats on a comprehensive solution, House Republicans instead chose this path. Next, the House impeachment managers will present their case to the Senate.
On Wednesday, the House voted on a resolution condemning rape and sexual violence committed by Hamas in its war against Israel (H.Res.966), which passed unanimously. The House next voted on whether to consider additional legislation—the SALT Marriage Penalty Elimination Act (H.R.7160) and a resolution denouncing the energy policies of the Biden administration (H.Res.987). This resolution for debate on these bills failed to pass the House by a vote of 195-225. As I’ve explained a few times this Congress, failure to pass a resolution to begin debate is rare.
The same day, Speaker Johnson announced that the House would not consider the FISA reauthorization bill. In anticipation of voting on the FISA bill this week, I participated in briefings about the program and the proposed reauthorization, including from National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, and other intelligence and law enforcement leaders.
As a result of the failure to pass the rule and the removal of the FISA bill, we concluded the week earlier than expected on Thursday, considering the Assad Regime Anti-Normalization Act of 2023 (H.R. 3202), which condemns the normalization of relations with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and expands sanctions on the Assad regime. I voted in favor of the bill, which passed the House 389-32. We also voted on the Uyghur Policy Act of 2023 (H.R. 2766), a bill to authorize the Department of State to appoint a special coordinator to oversee federal policies and programs that affect Uyghurs; the Strengthening the Quad Act (H.R. 5375), which would create a parliamentary working group with the governments of Australia, India, and Japan, also known as “the Quad”, a group committed to promoting security, stability, and prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region; and the Promoting a Resolution to the Tibet-China Dispute Act (H.R. 533), which expands the responsibilities of the Special Coordinator for Tibetan Issues to include countering Chinese disinformation about Tibet. I joined my colleagues in voting for all of these bills, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
Finally, the House considered the Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act (H.R. 7176). This bill eliminates a portion of the process for LNG exports from the United States. It is an important issue for many people in our district and our region, as ours is home to a high concentration of existing and planned LNG export terminals, as well as producers of natural gas.
U.S. LNG exports are a vital component of our national security, shoring up our allies' energy needs, and an important tool in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions by replacing outdated coal-fired power plants with natural gas plants that can use U.S. LNG.
Under the current regulatory process, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is responsible for authorizing the construction and operation of LNG facilities and the Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for approving the exports once it determines that the export is in the public interest. Countries with which the United States has a free trade agreement are exempt from the DOE determination because they are assumed to be in the public interest.
The Biden administration recently announced that it would be reviewing the process for what goes into this public interest determination, pausing the five pending applications before the department while it reviews its criteria. This has caused some concern in our district, and I have heard from many people about it.
This bill, which predates the Biden administration’s pause, would remove the public interest determination from the process entirely so that LNG could be shipped anywhere without a public-interest determination. We considered this bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee last year, and I voted against it in committee because of concerns about the scope of this bill. This bill would potentially allow the export of U.S. LNG not only to our allies but also to our adversaries. I continue to believe that decisions about whether to export these natural resources should involve a public interest determination that includes national security considerations. A more tailored approach is necessary, which is why last year, I introduced the American Gas for Allies Act (H.R. 1497), which would extend the free trade agreement exemption to NATO countries to help our European allies end reliance on Russian natural gas.
Because of my concerns about the bill, I voted no on the Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act which passed the House by a vote of 224-200.
As a reminder, you can always find a list of all of the votes I have taken for the district on my website.