Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 789) censuring Representative Paul Gosar.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 795 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), who is the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Madam Speaker, yesterday the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 795, providing for consideration of H. Res. 789, Censuring Representative Paul Gosar, under a closed rule. The rule self-executes a manager's amendment from Chairman Deutch and provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Ethics or their respective designees.

Madam Speaker, in any other Congress, the actions of Representative Paul Gosar might be easier to dismiss. After all, every single minute of every single day, 5,000 minutes of content are uploaded onto YouTube.

So my colleagues across the aisle or the public might ask, who cares about one YouTube video post by Representative Gosar? He is just one of many Americans posting his fantasies online, even if his involve a violent scene in which he attacks and murders people that he has labeled as enemies of the American people, a colleague in Congress, and the President of the United States.

But it is just an anime video, so it is not a big deal, right?

Actually, it is a big deal. And here is why: People listen to Paul Gosar. He is an elected official; and that gives him credibility, whether justified or not. So while there are indeed 5,000 minutes of content uploaded every single minute of every single day, Mr. Gosar's video got real attention, just as he intended.

American citizens stopped what they were doing to watch something that a Member of the U.S. Congress had fashioned. He posted it on his official Congressional social media, where he has hundreds of thousands of followers, and where the video was viewed over 3 million times.

And what he posted was violence; fantasized violence. A wish made in a very specific way.

As I said, in any other decade, or any other Congress, this public endorsement of violence by a Member of Congress might have been excused as a lapse in judgment, or even possibly a bad joke.

But this Congress knows what happens when members of the radical right get stirred up by their leaders.

Just a few months ago, this Congress had to hide in safe rooms under the protection of police and soldiers, or barricade ourselves in our offices because our place of work was overwhelmed by armed citizens who wanted to hang some of us.

This Congress has seen threats against Members of Congress more than double, forcing Members to pay for additional security for their homes, offices, and families; rethink how to engage with constituents; and even wear bulletproof vests to public events.

So when a Member of this Congress fantasizes in public about beheading another Member of Congress, it is not fantasy to think that there are Americans out there who will take such a video as a call to action.

A recent poll reported that 85 percent of Americans get their news from Facebook, while only 13 percent of Americans get their news from print. Are we really to believe that during this moment in time, that among that 85 percent, there are no Americans who will see this video and indulge in fantasies of their own?

Every single day Members of this body receive death threats. I have gotten them. We all have. Our staffs and families have to deal with abusive and violent phone calls, emails, letters, and social media posts. And these threats are particularly numerous and violent for Members who are women of color.

So every day we have to deal with the threat that somewhere out there is a radicalized American who has been taught to hate us, to regard us as evil, to fantasize, and even mobilize using that same social media, to eliminate us, taught by conspiracy theorists and far-right extremists; or by a fellow Member of Congress.

That is not imagination; that is fact.

In any other context, and especially in any other workplace, someone posting a video of himself killing a coworker would not be acceptable, and an employee who did that would almost certainly be fired.

In any other context, and especially in a school, a student using school resources to post a video of himself beheading a classmate and attacking a school official would not be acceptable, and that student would face disciplinary charges, if not criminal charges, and would likely be referred for a mental health evaluation.

But for the privileges traditionally afforded to Members of Congress, in any other context, someone posting a video of himself killing a Member of Congress and attacking the President of the United States would almost certainly be reported to the Secret Service and U.S. Capitol Police.

We must condemn this celebration of political violence because, in addition to upholding the honor and integrity of the U.S. Congress, every Member of this body deserves to come to work and feel safe. That is true for any worker in any part of this country.

It is unacceptable that our colleague would have to sit across from someone who has threatened her life in such a vivid way, and it is unacceptable for this body to let that action go unpunished.

This is the House of Representatives of the United States Congress. We are all elected to be the leaders of this great country, and with that role comes immense responsibilities. People look up to us, they take our lead.

So when a Member posts a video of himself killing his colleague, that is obviously going to have an impact on the way people approach their politics.

So we cannot dismiss Representative Gosar's violent fantasies as a joke because, in this decade, in this America, someone is going to take him seriously. He is a public figure and, as we vividly saw on January 6, the words and actions of public figures can readily act as a spark to the tinder of radical extremism. And God help us all when that happens.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would have to agree with my learned colleague that these are unusual actions, but these are also unusual times. Every time we have seen a new low in conduct from our colleagues across the aisle, we get crickets or excuses from the Republican Party. Indeed, it took 9 days before the minority leader publicly spoke about this threat; and his silence spoke volumes, both to the American people and those who were paying attention to Mr. Gosar's post.

Instead, we have heard multiple reports that our colleagues are considering punishing their colleagues who voted for the bipartisan infrastructure package. I think that speaks volumes about where their priorities lie.

We will continue to see Members emboldened by the lack of accountability engaging in evermore outrageous conduct, placing both the integrity of Congress and the safety of its Members at risk.

While Mr. Gosar has since taken down his post, he has not apologized. In fact, he said publicly on TV that he does not apologize. He has doubled down on his decision to post the video saying, the cartoon exposes the threats to America. It doesn't make a threat to anyone.

I would have to disagree with his assessment.

As to the claim that there hasn't been enough of a process, that this should have gone to the Ethics Committee; I will remind my colleagues that we heard in the Rules Committee last night that the majority requested an emergency meeting of the Ethics Committee, which the minority denied.

And this isn't a case where there are facts to discover. The actions of Representative Gosar were not hidden for an investigatory body to discover. His misconduct was paid for and produced with public resources and posted on an official public Twitter account, where it got more than 3 million views before it was taken down.

There is no dispute about whether Representative Gosar posted the reprehensible video depicting the murder of one of his colleagues on his official channels. And the Republican Conference has had 2 weeks to decide to take action and hold him accountable. Instead, they are debating whether to punish their colleagues for voting for infrastructure for the American people.

So we have said that--it actually just strikes me as odd that our colleagues would argue that this forms a harmful precedent, and that the threat of violence or murder in the future might be cause to censure and strip members of their committees. If that is the case, then sign me up because I do think that is reprehensible and deserves censure.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), the distinguished chairwoman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin), a distinguished member of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, like the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma, I, too, long for the times when the norms of civilized conduct in this House were observed. When, perhaps, our colleagues across the aisle can return to those norms, then motions and resolutions like the one we are considering today will not be necessary.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee.

Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close if the gentleman is prepared to close. I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I include in the Record a November 9 Insider article entitled: ``GOP Lawmakers Want to Punish the 13 Republicans Who Voted for Biden's Infrastructure Bill By Kicking Them Off Congressional Committees, Report Says.''

[From the Insider, Nov. 9, 2021]

GOP Lawmakers Want To Punish the 13 Republicans Who Voted for Biden's

Infrastructure Bill by Kicking Them Off Congressional Committees,

Report Says

(By Tom Porter)

Republican leaders in the US House of Representatives are

expecting a bid to punish the 13 Republicans who voted for

President Joe Biden's $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill by

stripping them of committee assignments, according to a

report.

Punchbowl News reported that some Republican lawmakers were

determined to take action against the 13, several of whom are

ranking members or senior Republicans on House committees or

subcommittees.

The report did not detail what level of support the move

might have as of Tuesday morning.

Under House rules, a party's steering committee has the

power to recommend that a lawmaker be removed from committee

assignments, which is then subject to a vote by the caucus

and the full House.

It is a punishment that has historically been reserved for

lawmakers who have been accused of crimes, or been involved

with extremism.

The support of the 13 Republicans was ultimately vital for

the infrastructure bill passing into law last week, with six

Democrats voting against it amid a monthslong dispute in the

party over a connected bill that is being stalled in the

Senate. The infrastructure bill was passed by the Senate in a

bipartisan vote in June.

The move to take action against the 13 Republicans who

supported the infrastructure bill highlights the fury of some

GOP lawmakers against party colleagues for backing Biden's

legislation.

Several hard line loyalists to former President Donald

Trump on the far right of the GOP House caucus, including

Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz, have been

publicly critical of the 13 lawmakers. Trump himself has also

criticized them.

``Here are the `Republicans' that just voted to help Biden

screw America,'' Greene tweeted last week, branding them

``traitors, and sharing pictures and phone numbers of them.

In an Monday CNN interview, Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan--

one of the 13 Republicans who voted for the infrastructure

bill--played a threatening message he'd received after the

vote.

``I'll tell you it's a terrible way--we have seen civility

really downslide here. I'm concerned about my staff. They are

taking these calls,'' he said.

There has long been tensions in the GOP between centrists

and Trump loyalists. In May, Rep. Liz Cheney was removed from

her leadership role in the House GOP over her criticism of

Trump and his baseless claims of fraud in the 2020 election.

Madam Speaker, as I indicated, there are some in the Republican Conference who want to kick 13 Republicans off their committees for voting for an infrastructure bill that will benefit their constituents, but when a Member of Congress publicly celebrates a video depicting the murder of a colleague, silence.

It is disgraceful that Congress is the one place in the United States where a video calling for the murder of a Member of Congress is not universally condemned, and it is a sad thing for this institution.

Madam Speaker, we are here to address the conduct of a Member of Congress who disseminated and celebrated a video that portrays him murdering another Member of Congress and attacking the President of the United States.

The evidence speaks for itself. There is nothing more to review. Nothing to investigate. No questions to answer or facts to find.

We have all seen the video. We have heard Mr. Gosar's response, and we have seen the lack of response from the Republican Party leadership to condemn Representative Gosar's celebration of violence to make clear that such actions are unacceptable, and that political violence is unacceptable in the United States of America.

In the absence of meaningful action by his own party, it is up to Members of the House of Representatives and the country as a whole to decide whether such actions deserve consequences.

Today, we ask ourselves, is this behavior acceptable to you? Is it acceptable to the American people? The way we vote today says a lot, not only about the integrity of the Members who are entrusted with the privilege of representing this great country, but also the direction in which we are headed.

I am grateful to the few Republican colleagues who have the integrity and the guts, quite frankly, to condemn Mr. Gosar's actions. But, once again, Republican leadership lacks the courage to properly manage the actions of their conference, and so Congress must act.

Rejecting political violence should not be a partisan effort. How far has the party of Lincoln fallen that it would excuse this conduct? We must say that political violence is not acceptable in the United States of America.

Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support the rule and underlying resolution.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Madam Speaker, this is a very troubling moment in our history.

After the rule is passed, you will see other Members come to the floor to continue this debate.

I thought I would start out by holding up a most precious document, and that is the Constitution of the United States of America. I often get chills when I read its Preamble, which indicates that the body of people who started this Nation organized to create a more perfect Union.

I love to hear those words because what it suggests is that we wanted to be the standard-bearer for what is best and better in the world. We wanted to cease conflict. We wanted to be the defenders of peace. And even with the original sin, we wanted somehow to be better than others.

I get chills when I walk through the Halls of this very august place, to see the depictions of the debates in the early years, to realize how fragile democracy is, and how we could not last.

I hold this up because, interestingly, we can be so proud that Congress was listed as the first body of government, Article I.

As I read the charges in here, it gives us powers as the House of Representatives. Nowhere is there a privilege to kill. Nowhere is there the instruction to kill. Nowhere is there an instruction to be free to murder. Yet, with a great deal of trepidation and sadness, I am here because of a video.

This headline speaks to it: ``House to vote on censuring Republican,'' Mr. Gosar, ``who shared violent video targeting'' a Member of Congress.

That is the crux of why we are here. It is not speech of people supporting the right to be free in this Nation and supporting the George Floyd bill, where protesters, peaceful and otherwise, did rise up, young people, about 66,000 in Houston, completely peaceful, as it was around the Nation.

Don't try to compare the pain of protesters on an issue of justice with the actions of this gentleman. Yes, I call him that.

Mr. Gosar is seen delivering a fatal blow to the back of the monster's head, and blood is seen gushing from the wound. The face is that of our colleague, and it is violent.

In addition, it is treasonous to be seen to attack the President of the United States of America.

In one scene, footage of migrants crossing the Rio Grande is overlaid with what appears to be splattered blood.

Who are we as a Nation?

In another, the words ``drugs,'' ``crime,'' ``poverty,'' ``money,'' ``murder,'' ``gangs,'' ``violence,'' and ``trafficking'' flash across the screen. Mr. Gosar knew what he was doing.

The 1 minute and 32 seconds was posted by him. It shows him battling a towering, naked monstrosity with the face of that Democratic Member. It is against women of color; it is against women; and it is against Members of Congress.

Last week, Ted Lieu and I, and 30 other Members, sent a letter to Republican leadership asking if there was one person that would call this out and indicate shame, shame, shame.

I include in the Record the letter that was sent to Republican leadership.

Congress of the United States,

Washington, DC, November 12, 2021.

Hon. Kevin McCarthy,

Republican Leader, House of Representatives,

Washington, DC.

Dear Republican Leader McCarthy: We write as members of the

United States House of Representatives to express our extreme

concern, indignation, and fear regarding the recent actions

of Representative Paul Gosar and to ask that you publicly

request a House Ethics Committee investigation into Mr.

Gosar's actions.

On November 7, 2021, Mr. Gosar shared a grotesque video on

Twitter in which his face and those of several other

Republican Members of the House are edited into the opening

credits of the Netflix anime series Attack on Titan, and in

which Mr. Gosar is depicted killing a giant monster with the

face of a Democratic Member of Congress.

The one minute and thirty-two-seconds video depicts Mr.

Gosar battling a towering, naked monstrosity with the face of

a Democratic Member of the House superimposed over the

monster's face. Mr. Gosar is then seen delivering a fatal

strike to the back of the monster's neck, and blood is seen

gushing from the wound. The video also depicts Mr. Gosar

leaping at President Biden while brandishing two swords, and

the video is interspersed throughout with real-life footage

of Border Patrol officers rounding up migrants at the U.S.-

Mexico border. In one scene, footage of migrants crossing the

Rio Grande is overlaid with what appears to be splattered

blood. In another, the words ``drugs,'' ``crime,''

``poverty,'' ``money,'' ``murder,'' ``gangs,'' ``violence''

and ``trafficking'' flash across the screen.

Sharing the glorification of violence expressed in this

video goes far beyond the protections afforded by the Speech

and Debate Clause in the Constitution and is beneath the

dignity of a person serving in the Congress of the United

States. Mr. Gosar's actions display a breakdown of reasoned

discourse not seen in the House since the summer of 1856,

when South Carolina Congressman Preston Brooks attacked

Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner with a cane on the

Senate floor. The beating nearly killed Sumner and

contributed significantly to the country's polarization over

the issue of slavery and to the use of violence that

eventually led to the Civil War.

In a like manner, Mr. Gosar's actions serve solely to

glorify the usage of violence against Members of the House.

As we witnessed with Mr. Gosar's actions leading up to

January 6, threats of violence and the glorification of

violence lead to actual violence. Mr. Gosar has continuously

been a strong proponent of the Big Lie that President Biden

lost the 2020 Presidential election. As reported by several

media outlets, Mr. Gosar was intimately involved with the

planning of the January 6 rally and, following the January 6

attack, Mr. Gosar called the insurrectionists ``peaceful

patriots.'' Rather than condemn calls for violence against

Congress and actual violence against Congress, Mr. Gosar has

instead shared an animated video of himself killing a fellow

Member of Congress.

Less than one year has passed since Congress witnessed the

January 6 domestic terrorists break into the Capitol

building, vandalize and steal property, threaten our safety

and lives, and attack and kill Capitol police officers. Less

than one year has passed since we witnessed crowds chanting

``Hang Mike Pence,'' and ``Hang Nancy Pelosi'' outside this

bastion of democracy. If ever there was a time for the House

to come together to promote civility, discourse, and

cooperation, it is now.

For these reasons, we are asking that as the Leader of the

Republican Conference you publicly request an investigation

into Mr. Gosar's actions by the House Ethics Committee to

determine whether Mr. Gosar has violated the Rules of the

House to a degree sufficient to warrant disciplinary action,

including ordering the cessation of conduct that threatens

the lives of fellow Members of Congress and the President,

removal from his Committee positions, censure, expulsion, or

further disciplinary action as determined by the Committee or

the House of Representatives.

We must act to protect the dignity and integrity of the

House.

Very truly yours,

Sheila Jackson Lee, Alan Lowenthal, Grace F. Napolitano,

Rashida Tlaib, Ted Lieu, Nanette Barragan, Sylvia R.

Garcia, Grace Meng, Bonnie Watson Coleman, Jimmy Gomez,

Dwight Evans, Mike Doyle, David N. Cicilline, John

Larson, Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Adriano

Espaillat, Mike Quigley, Ilhan Omar, J. Luis Correa,

Stacey E. Plaskett, David Price, Linda Sanchez, Andre

Carson, Earl Blumenauer, Troy A. Carter, Madeleine

Dean, Mary Gay Scanlon, Jason Crow, Jim Cooper, Jerry

McNerney, Brenden F. Boyle, Steve Cohen, Members of

Congress.

This brings me to tears. There is no celebration on this floor. It is imperative that we pass this resolution and Mr. Gosar is censured and removed from his seat. The reason is you cannot depict the murder of another Member of Congress or the President of the United States.

Madam Speaker, I stand here today as a senior member of the Committees on the Judiciary, on Homeland Security, and on the Budget, to support this Rule governing debate of H. Res. 789 to censure Rep. Gosar and to remove him from his committee assignment.

I also stand here, Madam Speaker, to express my concern, indignation, and fear regarding Representative Gosar's actions.

On November 7, 2021, Mr. Gosar shared a grotesque video on Twitter in which his face and those of several other Republican Members are edited into an anime segment, and in which Mr. Gosar is depicted killing a giant monster with the face of a Democratic Member of Congress.

Mr. Gosar is then seen delivering a fatal strike to the back of the monster's neck, and blood is seen gushing from the wound.

The video also depicts Mr. Gosar leaping at President Biden while brandishing two swords, and the video is interspersed throughout with real-life footage of Border Patrol officers rounding up migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.

In one scene, footage of migrants crossing the Rio Grande is overlaid with what appears to be splattered blood.

In another the words ``drugs'' ``crime'' ``poverty'' ``money'' ``murder'' ``gangs,'' ``violence'' and ``trafficking'' flash across the screen.

The one minute and thirty-two second video depicts Mr. Gosar battling a towering, naked monstrosity with the face of a Democratic Member of the House superimposed over the monster's face.

This was a one minute and thirty-two second speech threatening violence against a member of the House.

Last week, my colleague Ted Lieu and I, along with thirty other members of the House, sent a letter to Minority Leader McCarthy asking him to request an Ethics investigation into Mr. Gosar's actions.

Rather than standing for the dignity of the House, Minority Leader McCarthy has done nothing.

I would like to submit into the record the November 12, 2021 letter sent to Minority Leader McCarthy by myself, Ted Lieu, and thirty other members of Congress.

Sharing the glorification of violence expressed in this video goes far beyond the protections afforded by the Speech and Debate Clause in the Constitution and is beneath the dignity of a person serving in the Congress of the United States.

Mr. Gosar's actions display a breakdown of reasoned discourse not seen in the House since the summer of 1856, when South Carolina Congressman Preston Brooks attacked Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner with a cane on the Senate floor.

The beating nearly killed Sumner and contributed significantly to the country's polarization over the issue of slavery and to the use of violence that eventually led to the Civil War.

In a like manner, Mr. Gosar's actions serve solely to glorify the usage of violence against Members of the House.

As we witnessed with Mr. Gosar's actions leading up to January 6, threats of violence and the glorification of violence lead to actual violence.

Mr. Gosar has continuously been a strong proponent of the Big Lie that President Biden lost the 2020 Presidential election.

As reported by several media outlets, Mr. Gosar was intimately involved with the planning of the January 6 rally and, following the January 6 attack, Mr. Gosar called the insurrectionists ``peaceful patriots.''

Rather than condemn calls for violence against Congress and actual violence against Congress, Mr. Gosar has instead shared an animated video of himself killing a fellow Member of Congress.

Rather than uphold the dignity and sanctity of the House, Republican Leader McCarthy has done nothing

Less than one year has passed since Congress witnessed the January 6 domestic terrorists break into the Capitol building, vandalize and steal property, threaten our safety and lives, and attack and kill Capitol police officers.

Less than one year has passed since we witnessed crowds chanting ``Hang Mike Pence'' and ``Hang Nancy Pelosi'' outside this bastion of democracy. If ever there was a time for the House to come together to promote civility, discourse, and cooperation, it is now.

For these reasons, I urge all members to vote in favor of this Rule governing debate.

We must act to protect the dignity and integrity of the House.

Madam Speaker, I think all of us would wish that we were not here on a subject of this gravity, on a subject so present in our society at large: The exhortation to violence to accomplish one's objectives.

I have been sitting here since we started the debate, which was about 45 minutes ago. So many get up and say, ``I do not support violence,'' ``I do not support this action,'' but I will do nothing about it.

Now, of course, they don't say the last sentence. They just don't do anything.

As I sat there as Mr. McCarthy was talking, I was thinking that he was getting up in my face and up in Nancy Pelosi's face. I think that is what he was doing. I expect that in vigorous debate.

They focused on a non-analogous action by a Member of this House, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee. Why did they do that? Because there is no analogous event to this one. In the 40-plus years that I have served here, there has never been a case like this. Never.

This is not about control, as the majority leader would represent. It is about decency, democracy, and security, and the rule of law.

We have seen, Madam Speaker, over and over again in our politics that words matter, and actions matter even more. Vitriol, the glorification and promotion of violence, hate speech, and the failure to condemn all of these when they occur have created an atmosphere in our country, which sadly has now and too frequently been visited on this floor, that is not conducive to the exercise of free constitutional politics.

A former leader of my party Dick Gephardt said that democracy was a substitute for war, that we should settle our differences peacefully and nonviolently.

The speech that has been the subject of this resolution whittles away at the rule of law and the civility needed for constructive debate.

Indeed, violent words and images are too often a precursor to the practice of violence. We have seen that. We saw it on January 6 as the President of the United States incited and urged people to come to the Congress to stop democracy in its tracks.

And people wanted to hang the Vice President of the United States as a result of those words because he was not doing that because he thought it was not legal. He wanted to follow the law.

My friend Gabby Giffords and Senator Kelly know that all too well, that violent words and images are too often a precursor, as does Representative Speier who worked for the late Representative Leo Ryan and was herself badly injured in the shooting that took his life. My friend, the Republican whip, and his family know that words can encourage and result in violence. Last month, the family and constituents of Sir David Amess in the United Kingdom experienced the same pain.

All of us who were in this Capitol on January 6 and those who stood in defense of it know that pain.

The loved ones of Officers Sicknick, Liebengood, Smith, DeFreytag, and Hashida carry that pain with them every day.

Officer Evans' family, as well, has been carrying that pain since April.

Madam Speaker, so do the families of elected officials, journalists, and civil society leaders who have been killed or maimed by political violence across the world incited by rhetoric that is rationalized as acceptable in the political environment. And then, oh, I don't support violence. I don't know how that happened. Yes, I said in front of the White House, ``Go down to the Capitol,'' and although it wasn't the exact words of ``be violent,'' it is what those who came down here expected the exhortation to be.

It would be naive, Madam Speaker, to suppose that we can eradicate the promotion of violence in wider society, either in our country or abroad.

Such evil has always existed, and the internet and social media make it easier to disseminate that malicious type of speech.

But constitutional parliamentarians worldwide have long understood that in order to maintain the level of civility required to carry out the business of legislating for the people, we must have rules of decorum and limits on speech that would cause civil debate to devolve into uncivil attacks and political violence.

That is why we have rules in this House to enforce decorum and ensure civility. That is why we have rules of conduct, which the chairman of the Ethics Committee read a little earlier. It should be and is undebatable that this conduct violated that rule.

Those rules apply not only to this floor but everywhere a sitting Member engages in work relating to his or her service as a Representative.

When those rules were written, they did not anticipate that a Member would threaten violence directly against another Member. Not because it has never happened. A Congressman from South Carolina nearly beat to death a Senator from Massachusetts, Senator Sumner, because he wanted to abolish slavery. That, of course, was a crime.

In some countries threatening public officials is a crime. They didn't have to spell that out explicitly because it has always been understood that such behavior is unacceptable in this institution and incompatible with our service.

Indeed, any kindergartner, frankly, Madam Speaker, will tell you that such behavior is wrong anywhere.

The actions of Representative Gosar this week and in weeks previously--much like the actions of Representative Greene earlier this year--would convey a dangerous lesson to our children and teenagers that the opposite is true, that threatening violence against those with whom one disagrees is acceptable. It is not. That bullying and encouraging one's followers to menace another person or another group is somehow compatible with citizenship in a democracy and indeed a civilized society. It is not.

The resolution before us today is necessary because we in this House who speak for the American people must reflect, as the Speaker said, the highest standards of American society.

I just came from the Speaker's office not too long ago. I don't know how many of you have been there, but over the door it says it is Robert H. Michel Rooms.

I had the opportunity to serve with Robert Michel. Robert Michel was a Republican, and he was from Peoria, Illinois. He was one of the finest, most decent men that I have known, not just serving in the Congress of the United States, but have known. He said this: ``Civility means being tough without being mean, being witty without being malicious, and . . . believing in the power of reason to influence public debate while still being aware of the power''--hear these last words--``being aware of the power of irrationality in public life.''

This resolution, Madam Speaker, is necessary because when Members of Congress and other elected officials speak and act, our constituents and followers give great weight to our words and actions.

It is a way for them to rationalize unacceptable behavior as was done on January 6. It is disgusting, Madam Speaker, whenever someone out in the world tweets a threat of violence or hateful content.

But when a Member of this House does so, no matter how you rationalize it, no matter how you try to put lipstick on that pig, it is a threat of violence.

What Representative Gosar did last week is not just worthy of censure, it demands it.

And for anyone who threatens to apply the same standard to Democrats in the future, as Ms. Speier said, I am with you. This is not about Republicans or Democrats; this is about decency. This is about security for our Members. This is about democracy, not violent overthrow or opposition.

I, for one, will join you in enforcing that standard on any Democrat who violates it. But I will tell you this, Madam Speaker, the analogies that the Republicans have been making limp badly.

I am certain my fellow Democrats will do the same. Because this is not about party, it is not about politics, it is not about partisanship. It is about decorum, civility, safety, and, yes, the rule of law that was trampled upon on January 6.

But this is not about January 6. This is about this incident of a Member using whatever medium you want to say on the public dime threatening and showing the killing of a Member of this House. Can't that appall you, even that act? Do you have no shame? Madam Speaker, those are the questions that I would ask.

No one--Democrat or Republican--ought to be allowed to engage in the promotion of violence against a fellow Member, or indeed, a fellow American. Because we know where the glorification and promotion of violence leads, and we have seen it. We have seen it this year and in previous years.

Piercing tweets become sharp knives.

Fiery words bring out deadly firearms.

And cartoon killing begets real life bloodshed.

This resolution specifically addresses Representative Gosar's actions, but it also reflects more generally, Madam Speaker, what I hope is a sentiment shared by Members from both parties that we have seen too much of violent speech in our politics and in this country, and it must end.

In February, when we considered a resolution relating to the violence-promoting and undecorous actions of Representative Greene, I recalled the famous words of Edmund Burke, who viewed service in his nation's Parliament as the highest calling.

He said the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men and women--he did not add that but would today, certainly--that good men and good women do nothing.

Once again, the Republican leadership in this House has chosen to do nothing. It is interesting because a far lesser offense resulted in the removal of a Republican by the Republicans from committee, Steve King of Iowa.

So, again, the House, in light of that void, must take action.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on both sides of the aisle to uphold a standard that should be critical to us all. Some modicum of respect for those who are political opponents, Madam Speaker, and some restraint is in the way we depict them and ourselves.

Vote ``yes'' on this resolution.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania (Ms. Scanlon), my friend, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Madam Speaker, today's rule covers one item, a resolution censuring Representative Paul Gosar for a video posted on his official Twitter account last week, and removing him from his seat on the Committees on Oversight and Reform and Natural Resources.

Madam Speaker, today's action, once again, tramples on the traditional norms of the House; the idea that the majority and the minority have the right to appoint their own members to committees as they see fit. It sets a dangerous and disturbing precedent that will likely change the character of the House in the years to come, and not for the better.

And the majority is doing so solely to play politics with this moment and to score a cheap political point at the expense of a Member of the minority.

But before I go into all of that, I do think it is important to lay out the sequence of events that occurred here, since I believe they are instructive.

Last week, Representative Gosar posted a video on his official Twitter account. This video was certainly provocative and, in my opinion, inappropriate.

Upon being informed of the video's existence, Leader McCarthy immediately took action and called Congressman Gosar, conveying the message that this video was inappropriate. After that conversation, Congressman Gosar took the video down and issued a statement explaining and clarifying its meaning, and stating that he certainly didn't approve of violence against any person.

Yesterday, Congressman Gosar took the additional step of appearing before the Republican Conference to further explain his actions. He described that his intention was for a depiction in the video to be symbolic of the policies he opposes, not actual people. He clarified that he did not intend it to be an endorsement of violence and, further, that he does not condone violence.

But not content with his admission to a lapse in judgment, last night the majority made the decision to convene the Rules Committee on short notice to consider a resolution censuring Representative Gosar and removing him from his committee assignments. In doing so, the majority is acting in clear contrast to the existing precedent throughout the history of this institution; a precedent the majority has taken multiple deliberate steps to weaken in this Congress.

Throughout the history of the House of Representatives, the majority and the minority have respected the right of each of their conferences to assign their respective members to committees. The decision about whether to seat a member on a committee, or to remove a member from a committee, traditionally rests with the respective conferences.

Early this year, the majority took two actions to go against that tradition. First, the majority voted to remove a Republican Member of Congress from her committee assignments.

Second, the Speaker unilaterally refused to appoint two of Leader McCarthy's choices to be Republican members on the Select Committee on the January 6 attack and, instead, appointed Republicans she wanted on the committee. Both of these actions are in stark contrast to the norms and traditions of the House of Representatives.

Today, the majority is taking a third such action. This continues to set an extremely dangerous precedent for the future of the institution. In future years, the precedent may be used to give the majority veto power over the minority's committee assignments. That is a slippery slope for the institution to go down.

But to make matters worse, in acting today, the majority is setting a standard for Members of the minority that it does not set for itself. There have been plenty of instances of Members on the majority side using intemperate language, making statements that directly or could be construed as endorsing violence or taking controversial or inappropriate actions; yet, the majority has yet to act to remove one of its own members from their committee assignments.

This is a classic case of the old adage: ``Rules for thee but not for me.'' That is deeply frustrating.

Madam Speaker, if action is truly necessary today, then there are two other options for addressing Representative Gosar's actions than what the majority is proposing. First, the majority can and should leave the matter up to Leader McCarthy and the Republican Conference. Indeed, this was the topic of discussion at yesterday's Republican Conference meeting and, historically, neither Leader McCarthy nor the Republican Conference has shied away from disciplining Members.

Second, the House also has the option of referring Representative Gosar to the Ethics Committee. This is also an appropriate course of action, particularly if the majority believes that

a violation of the Code of Ethics has occurred. Such a referral would give the bipartisan Ethics Committee the time to review the matter, allow Representative Gosar to present his arguments, and give the committee the chance to make appropriate recommendations.

But once again, the majority is rushing forward with a resolution to strip a Republican member of a committee assignment without giving either of these two appropriate venues a chance to resolve the matter. In doing so, they are playing politics in the worst way, rushing to condemn a Republican Member for actions for which he has already sought to address.

It is disturbing to note the surprise on my Democratic colleagues' faces last night at the Rules Committee when I referenced the public statement Congressman Gosar released after removing the video. They didn't seem to know about it. I think they are condemning his actions and didn't even know that he had already taken corrective action.

That goes to show, frankly, that we have not taken the appropriate care in looking at this matter, and certainly not given Representative Gosar the opportunity to address it.

Madam Speaker, I urge opposition to the rule, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume simply to make a couple of quick points to some of my friends' concerns.

First of all, nobody has had 2 weeks to act. This incident occurred less than 2 weeks ago, and we were in recess last week. So let's focus on the here and now.

I may be mistaken about this, but I don't think we have kept the Ethics Committee from meeting about this. Quite the opposite, we wish they had.

The chairman did say he would put in a request for an emergency meeting. The reality is, the majority moved ahead, I think, before that could happen. That process, I think, would have been the appropriate one to follow or an appropriate one to follow in this case.

So, I just simply posit those things for the record.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Gaetz).

Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, if we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to consider a resolution that would add a new House rule stating that any resolution proposing to remove a Member from a committee assignment shall not be in order unless offered by, or with the concurrence of, the leader of the party of the Member that is the subject of the resolution.

Madam Speaker, my amendment would reinforce the longstanding norm of basic fairness that today's resolution does not comply with. Throughout the entire history of the House of Representatives, it has been an unwritten rule, or norm of conduct, that one party does not attempt to exercise a veto over the other party's committee assignments. The reasons for this are obvious. It protects the operations of the institution and ensures that politically motivated attempts to remove Members from committees do not happen.

But the majority's actions, both today and earlier this Congress, threaten that norm and threaten to set off a new round of escalating partisan punishment anytime the majority changes hands. Establishing this as a written rule of the House would ensure that no Member ever faces this kind of partisan retribution again.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include in the Record the text of my amendment, along with the extraneous material, immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.

Obviously, I oppose the rule. Today's action threatens one of the key norms of this institution, the right of the majority and minority to make committee assignments for their respective Members. It threatens to set a new, dangerous precedent for this institution, allowing the majority to have a veto over the minority's assignments.

Representative Gosar has already addressed his misguided decision to post the video and has sought to rectify it.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question, ``no'' on the rule, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Madam Speaker, it is an old definition of abuse of power: ``Rules for thee, but not for me.'' That is exactly what is happening here today.

House Democrats are preparing, once again, to break another precedent of the United States House of Representatives.

It is an open secret that the American people are facing substantial challenges today. Many of these challenges are Washington-inflicted, of one-party rule, caused by the Biden administration's incompetence and radicalism.

Absolute chaos on the southern border; out-of-control crime; record- breaking gas prices and inflation; a broken supply chain; a historic labor shortage; a failing education system and, of course, the humiliating surrender in Afghanistan.

Will this Congress be remembered as the Congress that addressed those serious challenges? Not a chance?

Instead, I believe this Congress will go down in history as the broken Congress.

For nearly 4 years, as the House Republicans have been voicing the needs of millions of Americans, House Democrats have broken nearly every rule and standard in order to silence dissent and stack the deck for their radical, unpopular agenda.

They broke the motion to recommit, the first time in the history of Congress. They broke impeachment, not once, but twice. They broke in- person voting and replaced it with proxy voting, for the first time in history. And they broke the minority's right to appoint members of its own choosing to committees.

The Speaker is burning down the House on her way out the door.

What's worse, we got to this point on the basis of a double standard. Democrats want to change the rules but refuse to apply them to their own caucus.

I listened to the Speaker talk about the highest standards.

Madam Speaker, when a Democratic chairwoman flew to Minneapolis and told an angry crowd during the trial to ``stay on the streets,'' ``get more active,'' ``get more confrontational.'' ``We've got to make sure they know we mean business.'' That high standard, the Democrats refused to take action.

The trial judge actually singled her out on her comments on an ongoing basis, which he said could become an issue on appeal.

But this wasn't the first time. No. This is three times.

At a rally in Los Angeles, that same chairwoman, she told a mob: ``If you see anyone from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them that they're not welcome anymore, anywhere.''

She later defended that comment in another speech in L.A., saying-- this same chairwoman, of the high standards--

I did not threaten Trump constituents and supporters. I do

that all the time, but I didn't do it that time.

This side of the aisle didn't ask that chairwoman to lose her committee. We simply asked for an apology.

Meanwhile, with that high standard, Speaker Pelosi and Leader Hoyer defended her. When asked about her Minneapolis comment, Leader Hoyer described her as ``passionate--she believes in her issues.'' She believes she should get in your faces.

And Speaker Pelosi, oh, what did she do with that high standard? She compared her comments in Minneapolis to Dr. King's civil rights movement. You see, why would they do that? Rules for thee, but not for me.

Just this month, the dossier's principal source was arrested by Special Counsel Durham for lying to the FBI. Think about everything that dossier put this country through for 2 years, based on fabricated evidence. The infringements to due process; the spying on the Presidential campaign; and, of course, the $32 million spent by hardworking taxpayers for a Mueller investigation.

And yet, the Democratic chairman says, ``I don't regret it.'' Why? Rules for thee, but not for me.

When the Speaker of the House, on this very floor, engaged in personalities, the floor shut down for 3 hours because no one wanted to take it to the top. Her entire caucus that believed in the higher standard voted to keep her words in the Record rather than strike them down. Why?

Rules for thee, but not for me.

The Speaker said: ``I stand by my statement. I'm proud of the attention that's being called to it.''

Never happened before in the history of this body. Why? Because it is a broken Congress that believes in rules for thee, but not for me.

This is part of a larger pattern. When a Congressman on the Intelligence Committee was targeted by a suspected Chinese Communist Party agent for years, the Democrats kept him on the committee. Why? Rules for thee, but not for me.

When a Democrat Congresswoman said: ``Israel has hypnotized the world,'' supporting Israel is ``all about the Benjamins,'' and that 9/ 11 was ``some people did something,'' Democrats actually defended her. Why? Rules for thee, but not for me.

And when a Member of the Democratic leadership tweeted a week ago, ``Lock up Kyle Rittenhouse and throw away the key,'' in an attempt to sway an ongoing trial, the Democrats said nothing. Why? Rules for thee, but not for me.

Let me be clear: I do not condone violence, and Representative Gosar has echoed that sentiment. The video was deleted. Democrats won't listen because they will do anything to distract from the failures of one-party rule in 1 year destroying a Nation.

For Democrats, this vote isn't about a video; it is about control. That is the one and only thing Democrats are interested in--not condemning violence, not protecting the institution, not decorum or decency, just control.

The Democrats want control, and they don't care about the consequences. They are destroying this institution, silencing the minority, and, therefore, silencing millions of Americans.

When I talked to Democrat leadership when they told me what they wanted to do, I asked a simple question: Have you seen the video? No, haven't seen it. But they knew exactly what they wanted to do. It is interesting. Without even watching, they decide the punishment. Why? No need. Rules for thee but not for me.

What they have started cannot be easily undone. Their actions today and in the past have forever changed the way the House operates. It means that the minority rights that have served this body so well are a thing of the past. Furthermore, it means that, under the Pelosi precedent, all the Members that I mentioned earlier will need the approval of a majority to keep those positions in the future.

What was interesting is, it is not just the Speaker who is making those decisions. When the chairwoman incited those ideas three times, everyone in the Democratic Party had the ability to vote what they thought. Because of those high standards, they all voted to table. They all voted to table, not to remove this chairwoman from committees or ask for an apology. Why? Because you all believe in rules for thee but not for me.

That legacy is a real culmination of Speaker Pelosi's career. Make no mistake, the House is weaker, more partisan, more self-focused today than when Speaker Pelosi became Speaker less than 4 years ago. Future Congresses will suffer for it. More importantly, the American people have needlessly suffered because of it. They won't soon forget it.

It is about control. It is not about a standard that everybody lives by. It is a standard you enforce on one but not

upon yourself. You encouraged your own side to engage further when you all took a vote to table.

It would be interesting to see, if your leadership hasn't watched the video, how many of you who vote today have watched it.

When it was requested, I contacted the Member. He took the video down. He put out a statement that he does not believe in violence to anyone.

But, you see, when others on the other side of the aisle incite violence, it is okay because it is rules for thee but not for me.

Unfortunately, this body has suffered greatly, and a new standard will continue to be applied in the future.