reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker argues that the Haiti Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program, created after the 2010 earthquake, has been mismanaged for over a decade. What began as a temporary measure has effectively become permanent, with thousands of Haitians remaining in the United States under TPS due to repeated renewals. The speaker challenges the commonly cited numbers about how many TPS holders could be removed from health care, stating that those figures are a fraction of the total and that a large share of TPS beneficiaries are not in health care. The speaker contrasts this with the claim that a large portion of TPS recipients came to the U.S. illegally, stating that 91% of Haiti TPS holders entered the country illegally and are now using TPS status to stay. They argue that the program was not designed to allow ongoing entry and stay, and that its current form undermines efforts to curb abuse of the program and to enforce immigration laws. A notable point raised is that the program’s weakness has real-life consequences. The speaker cites a violent incident in Florida a week earlier, where a mother was brutally murdered outside a convenience store by a Haitian individual, linking the crime to concerns about TPS and President Biden’s handling of immigration policy. The speaker also references other crimes, including murders on a subway in Charlotte, to illustrate the perceived danger and risk to Americans. The overarching claim is that millions of dollars and taxpayer resources are being used to support a program that has become effectively permanent and that it continues to flood the United States with people who are allegedly exploiting TPS and not integrating as promised. The speaker contends that the goal of the bill is not achieved, arguing that people should come to the United States to follow laws and contribute to society rather than to exploit goodwill or pose risks to the American public. In conclusion, the speaker asserts that the bill is flawed and should not be supported by either party, and yields back.

This is a dilatory motion. I have asked the clerk to take a vote. We cannot do anything else in, during the vote. The vote has to be taken. And after that, if you have something, then you can bring it up. Vote. Mr. Eielsen? We. Mr. Nathan, yes. Yes. Mr. Balzinelli? No. Mr. Ritter? No. Mr. Vincent? No. Mr. Wiss? No. Mr. Bouillard? No. 4, 6. 4. Sorry, sorry. 4, 6. 4. 6. 5. 6. 6, 55 Yes. So can you repeat? So my apologies for that. It's 6 yeas, five nays.

The resolution was adopted with 219 yays and 208 nays. The motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

The votes are in: 111 in favor and 364 against. The motion has been rejected. Unlock.

The rule 183-1-13-05 regarding poll watchers' tablets is passed with a vote of 3 to 1.

On this vote, the yeas are 202 220. The nays are two zero seven. The resolution is adopted. Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. The chair will

Speaker 1 requests that House Bill 1312 be read at length, as well as every subsequent bill. Speaker 0 acknowledges the request for the bill to be read at length.

House Bill thirteen twelve is under consideration. An "aye" vote is recorded. A "no" vote is recorded. The "aye" votes prevail. House Bill thirteen twelve has passed.

The "Defund the Taliban" bill passed unanimously in the House. The speaker thanks supporters for their help during the year-long journey. The bill will now go to the Senate, where Senators Hagerty, Blackburn, Sheehy, and Tuberville are expected to support it. The speaker encourages people to address their concerns to the Senate to get the bill passed. The bill aims to stop the estimated $40,000,000 a week, or over $5,000,000,000 total, of U.S. tax dollars that have allegedly gone to the Taliban.

The resolution was adopted with 88 votes in favor and 4 votes against. The motion to reconsider was laid on the table without any objections.

The eyes to the right were 111, and the nose to the left was 364. The nose have it. Unlock. The question was whether the bill should be now read a second time. Those of that opinion said “I,” and those of the contrary said “No,” repeating “No.” Division was called, and the division proceeded.

The voting is finished and the machine should be locked. The outcome of the vote is as follows: 120 in favor, 14 against, and 45 abstentions. The draft resolution AES 10l25 has been adopted.

The transcript shows a parliamentary division. The Speaker states: “The eyes to the right, 111. The nose to the left, 364. The eyes to the right were 111, the nose to the left, 364. So the noes have it. The noes have it.” Following this, the question is: “that the bill be now read a second time as many as are of that opinion say aye. Aye. Of the contrary, no. No.”

The division result is 79 in favor, 56 against. The bill has been agreed to. The minister for communications is called to move for the third reading. The leader of the house is asked to proceed immediately. The motion for the bill to be read a third time is made. The question is put to a vote. Those in favor say aye; those against say no. The ayes have it. The Clerk is called to announce the third reading of the bill to amend communications law and related purposes.

The Senate is evenly divided with 50 votes for and 50 against. The Vice President casts the deciding vote, resulting in the passage of the amended bill. Additionally, there is a commitment to eliminate taxes on tips for those who earn them.

The ayes are 206, the nays are 222. The resolution is not adopted. Motion reconsidered is laid upon the table. Pursuant to clause eight of rule 20, unfinished business is on the vote of the motion of the gentleman in Missouri, Mr. Smith, to suspend the rules. HR one four nine one as amended is in order. The clerk will report the title.

The amendment was put to a vote. Those in favor signified by saying aye; those opposed say no. The chair ruled the noes have it, and the amendment is not agreed to. A roll call was requested. The roll call results were: - Missus Fishbach: No - Mister Norman: Yes - Mister Roy: No - Missus Houchin: No - Mister Langworthy: No - Mister Scott: No - Mister Griffith: No - Mister Jack: No - Mister McGovern: Aye - Miss Gantlin: Aye - Mister Nugoose: Aye - Miss Ledger Fernandez: Aye - Madam chair: No The clerk reported the total as 5 yeas and 7 nays. The amendment remains not agreed to. The chair indicated that what’s appropriate will be released when it is time for the president to release it.

The vote result is as follows: 153 in favor, 10 against, 23 abstentions. Draft resolution A/E/L 27 has been adopted.

Thirteen votes in favor, one against, and one abstention. Draft resolution not approved due to veto by permanent Security Council member.

The proceeding included a brief inquiry about closing statements before a roll call vote. The roll call began as the chair announced the vote would be by roll call. Roll call votes recorded in the transcript: - Chair votes aye. - Representatives with listed votes: Schultz yes; Holland no; Allen yes; Coulter no; Frederick no; Howard no; Jacob yes; Jordan no; Cagle no; Nash yes; Pursell no; Scott yes; Steer yes; Zalesnikar yes. - The transcript does not show representative Weiner’s individual vote, though the roll call note indicates the vote included Weiner. Outcome: - There were eight ayes and eight nays, and the motion does not prevail. - This concludes the agenda for today.

The senator asked how many votes are needed to pass the bill with the emergency clause, which is 32. Senators then voted on the bill. The speaker emphasized the importance of treating everyone with respect and dignity in the Senate, stating that they will do the same.

The Resolve Tibet Act passed the US Senate unanimously, reaffirming Tibetan people's right to self determination. Tibet supporters and activists lobbied for over a year for this bill. The next step is reconciliation with the House version before heading to the White House.

The yeas are 56, the nays are 44. Three fifths of the senators duly chosen and sworn not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to.

California passes its vote.

The vote resulted in 54 yeas and 46 nays, confirming the nomination. Additionally, the motion to reconsider is now laid upon the table, and the president will be promptly informed of the Senate's decision.