We use analytics tools to understand how people use the site. They're optional: if you decline, the site works the same, no analytics cookies are set and Google gets only a cookieless, anonymous count signal. Your votes are saved either way; the details are in the privacy policy.
85 public bills, H.R. 2395- 2479; and 11 resolutions, H.J. Res. 82; and H. Res. 259-268 were introduced.
Pages H1333-38
Reports Filed
Reports were filed today as follows: H.R. 1155, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow taxpayers to elect to receive certain replacement refunds electronically, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-41); H.R. 998, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require additional information on math and clerical error notices, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-42); H.R. 1491, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make the postponement of certain deadlines by reason of disasters applicable to the limitation on credit or refund, and to take postponements into account for purposes of sending collection notices, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-43); H.R. 517, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the rules for postponing certain deadlines by reason of disaster, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-44); H.R. 1152, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the application of the mailbox rule to documents and payments electronically submitted to the Internal Revenue Service, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-45); H.R. 997, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to conform to the intent of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, as set forth in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 105-599, that the National Taxpayer Advocate be able to hire and consult counsel as appropriate, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-46); H.R. 1450, to require the Office of Foreign Assets Control to develop a program under which private sector firms may receive a license to conduct nominal financial transactions in furtherance of the firms' investigations, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-47, Part 1); and H.R. 1716, to deter Chinese aggression towards Taiwan by requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to publish a report on financial institutions and accounts connected to senior officials of the People's Republic of China, to restrict financial services for certain immediate family of such officials, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-48, Part 1).
Page H1333
Speaker
Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative McDowell to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H1305
Guest Chaplain
The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Rabbi Pinchus Ciment, Lubavitch of Arkansas, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Page H1305
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program
Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers'': The House passed H.J. Res. 24, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers'', by a yea-and-nay vote of 203 yeas to 182 nays, Roll No. 77.
Pages H1307-11
H. Res. 242, the rule providing for consideration of the joint resolutions (H.J. Res. 24) and (H.J. Res. 75) and the bill (H.R. 1048) was agreed to Tuesday, March 25th. Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator Freezers'': The House passed H.J. Res. 75, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator Freezers'', by a yea-and-nay vote of 214 yeas to 193 nays, Roll No. 78. Consideration began yesterday, March 26th.
Page H1312
H. Res. 242, the rule providing for consideration of the joint resolutions (H.J. Res. 24) and (H.J. Res. 75) and the bill (H.R. 1048) was agreed to Tuesday, March 25th. Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act: The House passed H.R. 1048, to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to strengthen disclosure requirements relating to foreign gifts and contracts, to prohibit contracts between institutions of higher education and certain foreign entities and countries of concern, by a yea-and-nay vote of 241 yeas to 169 nays, Roll No. 83. Consideration began Tuesday, March 25th.
Pages H1312-16
Pursuant to the Rule, an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 119-1 shall be considered as adopted in the House and in the Committee of the Whole, in lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Workforce now printed in the bill.
Page H1312
Rejected
Scott (VA) amendment (No. 3 printed in H. Rept. 119-38) that was debated on March 25th that sought to amend Section 117 to streamline foreign gift and contract reporting, aligns reporting with other federal research security compliance requirements, establishes common- sense sanctions for noncompliance and requires the Secretary of Education to conduct negotiated rulemaking to receive stakeholder feedback (by a recorded vote of 199 ayes to 214 noes, Roll No. 79);
Pages H1312-13
Self amendment (No. 4 printed in H. Rept. 119-38) that was debated on March 25th that sought to amend the threshold value at which gifts must be reported from $50,000 to $1 (by a recorded vote of 92 ayes to 321 noes, Roll No. 80);
Pages H1313-14
Tlaib amendment (No. 5 printed in H. Rept. 119-38) that was debated on March 25th that sought to amend the definition of ``Foreign Country of Concern'' to include any country that is defending a case before the International Court of Justice relating to an alleged violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 or their Additional Protocols or the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide; and to include any country the government of which includes officials that have outstanding arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (by a recorded vote of 3 ayes to 410 noes, Roll No. 81); and
Page H1314
Tlaib amendment (No. 6 printed in H. Rept. 119-38) that was debated on March 25th that sought to amend the definition of ``Investment of Concern'' to include any entity that the Secretary of State determines consistently, knowingly, and directly facilitates and enables state violence and repression, war and occupation, or severe violations of international law and human rights (by a recorded vote of 4 ayes to 404 noes with one answering ``present'', Roll No. 82. H. Res. 242, the rule providing for consideration of the joint resolutions (H.J. Res. 24) and (H.J. Res. 75) and the bill (H.R. 1048) was agreed to Tuesday, March 25th.
Pages H1314-15
Meeting Hour
Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday, March 31, 2025 for morning-hour debate.
Page H1316
Senate Message
Message received from the Senate appears on page H1321. Quorum Calls--Votes: Three yea-and-nay votes and four recorded votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H1311, H1312, H1313, H1313-14, H1314, H1315, and H1315-16. Adjournment: The House met at 9 a.m. and adjourned at 1:43 p.m.
Every speech and line is the Congressional Record's own text, read from GovInfo. Speakers are matched to members by GPO's own metadata. Referandom places each turn on the Clerk's video by matching its words: 99 of 136 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Welcoming Guest Chaplain Rabbi Pinchus Ciment
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Hill) is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome today's guest chaplain, my friend, Rabbi Pinchus Ciment.
Rabbi Ciment is the director of Chabad Lubavitch of Arkansas in Little Rock and is currently the longest serving rabbi in our State.
He was born in Boston, Massachusetts, and moved to Little Rock with his wife in 1992.
Rabbi Ciment has lectured on matters in Judaism at several universities in Arkansas and has been a frequent author in the ``Ask the Clergy'' section of our statewide newspaper, the Arkansas Democrat- Gazette. He studied at the Rabbinical Seminary in Morristown, New Jersey, and the Central Lubavitch Yeshiva in Brooklyn, New York, receiving his rabbinical ordination in 1990.
Rabbi Ciment is a devoted husband to Estie and a proud father of 10 children.
I extend my heartfelt thanks to Rabbi Ciment for delivering a beautiful opening prayer.
Mr. Speaker, I wish him, his family, and Chabad Lubavitch of Arkansas continued success in serving the central Arkansas community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Penn State wrestling, the 2025 NCAA Division 1 national champions.
Continuing their dominance of NCAA wrestling, the Nittany Lions brought
Under the leadership of Coach Cael Sanderson, his team has won 12 of the last 15 NCAA championships.
Penn State's two individual champions are a testament to the strength of their program as well as their personal strength, talent, and determination.
Carter Starocci made history by becoming the first wrestler to win five individual NCAA titles, while Mitchell Mesenbrink claimed his first national title with an outstanding performance.
Beyond individual triumphs, the Nittany Lions made history as only the second team ever to have 10 All-Americans in one tournament.
This success would not be possible without the dedication of the coaching staff, the families, and the unwavering support of the Penn State community.
As a graduate of Penn State, I am proud to congratulate Penn State wrestling on winning the 2025 national championship and on their continuing success.
Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to celebrate Larry Huggins' incredible contributions to Illinois and Chicago.
Larry is a trailblazer. At a time when Black people were discouraged from construction jobs, Larry founded a construction company that is still thriving and has helped build some of Chicago's most famous landmarks.
Huggins is an eminent civic leader, as well. He served as acting chairman of Metra and founded the famous Christmas in the Wards to distribute toys and other gifts to Chicago's needy.
He also cofounded the Chicago Football Classic, which is a yearly football game between two HBCUs at Soldier Field. The game is accompanied by scholarships, workshops, and outreach for students.
From business success to civic leadership, I am pleased to congratulate Larry Huggins on a life of exemplary service and achievement.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate Sydney Tran, a seventh grade student at El Rancho Charter School in Orange, for becoming Orange County's new spelling bee champion.
Sydney earned her well-deserved victory and secured a spot at the Scripps National Spelling Bee by spelling the word ``obsecration'' in the 14th round of competition.
In addition to her spelling skills, Sydney is also on the school robotics team and participates in community service projects, embodying the spirit of a well-rounded and engaged student. Her success serves as an inspiration to her peers and brings pride to our entire community.
Sydney will soon head to Washington, D.C., to represent Orange County at the national spelling bee in May.
Mr. Speaker, we wish Sydney good luck. We are cheering her on.
Mr. Speaker, for Women's History Month, I rise to honor the parent leaders from The Resurrection Project known as Las Mamas de Back of the Yards, or the Back of the Yards Moms, a powerhouse of immigrant women who are the heart and soul of their community on Chicago's South Side.
Mothers like Consuelo, Lorena, Alma, Maria, Ofelia, Martha, Zuleyman, Victoria, Gabriela, and Sylvia show us what real leadership looks like.
They educate neighbors on their rights, organize rapid responses when raids threaten families, distribute food when the fridge is empty, and keep our youth safe and supported.
From city hall to Washington, and right inside our schools, these women ensure that their voices and their community voices are heard.
They are respected, admired, and deeply rooted in the Back of the Yards, and, yes, they keep people like me on our toes, always causing good trouble.
In honoring them, we honor the power of immigrant women everywhere, their courage and commitment, and the fight for a better future for all of us.
Mr. Speaker, I thank them, I stand with them, and I celebrate them.
Mr. Speaker, during this past district work period, I had the opportunity of hosting discussions with business leaders and constituents across Indiana's Sixth District. With our community leaders, we had conversations that focused on the need to extend the progrowth policies of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Over 17 visits across my district, I spoke with our seniors on Medicare Advantage. I spoke with Hoosier farmers on National Ag Day at our Purdue Extension facility in Johnson County. I heard from our Indiana Realtors--and no one knows our communities like our Realtors-- about the importance of homeownership and having sufficient housing inventory for job growth and economic creation.
I appreciate these listen-and-learn opportunities with our local small businesses and constituents. All policy is so very local.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to work with businesses across Indiana's Sixth District to bring business sense to Washington. The American people expect results, and we must deliver.
Mr. Speaker, yes, that is me in 1977. I was a young law student representing Texas at the historic International Women's Year conference in Houston.
Ann Richards was right behind me. She was getting ready to make a speech on the ERA. She would go on to be Governor, and I went on to serve in the city, county, State, and now here in Federal Government.
That day, we were doing what I am doing right now: fighting for the equal rights amendment, fighting to guarantee equal rights for all women under the Constitution.
I still have the ERA pin I wore that day. I have kept it for nearly 50 years because the fight isn't over.
This week, I stood with powerful women in Congress to introduce a resolution that removes our final barrier: the arbitrary deadline set decades ago. If it passes, the ERA becomes the 28th Amendment.
We must pass this resolution. We must remove all barriers to women because our rights don't have deadlines. Our rights are human rights.
Mr. Speaker, we must use budget reconciliation to fully repeal the so-called Inflation Reduction Act's, IRA, green subsidies.
They are a trillion-dollar disaster, driving up energy costs, undermining grid reliability, and forcing out dependable power sources like coal and natural gas as well as the hydroelectric dam destruction we see happening.
Keeping even one of them threatens real spending reductions and makes it nearly impossible to rein in the national deficit of around $2 trillion brought on by the Biden administration and Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
The stakes are very clear. Europe's energy crisis shows what happens when
We cannot let the left's green welfare agenda weaken our energy security while boosting our biggest adversary any longer.
Full repeal means saving taxpayers $1 trillion in wasteful spending, easing inflation and lowering costs for families and small businesses, and restoring energy security by stabilizing our grid. Reconciliation is the way forward.
(Ms. BALINT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.)
Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify something for some of my colleagues and for leaders across this country because there seems to be some confusion. There is a big difference between taking a knee and bending a knee.
Taking a knee shows that you can hold many truths at once, you can love our country and believe that there is still more work to do. It shows that you are willing to do that work and to live up to our country's ideals.
However, bending a knee is something quite different. Bending a knee is capitulation. It is what you do when you have given up, when you have lost your fight, when you have lost your way, when you are not willing to show courage, to show up, or to speak up.
Taking a knee, you have got skin in the game. Bending a knee, you have given in, you have lost your self-respect.
We were not elected to be obedient, to submit, to cower. We were not sent here to worship one man. We have no kings in America. We were sent here to work on behalf of the people. If you are not risking anything, you are not being brave. Show some grit and stand up for your people.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted by the Department of Energy Relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In...
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 242, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 24) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers'', and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 242, the joint resolution is considered read.
The text of the joint resolution is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The joint resolution shall be debatable for 1 hour, equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Weber).
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.J. Res. 24.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, on December 23, 2024, as American households and businesses were in the process of preparing for the holidays, the Biden-Harris Department of Energy finalized burdensome and unnecessary energy efficiency standards for walk-in coolers and walk-in freezers.
These products are staples--they are necessary--in businesses and restaurants across the country, and they play an essential role in providing consumers with safe and fresh food as well as drinks.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the Biden-Harris administration's final rule jeopardizes those very same small and independent retailers' ability to serve the communities that rely on them.
This final rule will force stores like small grocers and convenience stores to incur significant major up-front costs for new equipment. I know because I operated an air-conditioning business for 35 years. They will incur significant, major up-front costs on equipment while reckoning with associated operational disruptions and supply chain challenges. The Biden-Harris DOE itself estimated that the cost of these standards, which were last updated just a handful of years ago, to be almost $1 billion, with a b.
However, the real cost, Mr. Speaker, is likely much higher, as DOE ignored other costs businesses will be forced to absorb. An example of added costs is any structural changes needed to accommodate a new walk- in cooler or freezer in order to comply with their final rule.
Unfortunately, this final rule will disproportionately affect rural communities and small businesses. In many areas across the country, Mr. Speaker, including in my district in Texas, there are communities with limited food and drink retail options. It is not uncommon for a convenience store to bridge that gap in providing food to American families.
These same small businesses, which are often owned and operated by a single family or an individual, cannot afford the new equipment mandated by these unreasonable standards. In fact, 90 percent of food and drink retailers are categorized as small businesses and operate with a 1 to 3 percent margin. That is how slim their margin is.
The result will be significant costs being passed down to consumers and, in the worst case scenario, the shuttering of businesses, those mom-and-pop businesses that we all like. They may be shuttered, prevented from providing essential services to the very communities that they grew up in.
Thankfully, Mr. Speaker, the House is considering H.J. Res. 24, introduced by the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice) to repeal this disastrous final rule.
Over the last 4 years, small businesses have endured supply chain challenges, an inflationary environment, and regulatory uncertainty, just to name a few. Congress has the opportunity today to chart a new path for the small and independent retailers and grocers that feed American families by repealing this final rule.
I thank the gentlewoman from Oklahoma for her leadership on this issue, and I urge my colleagues to join me in
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. Res. 24, the fourth Republican resolution this Congress to dismantle energy conservation standards for appliances. This harmful resolution guts a Department of Energy efficiency rule for walk-in coolers and freezers, which will increase energy costs for businesses and consumers. Let me stress that again. If this rule is repealed, businesses and consumers will have increased energy costs. Since it is a Congressional Review Act resolution, it prevents the Department of Energy from ever issuing substantially similar standards in the future.
Now, let me say, Mr. Speaker, at a time when Americans are struggling to make ends meet and facing the reality that Republicans may soon strip them and their families of healthcare, it is shocking that House Republicans are spending another day here on the floor focusing on repealing commonsense energy efficiency standards that save businesses and consumers money.
This whole Congress has been a revolving door of resolution after resolution attacking conservation standards for different appliances. In fact, I should point out, we were on the floor just yesterday afternoon debating an effort to repeal another energy efficiency standard for commercial refrigerators and freezers.
Instead of investigating--which is what they should be doing--the shocking and unprecedented breach of security and leaked military strikes from top Trump national security officials, which threatens our national security and our defense, we are here once again wasting valuable floor time debating energy efficiency standards.
Maybe we should be taking action to protect Social Security from the Trump administration's funding cuts that could stop seniors from getting the benefits they earned through a lifetime of work. My constituents are already telling me they can't even call the Social Security office anymore. There is nobody there. They have cut the staff. They have cut the phone service. They can't even access the Social Security Administration anymore under the Trump administration.
Maybe, Mr. Speaker, we should be reversing the Trump administration's actions to close the Department of Education and rip away funding from students, teachers, and schools.
House Republicans are not likely to take on any of these actions that I suggested because they refuse to take on President Trump, even when he is breaking the law. It is clear that my Republican colleagues do not have their priorities in order. In fact, it seems to me their only priority is securing giant tax breaks for their billionaire buddies at the expense of American families and businesses. H.J. Res. 24 fits right into the Republican agenda of raising costs on hardworking Americans.
Now, I would be remiss if I didn't point out the irony of this resolution. President Trump and Republicans ran on a promise to cut energy costs in half in his first year. Yet, here we are once again wasting precious time on the floor with a resolution that would raise energy costs for American businesses by wasting more energy.
The energy efficiency standards under threat today for walk-in refrigerators and freezers will save American businesses up to $6.5 billion on utility bills over the next 30 years. These businesses include restaurants, convenience stores, and supermarkets across the country, and Republicans' anti-efficiency agenda will rob them of these cost savings.
This is especially concerning at a time when we are hearing more and more stories about the damaging impacts of Trump's extreme tariffs, the rising cost of groceries, and the chaos and uncertainty that Trump is bringing every day to our economy.
People are concerned about a Trump recession. That is what they are worried about today. That is what I hear when I go home. However, Republicans don't care about everyday Americans. They only care about doing the bidding of their billionaire corporate buddies at the expense of consumers and working families.
Energy efficiency standards for appliances are designed to reduce energy use and climate pollution while also saving consumers and businesses money. Reducing an appliance's energy use also helps decrease stress on the electric grid.
The resolution today is proof that my Republican colleagues' concern about grid stress--we had a hearing yesterday on that--and the increased load growth from data centers and American manufacturing are hollow and merely lip service. If Republicans truly cared about reducing stress on the electric grid, which is what they said yesterday at the hearing, they would stop dismantling energy efficiency standards designed to ease strain on future electric grid capacity.
The true intent of this anti-efficiency resolution is not to help American businesses, but to line the pockets of their billionaire cronies and oil and gas friends. You guessed it, less efficient appliances means more profits for Big Oil and Gas.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this resolution, and I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I rise, obviously, in strong support of H.J. Res. 24, legislation that I authored which uses the Congressional Review Act to overturn regulations by the Biden administration.
I was extremely excited this morning to be notified that I have a Statement of Administration Policy from President Trump on this legislation, which I include in the Record.
In December of 2024, the Department of Energy enacted new energy efficiency standards for walk-in coolers and freezers, equipment vital to pharmacies, convenience stores, food processing facilities, food banks, restaurants, and many other establishments nationwide.
These regulations will impose significant financial burdens on small businesses, which will have to absorb major upgrade costs to meet these new aggressive standards. At a time when our focus should be on lowering the cost of living for our constituents, it is clear most of these expenses will be borne by consumers in the form of increased prices.
Mr. Speaker, furthermore, they threaten significant operational disruption for many enterprises that rely on this equipment. We have heard from many businesses in rural areas which will have to go through extensive structural and electrical upgrades to accommodate the new equipment. These same businesses have reported that getting the refrigerators and freezers repaired is a process which is already taking too long and is expensive and will become even more so.
For businesses looking to enter underserved markets, this will be another barrier in doing so. For businesses operating on a narrow profit margin, this could be what sends them under.
Recognizing these detrimental impacts, I fought against the adoption of this rule and expressed my disapproval last year during the public comment period. Like many of the rules handed down by the Biden administration, this effort will have a harsh economic impact while failing to achieve its own stated goal.
DOE estimates that the rule would carry a minimum price tag of nearly $1 billion with minimal energy usage reduction. My colleague mentioned that it would be a savings of $6 billion over 30 years. What he didn't mention is the cost of replacement equipment with these new energy efficiency standards could be tens of thousands of dollars, adding up to billions and billions of dollars that are going to be borne by these businesses.
I am grateful President Trump has taken the decisive action to halt these rules by having the Department of Energy postpone the effective date of these standards, providing breathing room for businesses. However, more work needs to be done; and Congress has a role to play.
My resolution seeks to ensure that these overreaching regulations are permanently overturned. By doing so, we will protect small businesses from unnecessary compliance costs and preserve the diversity of choice available to consumers.
This action aligns with our broader commitment to roll back burdensome regulations that stifle economic growth and infringe upon individual freedoms. In fact, according to the National Association of Manufacturers, in 2022, the total cost of regulations is estimated at over $3 trillion.
We cannot continue to allow burdensome regulations on every aspect of our lives and our businesses. I urge my colleagues to support H.J. Res. 24, legislation that will reduce burdens on businesses and serve the best interests of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose H.J. Res. 24. It is baffling to me that amidst skyrocketing electricity costs, the highest they have been since the 1990s, we are talking about overturning commonsense energy efficiency standards.
Economists predict these standards would save American taxpayers billions of dollars. Mr. Speaker, you don't need to be an economist to know that a better fridge or freezer will mean lower costs on your utility bill. For families going to their local grocery, these standards would lower prices and reduce financial strain. For small businesses, it means less overhead and more profitability.
These benefits are why the Department of Energy has set energy efficiency standards for decades, across Republican and Democratic administrations, with broad support and little controversy.
America should be leading the world in creating and adopting innovative technologies, especially ones that reduce costs and help the environment. Unfortunately, this was just another empty campaign promise by candidate Trump that electricity costs would be reduced.
Let me just emphasize that Democrats believe in an economy that works for all people. Under the last administration, we passed legislation that created nearly half a million new jobs in just 2 years. The Federal Government set standards that will save money.
Mr. Speaker, I conclude by saying that Americans will save $1 trillion on their energy bills over the next 30 years under the previous policies. That is $1 trillion. We will continue to fight for commonsense policies for everyday people, and that is why I oppose H.J. Res. 24.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.J. Res. 24, legislation led by my friend Representative Stephanie Bice. This reverses yet another burdensome Biden administration mandate that will add senseless costs for families and small businesses for no real benefit.
The Biden Department of Energy's rule on walk-in refrigerator equipment is a textbook example of government overreach. This rule imposes sweeping, unrealistic energy standards that demand massive energy reductions, but this isn't just about energy policy. It is about the reality facing restaurant owners, grocery stores, and convenience stores in North Dakota and across the country.
These businesses have battled through 4 years of inflation, supply chain disruptions, and workforce challenges. Washington bureaucrats are now telling them to replace perfectly good refrigeration equipment at a nationwide cost of nearly $1 billion just to meet an arbitrary, one- size-fits-all efficiency target.
To comply with these standards, manufacturers will have to increase prices on already expensive equipment. These costs will land squarely on the businesses and, ultimately, the American people. Mr. Speaker, 90 percent of the food and drink retailers impacted by this rule are small businesses. These are businesses that are critical to the U.S. economy, employing millions of Americans and contributing more than $200 billion annually.
This rule is not economically justified. It is Washington at its worst. It is no wonder that before President Trump took office, 75 percent of the country thought that we were headed in the wrong direction. It is rules just like this that they know about.
This is a bad rule. It is bad for business, and it is bad for customers. Let's stop this misguided regulation before it does more real damage to the small businesses that drive our economy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to put common sense over bureaucratic overreach and support H.J. Res. 24.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this Republican bill that requires businessowners to spend more money and use more energy.
Mr. Speaker, here we are at the end of March. It is the 83rd day since the Congress convened under the Republican majority, and Republicans haven't brought one bill to the floor of the House to help lower costs or tackle the cost of living for our neighbors back home.
Instead, Republicans have been singularly focused on crafting a massive tax giveaway for billionaires like Elon Musk that is paid for by ripping away health coverage from the people we love the most: kids, our parents, our neighbors who rely on skilled nursing, and people with disabilities who especially rely on Medicaid. It is wrong, and it makes life harder for people back home. It makes their lives more expensive.
People want answers, but Republicans have refused to hold townhalls. Many of them will not even answer the phone. At my townhall last week in St. Petersburg, people wanted to know why the administration and Republicans want to make it more difficult to receive Social Security rather than strengthen Social Security.
Instead of a wasteful, time-consuming, silly bill like this, why don't we work together and bring to the floor a bill that will strengthen Social Security? That would be a help to our neighbors back home.
I think what it comes down to is Republicans in Congress are out of touch with hardworking people. They are out of touch with their struggles. They want lower costs. They don't want bills like this that say you will pay more and our Big Oil friends are going to make more on their bottom line.
People are tired of being ripped off by the special interests and politicians who all have too much power here in Washington, D.C. This bill is another example of that. Republicans want to make it harder for businessowners to save money through energy efficient appliances.
Energy efficiency saves people money. It is pretty straightforward. It cuts costs. It cuts pollution. It encourages innovation. Specifically, electric bills for walk-in refrigerators and freezers are a huge line item for restaurants and grocery stores. Taking those savings away will increase costs for businesses, and these are costs that will be passed on to consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I want you to think about that the next time you are in the
Overall, when the Department of Energy goes in and works with manufacturers and consumer advocates, they come up, they look at the latest technology, and then move forward on adopting a standard that will be in effect years from now. They look particularly at the cost savings overall, and the savings they estimate here are huge. It is $6.5 billion in utility bill savings over the next 30 years.
This also hits home in my community because many of the businesses and many of my neighbors are rebuilding from Hurricanes Helene and Milton. They were flooded out. They lost their appliances. Many businesses went on the fritz. It would be particularly helpful to know that they are going to save money over time as they make these major investments.
This is exactly what Congress intended when we passed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. It was passed in 1975. We directed the Department of Energy to set and regularly update these standards.
Energy efficiency standards also incentivize innovation, and American manufacturers have traditionally led the way in innovation due to updated standards. By weakening these rules, we open our markets up to countries like China that manufacture low-efficiency products at the expense of American companies and American families.
The Department of Energy followed the law. They collaborated with manufacturers to ensure that the standards work. After all of this hard work, Republicans now want to swoop in and repeal these standards on coolers and freezers. They are, in essence, walking out on the cost savings at a time our neighbors really expect us to work together to lower the cost of living.
There is a larger issue here, and it is the fact that Republicans are ignoring the affordability squeeze. When Democrats were in charge, we did everything we could to help lower the cost of living. We passed a cap on insulin at $35 per month. We required Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices. We gave help on health insurance bills. We provided tax rebates and savings for appliances on electric bills.
This has led to a major manufacturing boom across the country of over 750 clean-energy projects and over 400,000 new jobs created all across America, many in Republican districts.
Since the Trump administration came in and started these illegal shutdowns and threatened new taxes through tariffs, the economy has stalled. Has anyone looked at their 401(k) lately? People are very uncertain.
Let's get back to business, standing up for hardworking Americans, standing up for businesses. Let's make sure we guard their pocketbooks and tackle the affordability squeeze together, rather than serve the special interests that all have too much power. Republican billionaires and Big Oil companies are the real winners when resolutions like this are passed and savings are ripped away from American consumers.
Mr. Speaker, let's stand up for the people for a change and not the powerful special interests. Let's stand up for their pocketbooks and vote ``no'' on this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, it is interesting for me to hear my colleagues across the aisle as an owner of an air-conditioning company that dealt with not just air-conditioning but convenience stores that had walk-in coolers, furnaces, and air-conditioners. I get that they speak from inexperience. I will give them that. What they don't realize is that when something like this is mandated, first of all, those businesses usually operate on a very, very thin margin. It could be 1.5 to 2, maybe sometimes almost 3 percent profit, which I know from experience.
When something like this has to be done, even a small walk-in cooler--let's just pick some figures. Let's say it costs $5,000 to $6,000, but the plumbing, electrical, carpentry, permits, and everything costs $10,000 to $12,000.
Now, they have a choice. They are either going to pass that on to their consumers in higher food prices, or they are going to continue to pay an extra $10 or $20 a month in electricity.
That is what is going to happen that they don't realize, that what they are wanting to do is mandate that businesses have to increase their expenses at the expense of the consumers because they are the ones that are going to pay for that.
I have watched this for a long time. I realize that they speak from inexperience. I will leave it at that, Mr. Speaker, for the time being, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for closing.
Mr. Speaker, again, I rise in opposition to this resolution. Republicans make it sound like no one supports these standards, like they came out of nowhere and are an incredible government overreach. Of course, that is not true.
Manufacturers support these efficiency standards. They provide clarity to industry. Manufacturers support the Department of Energy's rule because it provides clear guidance. If this rule is revoked, it creates regulatory uncertainty for manufacturers.
The Department of Energy worked with manufacturers and advocates to ensure that these standards were feasible and justifiable. Unlike my colleagues across the aisle, the Department of Energy went through a prolonged process that engaged extensively with experts and worked to address their concerns.
In fact, in recently submitted comments regarding the delay and the effective date for the standards, the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, a trade group that represents many of the manufacturers of these walk-in coolers, asserted strong support for proceeding with the standards as published in the Federal Register in December of last year.
Lennox, a manufacturer of these walk-in systems, also submitted comments asserting support for proceeding with the standards as finalized. Lennox's comments also state: ``The final rule provides regulatory predictability regarding . . . energy conservation standards through 2031, providing a stable planning horizon.''
These comments are an important reminder that regulatory uncertainty from killing a standard, as the resolution before us today would do, costs businesses money. My colleagues across the aisle are more concerned with slashing any and every regulation they can find than with engaging in thoughtful and well-reasoned policy.
This is politics at its worst, so I oppose this resolution.
I also want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues across the aisle keep talking about the costs of these standards to businesses, but I think it is important to get the facts straight. The new standards for walk-in coolers don't go into effect until 2027 for some products and 2028 for others. This means that if a business needs to replace these units anytime in the next couple of years, the products on the market now will be available to them. They don't have to get rid of the refrigerators they want. It is when they buy a new one.
Whenever a business does need to replace the units, the products on the market will save them money. Specifically, these standards will save, as I mentioned, $6.5 billion in utility bills over 30 years. DOE estimates the payback period for these products is 3 years for refrigerator systems and 1.6 years for non-display doors. After those 3 years or, in the other case, 1.6 years, you are actually saving money every year.
This means that after the first couple of years of ownership, these products start saving businesses a lot of money. This is real money.
The Republicans talked about upfront costs. There may be some upfront costs, but over the period of time after those first couple of years, businesses are saving money.
If Republicans are actually concerned about the small businesses in their communities, and if they are really concerned about costs being passed down to consumers, they would be standing up to the Trump administration and pushing back on tariffs.
I am mentioning the tariffs today because the President, again, is starting to impose new tariffs. The last one was on automobiles. Large appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines rely, in part, on steel, making them extremely vulnerable to price increases
In the aftermath of steel and aluminum tariffs during Trump's first term, talking about the first term now, not the new one, major appliances showed price increases of between 5 and 10 percent.
If my colleagues are concerned about the prices, they should be speaking out against what Trump is doing with these tariffs, not to mention the fact that the tariffs impose additional costs on consumers. Again, the uncertainty--the back and forth, put the tariffs on, take the tariffs off--is the reason that the stock market has been so volatile. People don't know with certainty what is going on with this administration.
We are facing policies from the Trump administration that will increase everyday costs for households and businesses. Instead of trying to fight these increases, Republicans are more concerned with the upfront costs of walk-in coolers in 2028. I don't know what to say except that it is ridiculous.
Mr. Speaker, I urge opposition to this resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of Rule XX, this 15- minute vote on passage will be followed by a 5-minute vote on passage of H.J. Res. 75.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 203, nays 182, not voting 45, as follows:
Messrs. CLEAVER, VEASEY, DELUZIO and Ms. CLARKE of New York changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the joint resolution was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote because I was in a legislative meeting which ran over. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 77.
Mr. Speaker, I was absent from the floor and the roll call vote on passage of H.J. Res. 24, providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Walk-In Coolers and Walk-In Freezers.''
Had I been present, I would have voted: NAY on Roll Call vote no. 77, final passage of H.J. Res. 24.
Providing for Congressional Disapproval of the Rule Submitted by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy Relating to "Energy Conservation Program: Energy...
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on passage of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 75) providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy relating to ``Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Commercial Refrigerators, Freezers, and Refrigerator-Freezers'', on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint resolution.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 214, nays 193, not voting 23, as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.
So the joint resolution was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions Act
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 242 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 1048.
Will the gentleman from California (Mr. Obernolte) kindly take the chair.
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H.R. 1048) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to strengthen disclosure requirements relating to foreign gifts and contracts, to prohibit contracts between institutions of higher education and certain foreign entities and countries of concern, and for other purposes, with Mr. Obernolte (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose on Tuesday, March 25, 2025, a request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 6 printed in House Report 119-38 offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib) had been postponed.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 119-38 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 3 by Mr. Scott of Virginia.
Amendment No. 4 by Mr. Self of Texas.
Amendment No. 5 by Ms. Tlaib of Michigan.
Amendment No. 6 by Ms. Tlaib of Michigan.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote in this series.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 3, printed in House Report 119-38, offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott),
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 199, noes 214, not voting 23, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
Messrs. TURNER of Ohio, ELLZEY, and Mrs. BICE changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. JACKSON of Illinois changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 4, printed in House Report 119-38, offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 92, noes 321, not voting 23, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 5, printed in House Report 119-38, offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 3, noes 410, not voting 23, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 6, printed in House Report 119-38, offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Tlaib), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 4, noes 404, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 27, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments under the rule, the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Van Drew) having assumed the chair, Mr. Obernolte, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1048) to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to strengthen disclosure requirements relating to foreign gifts and contracts, to prohibit contracts between institutions of higher education and certain foreign entities and countries of concern, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to House Resolution 242, he reported the bill, as amended by that resolution, back to the House with sundry further amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any further amendment reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The question is on the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to attend today's votes. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 77, NAY on Roll Call No. 78, AYE on Roll Call No. 79, NO on Roll Call No. 80, NO on Roll Call No. 81, NO on Roll Call No. 82, and NAY on Roll Call No. 83.
Mr. Speaker, I recently gave birth and am unable to travel to DC to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted NAY on Roll Call No. 77, NAY on Roll Call No. 78, AYE on Roll Call No. 79, NO on Roll Call No. 80, NO on Roll Call No. 81, NO on Roll Call No. 82, and NAY on Roll Call No. 83.
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote today. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 77, YEA on Roll Call No. 78, and YEA on Roll Call No. 83.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at noon on Monday next for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?
Mr. Speaker, it is with a heavy heart that I rise today, alongside my colleagues in the New York delegation and many of our other cherished colleagues, to mourn the loss of a giant of the House and a trailblazer for women in public service, Chairwoman Nita Lowey.
For more than three decades, she represented her constituents in Westchester and Rockland Counties with unwavering dedication, fierce advocacy, and an unbreakable spirit.
As the first woman to serve as chair of the Appropriations Committee, Nita shattered glass ceilings with dignity and determination.
As the former dean of the New York delegation, Nita fought tirelessly to secure resources for the Empire State, leading the charge after September 11, Superstorm Sandy, and the COVID-19 pandemic.
Nita's commitment to global security and education also left an indelible mark beyond our borders. As the top Democrat on the Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, she championed critical global health and education initiatives.
Mr. Speaker, Nita was more than a colleague. She was a mentor and a friend to many of us. She was a voice of compassion and reason. She believed in the power of government to do good, and her legacy will endure through the lives she touched and the barriers she broke. May her memory be a blessing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lawler), my colleague.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to honor the remarkable career and lasting legacy of Congresswoman Nita Lowey. As the first woman to chair the House Appropriations Committee, she shattered barriers and paved the way for so many others during her 32 years in the House of Representatives.
Nita was a tireless advocate for the Hudson Valley, and she was committed to getting things done on behalf of her community. Along with Congressman Latimer, we now represent portions of the district she once served. I know I speak for George in saying that we are proud to follow in her footsteps.
Her commitment to bipartisanship is something I have tried to carry forward in her honor. Nita knew that real solutions come from working across the aisle, and her ability to build consensus led to critical investments in education, healthcare, and infrastructure that benefited New Yorkers and Americans across our country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Nita Lowey for her extraordinary leadership and her unwavering belief in a better future for all Americans. May her memory be a blessing, especially for her husband, Stephen; her children; and her beloved grandchildren.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Lawler for those kind words.
Mr. Speaker, I now ask that all Members and staff throughout the Capitol rise for a moment of silence in remembrance of Chairwoman Nita Lowey. May her memory be a blessing.
Mr. Speaker, today we remember and honor a trailblazer, a leader, and a dear friend, Mia Love.
Mia made history as Utah's first Black mayor and the first Black Republican woman elected to Congress, but her impact went far further than those titles. She was a fierce advocate, a tireless servant, and a bright light in the lives of so many.
Mia brought passion, energy, and an unwavering commitment to the people of Utah's Fourth District, a district that I am now proud to serve. She led with grace and conviction, never backing down from a challenge, and always striving to make a difference for those she served. It is for me a profound honor to follow in her footsteps.
Her legacy is one of faith, courage, and love, and the highlight of her life was her husband, Jason, and her family. These descriptions are all fitting for a woman whose name said it all.
While we grieve her loss, we also celebrate a life well lived, a mission well served, and a friend deeply missed. Our Utah communities mourn for the Love family. We pray that they find peace in the Heavenly Father's love and comfort and solace in what Mia has meant to all of us.
Mr. Speaker, last year, the EPA finalized a rule which set aggressive emission standards for vehicles, amounting to a de facto EV mandate.
While I am not against EVs or certainly against reducing emissions, we must not push misguided regulations that limit consumer choice, burden the American auto industry, and increase reliance on China.
President Trump recently issued an executive order to eliminate the EV mandate, demonstrating his commitment to repealing excessive regulations. However, we must take further steps to prevent future administrations from issuing similar mandates.
That is why I have partnered with Representative Fulcher to introduce the Choice in Automobile Retail Sales, or CARS, Act, which will prevent similar EV mandates and safeguard Americans' freedom to choose the vehicle that is best for them. We must put consumers back in the driver's seat and ensure the future of the auto industry is forged through innovation and not mandates.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the incredible legacy of Annise Parker, a trailblazer, a fearless advocate, and a champion for LGBTQ rights in Texas and across the Nation.
As the first openly LGBTQ mayor of a major American city, Houston, Annise shattered barriers and showed millions of people that LGBTQ Americans belong in government and in every part of public life.
Her work wasn't just about representation. It was about action. She fought for equality, fairness, and for a Texas where everyone, no matter who they love, has the opportunity to thrive.
Through her leadership at the LGBTQ+ Victory Fund, she helped elect and empower leaders at every level of government. It is because of Annise's leadership that the next generation of LGBTQ Americans have more seats at the table, more voices in the conversation, and more hope for the future.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Annise for her service, her courage, and her unwavering commitment to justice. Texas and our Nation are better because of her.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Gia Deborah Gentile, a remarkable young woman from Hawthorne, New York, who tragically passed away on March 9 at just 14 years old after a brave and tireless battle with neuroblastoma.
Though her life was far too short, Gia's legacy is one of kindness, compassion, and selfless service. Whether it was through her role on the student council, her leadership on the Westlake High School varsity cheer team, or her dedication to the Service Club, Gia led by example, always putting others before herself and inspiring those around her.
Even while facing the most difficult of challenges, Gia's heart of gold never wavered. She continued to serve and support others, embodying a spirit of positivity, empathy, and generosity that touched everyone she encountered.
As her parents, Carmine and Dana, and her siblings, Jordana and Tino, continue to grieve this unimaginable loss, we keep them in our thoughts and prayers. Gia's memory will forever shine brightly in the hearts of all who were blessed to know her.
May Gia rest in peace and may we all strive to live each day in the spirit of kindness that she exemplified.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to voice a concern from my constituents, Jeff and Bev.
Last week, Trump's billionaire Commerce Secretary was speaking with another billionaire about how only fraudsters would complain about missing a Social Security check. Trump's billionaire Commerce Secretary said that if Social Security didn't send out checks for a month, his mother-in-law simply would not call to complain.
At the very same time, I held a townhall with my constituents where Jeff and Bev, from Bloomington, asked this question: If or when Trump ends Social Security, Bev and I will be unable to pay our mortgage. We will become homeless at age 70. What can we do? What should we do?
There are tens of millions of Americans across the country like Jeff and Bev who depend on that check coming every month. On their behalf, I ask my Republican colleagues who have majority rule of this Chamber, what are they going to do to stand up for American families and stop the billionaires who are dismantling Social Security?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Tiffany Cooper, a beloved wife, mother, and teacher, who recently passed away after a courageous battle with cancer.
Mrs. Cooper was a remarkable, loving, kind, and faithful woman. She embodied patience and grace and was known for lifting the spirits of those around her with her warm heart and gentle spirit.
After graduating from the University of Georgia and earning her master's and specialist degrees, Mrs. Cooper became an educator who poured her heart into her students.
As a devoted Christian, Mrs. Cooper's love for the Lord was the center of all she did. She dedicated her time and energy to serving others, including leading the Christians on Campus group at Long County High School.
At the center of her life was her family, often saying that her greatest accomplishment was her two children, Sophie and Jake. She gave them a foundation built on family values, knowing that those values would guide them through life's challenges.
Her life will continue to inspire all who were blessed to know her.
President Trump announced a plan to fire 12 percent of Social Security employees, close 26 offices, and slash phone services. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick recently said his family wouldn't complain about missing a Social Security check and that the only people who would are fraudsters.
Well, Mr. Lutnick's family might be able to afford to lose a payment or two, but most Americans cannot. This is their money. Americans pay for these programs. These are earned benefits. People are afraid, and rightfully so. They are calling, texting, emailing, and stopping me on the street.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my constituents, seniors, Americans with disabilities, and working families, I have a message for President Trump and his incompetent billionaire buddies: Hell no, our seniors are not the fraudsters. You are.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, did you know that more than 3 million Americans, some only 18, 19, or 20 years old, served in Vietnam? Each one had a duty to serve, but our duty, Mr. Speaker, is to remember.
On March 29, National Vietnam War Veterans Day, we remember the brave Americans who served, including the 26,900 Vietnam veterans who call the Fourth Congressional District of Florida home. We remember the 58,000 patriots who never returned home safely to the warm embrace of their families. Today, their names are hauntingly etched into the two faces of black granite in our Nation's Capital known simply as The Wall.
A replica of this very wall, almost 300 feet long, will be on display in my district from April 17 to April 21, 2025, at the Northeast Florida Fairgrounds in Nassau County, Florida. This will be a unique and moving opportunity for individuals to come see the names of their loved ones and patriots who otherwise may not be able to make it to Washington, D.C.
Mr. Speaker, we remember the 150,000 who were wounded in battle and bear the visible scars of post-traumatic stress and Agent Orange exposure. We remember those who faced brutal captivity as prisoners of war, and the 1,200 servicemembers still missing in action from Vietnam.
Mr. Speaker, we may never be able to repay our debt to those who have given the last measure of devotion for the spirit of America, but we can continue to do our duty to remember.
Mr. Speaker, on National Vietnam War Veterans Day and every day, we, the people of the United States, with a grateful heart salute those who endured great dangers at the hands of the enemy and lost in service to our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, Elon Musk spent $277 million supporting Donald Trump's campaign last year. In return, Trump has done all he can to support Musk's business ventures, awarding billions in potential contracts to Tesla and SpaceX. Trump even turned the White House lawn into a Tesla showroom to try to boost Tesla sales.
Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, whose investment firm owns hundreds of millions in Tesla stock, went on national TV to try to increase Tesla's sagging stock price.
Our own colleague, Ms. Marjorie Taylor Greene, spent thousands of dollars buying Tesla stock this year and then tried to weaponize the DOJ to help increase Tesla sales. This is all blatantly unethical, and much of it is illegal.
At the same time, Ms. Greene's DOGE subcommittee, following the example of Elon Musk in February, is calling for the defunding of NPR and PBS. Yes, Elon and Marjorie Taylor Greene are trying to kill Elmo. However, here is the thing: Public broadcasting receives just a tiny fraction of funding compared to the government contracts Elon stands to gain. In fact, if you take away the new military contract for cybertrucks alone, you will pay for all of PBS and NPR. Unlike cybertrucks, PBS and NPR won't get recalled because they are falling apart.
What is happening right now is pure bait and switch. Republicans are trying to slash Medicaid, public schools, and programs like PBS so they can give billions to Elon Musk and his fellow oligarchs. The corruption we are seeing right now is outrageous, unprecedented, and cannot stand.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the life of Donald ``Don'' Angell, a remarkable Missourian who was taken from us far too soon in a tragic accident on his beloved family farm, a place that reflected the hard work and the dedication that defined his life. Above all, Don was a devoted husband to Kristen and a loving father to his six children: Hunter, Hudson, Harper, Hope, Harlow, and Hattie.
A proud graduate of the University of Missouri, he built a distinguished 27-year career in financial service. He served his community with the Springfield Sertoma Club for over 20 years, raising funds for children's charities, and found joy in working the land on his farm.
A man of deep faith, unwavering integrity, and a sense of humor that could brighten any room, Don had a unique ability to connect with people from all walks of life.
My prayers are with the Angell family, and may Don's legacy continue to inspire us all.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to recognize the University of Akron men's basketball team as Ohio's 13th Congressional District Champion of the Week.
The Zips recently won their third Mid-American Conference Championship in 4 years when they took down the Miami RedHawks with a final score of 76-74.
Entering halftime and down 34-46, the Zips played hard the second half of the championship game, tied it up with seconds to go, and ultimately came out on top for the second year in a row.
After losing five seniors at the end of the last season, there was some uncertainty at the start of this season about how successful the Akron Zips would be. The team quickly put all doubts to rest, going into the MAC tournament as the number one seed with a record of 27-6 which included a 14-game winning streak. They even made it to the NCAA tournament.
I again congratulate the Akron Zips men's basketball team for this outstanding victory. The team is a shining example of why this community is known as the birthplace of champions. I look forward to cheering them on next season.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the retirement of Colorado Springs Fire Marshal Brett Lacey.
Marshal Lacey joined Colorado Springs Fire Department in 1992, and he has faithfully served our community
Marshal Lacey was onsite and led the efforts to combat the Waldo Canyon fire and saved my own home and thousands of others in the Black Forest fire that devastated our community, in addition to helping recover victims of Hurricane Katrina.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that my colleagues join me in congratulating and thanking Fire Marshal Brett Lacey for his service to our country and to the Pikes Peak region.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great pride to congratulate the Baldwin High School girls' basketball team on winning the New York State AA State Championship.
On behalf of New York's Fourth Congressional District, I take this opportunity to commend and celebrate these young athletes for their dedication, for their teamwork, for their perseverance, and, quite frankly, their dominance on the basketball court.
This year's championship marks Baldwin's third State title in school history, a testament to the strong foundation built by the players, the coaches, and the administrators, both past and present.
We congratulate the Lady Bruins on their remarkable victory. I know they will continue to make Nassau County proud.
Mr. Speaker, it is March Madness. With America currently fixated on basketball, I recognize today the Palm Bay girls' basketball team on their recent statewide victory. The team made history by capturing the State's Class 4A State championship here in Florida. The Pirates overcame a tough American Heritage squad where they rallied from a 14-point deficit to win the State title.
Leading the way was Senior Guard Jaida Civil, a University of Tennessee commit and McDonald's All American, who grabbed 9 rebounds and scored 20 points.
The entire team made critical contributions, showing their depth and the unity of this team. The championship caps off a season where the Pirates won by an average of 57 points.
I congratulate the entire Palm Bay Pirates team. They have made our entire community proud.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate this week's Constituent of the Week, Rick Sherman, on being named Businessperson of the Year by the Orange County Chamber of Commerce.
For over a century, the W.A. Sherman Company has been a cornerstone of Orange County. It has provided essential electrical, heating, and plumbing services to the community. Passed down through generations, the Sherman family's dedication to service has made a lasting impact on local families and businesses.
Rick's leadership and unwavering commitment to this community are truly deserving of this recognition. As his Representative in Congress, I am grateful for the work he does each day to strengthen our local community and serve the people of Orange County.
I congratulate him again on this well-earned award. It is a privilege to highlight his story on the floor of the United States House of Representatives, and I am thankful for all he does.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Colter Lumley who on January 22 earned the rank of Eagle Scout. I had the honor to watch Colter from a young boy get involved in his community and do things that mattered, not just for his community but for the State of Montana.
Colter hails from Emigrant, Montana, and can now count himself among the 11 other boys who have achieved the honor since Troop 551 began in 1984. Those who know him best attest to Colter's humility and work ethic, saying that all he does is rise in the morning and put forth more effort and hard work before noon than most his age do in a full day.
His Eagle Scout project was to replace a retaining wall at the fire department in Gardiner, Montana. He arranged the preconstruction meetings, organized the delivery of the supplies, and was even able to get a price reduction to save money. He then rallied his football team and his troop to replace the wall, completing the job in 20 hours and placing over 600 cinder blocks.
Colter has made his country and his State proud. We thank Colter for setting an example for his peers and his community, and we congratulate him on this great achievement.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in disbelief at the troubling stories in ``The Atlantic'' magazine of classified attack plans carelessly leaked by the U.S. Department of Defense in a reckless and dangerous fashion.
Congress must conduct a fully independent investigation with public and private congressional hearings. The highest national security and intelligence leaders of our Nation put American's servicemembers' lives at high risk.
All responsible must be held fully accountable, including through removal or resignation from their positions. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, CIA Director Radcliffe, Director of National Intelligence Gabbard, Secretary of State Rubio, National Security Advisor Waltz, Chief of Staff Wiles, and Vice President Vance were among those involved in the plans Hegseth shared against DOD policy on a Signal group chat on unsecured, nongovernment devices vulnerable to espionage.
Hegseth failed to notice that the group chat included a news editor and reporter with no security clearance. Only Lady Luck graced our Nation as their haphazard approach to war didn't result in the death of American servicemembers who could have ended up at the bottom of the Red Sea or over foreign soil. Their reckless leak risked American lives and our security.
Mr. Speaker, as our Marine Corps uncle would say: Shape up.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the outstanding life and public service record of DeKalb County Commissioner Mike Watson.
Mike dedicated his life to serving northeast Indiana in roles ranging from president of the Auburn Economic Development Commission, president of the DeKalb Central Foundation, and serving as an Auburn Common Councilman.
In December, before his passing, Mike received the distinguished County Commissioner of the Year award from the Indiana County Commissioners Association.
Mike was the architect of many projects that bettered our region such as having the Auburn Waterloo Trail become part of the Poka-Bache Connector trail between Angola and Bluffton, Indiana, and the creation of the Auburn Main Street which collaborates with the Auburn community to
Mike will be remembered as an incredibly hard worker, an intense advocate for his Auburn community, and an unapologetic family man. He always put his heart and soul into his work, and our community will miss him and his mentorship sorely.
Mr. Speaker, I am a woman of faith. I know I am joined in this Chamber by fellow believers of all kinds. Today, I am reminded of Ezekiel 34:3, a story about the selfishness and greed of shepherds who used their sheep for their own gain, while neglecting their primary duty which was to care for the flock.
All of us were sent here to lead, to care for, and to protect our people. I ask my colleagues: How do they justify making an agreement with farmers and not paying them money? How do they justify snatching the benefits from veterans who put their lives on the line for our country? How do they justify the erasure of the underpaid and unpaid laborers who helped build this country? How do they take from our seniors on Social Security? They don't and they can't.
Believers know that, especially in times that require courage, God always has their back. Don't just sit back and watch. Dig deep for some courage and stand up for those who are in need the most.
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that President Donald Trump, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, and Congress are working together to return education to the proper original jurisdiction of the States.
I support President Donald Trump's plan to eliminate the Department of Education, ensuring that education decisions are made by local elected school boards, putting students and teachers first. Additionally, South Carolina has the visionary leadership of the State Superintendent Ellen Weaver in the tradition of Dr. Barbara Nielsen.
Additionally, House Republicans are protecting institutions of higher education by voting for the DETERRENT Act introduced by Congressman Michael Baumgartner. Foreign adversaries are targeting students by stealing research, limiting free speech, and pushing propaganda. As a cosponsor, I am grateful the act will reduce the foreign gift reporting threshold, close reporting loopholes, require disclosure of foreign gifts and contracts at research institutions, and hold private institutions accountable for their financial partnerships.
In conclusion, God bless our troops as the global war on terrorism continues. Open borders for dictators put all Americans at risk of more 9/11 attacks imminent, as warned by the FBI. President Trump is reinstituting existing laws to protect American families with peace through strength.
Mr. Speaker, when I recently asked someone who supports gutting the Department of Education how that decision would make American education better or what the Department even does, they couldn't give me an answer.
Let me tell you how gutting this Department will hurt every parent, teacher, and, most of all, students in our country.
In Virginia alone, 5,000 teachers would be at risk of removal; our education system would face a $2.4 billion shortfall; and we would lose $2,000 in spending for each student. Our most vulnerable students with special needs would be unable to access the resources they need to succeed, and low-income students would go hungry.
Education has always been a great equalizer and an engine for socioeconomic mobility. Without the Department of Education, we will be left with a system that leaves Americans--rural, urban, and suburban-- underserved, uneducated, and unprepared.
If we want to lead in the world of innovation and discovery, if we want opportunity for everyone, we need to invest in the next generation, our kids.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an extraordinary North Dakota woman, Else Rike. She celebrated her 101st birthday today. Instead of taking the day off, she was no doubt right where she has been for more than 70 years, at her desk in Grand Forks, North Dakota, preparing tax returns by hand with a calculator and typewriter.
Else's work ethic is unmatched and recently landed her a page 1 feature story in The Wall Street Journal. While tax preparers today rely on software, Else relies on decades of experience and a deep knowledge of the tax code.
This beautiful woman, shown right here, is proof that hard work and sharp thinking never go out of style.
On behalf of all North Dakotans, I thank Else for living our values and for showing us what true dedication looks like.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize West Salem High School for its commitment to inclusivity in sports.
The Titans recently earned two national awards for their inclusive basketball program. In addition to being named a Unified Champion School by the Special Olympics, West was also added to ESPN's Honor Roll, a distinction awarded to only one school in every State per year.
Their unique program includes combined gym classes where students with disabilities are paired with other students who can help guide them through activities, as well as special equipment and necessary modifications, like shorter hoops for athletes using wheelchairs.
I am so proud of the students and faculty at West for their dedication to ensuring that every one of their peers can participate and make friends through sports, regardless of their abilities.
Again, congratulations on these incredible and well-deserved achievements. Keep up the good work, and go Titans.
Mr. Speaker, more than 700,000 New Jerseyans sent me here to be their voice in Congress and to address the challenges they face each and every day.
Many of those constituents have sent me messages advocating for what is most important to them. Thousands have written asking me to protect Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid. Hundreds more wrote about the rising costs of childcare and housing. Many have asked me to stop the scourge of gun violence in our communities.
Not a single person, not one, wrote about loosening regulations on their commercial walk-in coolers and refrigerators.
Why, then, are those the bills that Republicans brought to the floor this
House Democrats, on the other hand, continue to present an alternative to the American people and fight for the progress that they deserve. Democrats are ready to lower the costs of childcare by expanding the number of childcare facilities across the country. We are pushing for record new investments in affordable housing and incentives for first-time home buyers.
That is what the American people are asking for, and that is what House Democrats are fighting for.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because healthcare through Medicaid, covering more than 10 percent of residents and more than 30 percent of all kids in New Hampshire, is on the line.
Their access to lifesaving preventative care, long-term care, and mental health and addiction treatment will be put at risk by the cruel and fiscally reckless budget being proposed by Republicans in the House.
In addition, New Hampshire's Medicaid expansion, established on a bipartisan basis, would end with any decrease in Federal funds, leaving 68,000 Granite Staters uninsured and devastating our hospitals and community health centers.
I have heard from literally thousands of Granite Staters on this issue, including a woman who contacted my office and shared her fears that cuts to Medicaid would leave her family homeless. She is a caretaker to two family members and worries they won't be able to survive on one income if they lose their health coverage.
I will continue to do everything I can to stop a budget that places the burden of cuts on New Hampshire families like hers to finance massive tax breaks to the superrich. I urge my colleagues to stand up against this betrayal of working families and instead focus on how we can work together to make life safer, healthier, and more affordable for all Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the FCC's Universal Service Fund, a successful program that brings high- speed internet and phone service to millions of underserved Americans.
This is personal to me. This program is essential for connecting rural and low-income communities, schools, and libraries, effectively bridging the digital divide and expanding access to education, healthcare, and job opportunities that would otherwise be out of reach.
For the bulk of my career, I worked at a children's nonprofit and then at the Department of Commerce's NTIA, advocating to provide affordable high-speed internet to all Americans, particularly children who need it for the homework gap. USF helps to ensure that these communities are not left behind. It empowers students, strengthens local communities, and improves access to essential services for families.
In 2023, carriers in Maryland received over $6 million to connect households in our rural and farm communities. Also, in the last 2 years, 1,600 schools and 198 libraries received over $73 million for connectivity, benefiting over 1 million students. Nearly 37 healthcare providers in our State received funding to strengthen connectivity to help patients and also facilitate the reach of telemedicine.
Today, I urge the Supreme Court and my colleagues in Congress to safeguard this incredibly essential program for those who need it most in terms of connectivity and opportunity.
Mr. Speaker, today, I call upon the Trump administration to abandon the drastic Biden-Harris 14(c) rule. The 14(c) rule is with regard to allowing certain people with handicaps to work for under minimum wage.
I have toured many work centers or shelter workshops in my district in which people who have different abilities are allowed to work--maybe they have spina bifida, maybe Down's Syndrome. I know a guy who is an outright quadriplegic. They are allowed to work for under minimum wage.
They usually get some other sort of Federal subsidy, SSI or something, but by being allowed to work in these places, they are able to supplement their income. They have the dignity of work. They have the socialization of somebody outside of their families.
I strongly encourage the Trump administration to abandon the drastic Biden-Harris 14(c) rule, and I encourage all of my colleagues in the U.S. Congress to tour some of their own shelter workshops, where you can see how valuable they are in the life of people who are given a little bit less than some of us in some ways to live their lives.
Mr. Speaker, Elon Musk's so-called department of government elimination is closing the Social Security hearing office in White Plains in May, just like that.
Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins offered the Federal Government county space that would be more cost-effective. The offer was turned down because this isn't about saving the government money. This is about thoughtlessly cutting critical services in the name of ideology.
This weekend, Commerce Secretary Lutnick said his 94-year-old mother- in-law wouldn't miss her Social Security check if it didn't show up. Mr. Lutnick is a billionaire who can easily provide for her, while most seniors rely on their monthly payments.
This weekend, more than 250 people in my district voiced their concerns at a rally to save Social Security. I will take their words over a billionaire's mother-in-law.
More than 10,000 of my fellow boomers become eligible every day for Social Security. This is not the time to be closing offices, cutting staff, and ending phone service.
There are ways to make Social Security more efficient. This ain't one of them. Scaring seniors and threatening to end their economic lifelines isn't about efficiency. It is a mockery of efficiency.
Mr. Speaker, the Binghamton Patriots boys' basketball team are New York State champions.
Just like the city they represent, this team was all about grit and determination. Down in the fourth quarter of the championship game, the Patriots didn't fold. They fought and took the
That is when they finished the job, because no matter how long the odds, do not ever count out Binghamton.
I congratulate Coach Paddick and his coaching staff, Binghamton teachers, staff, and administrators, and, of course, the students and players.
I thank them for bringing some joy to our community at a time when we really need it.
I will always be a proud Union-Endicott Tiger, but today we are all Binghamton Patriots because there is nothing more unifying than bringing home a State championship.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to read the Patriot's roster into the Congressional Record as follows:
Kamal Abdul-Aziz, Derek Abu Jr., Jah-lon Cook, Cashawn Fleming Jr., Zubayr Griffin, Elijah Johnson, Isaiah Joseph Selby, Vaughn Labor, Zahir Marshall, Michael Constantine, Ilyas Morgan, Elliot Nelson, Corien Noble, Benjamin Ondrusek, Connor Ondrusek, Duncan Paddick, Yusri Razzaq, Jayden Remplet, Shawn Remplet, Vince Saraceno, Devonte Santiago, Milo Wilson.
Mr. Speaker, North Carolina's First Congressional District is one of the most economically distressed in the Nation. However, I have good news to share.
Recently, I was honored to join industry, State, and community leaders for the groundbreaking of a new, over $2 billion, state-of-the- art Johnson & Johnson biologics manufacturing facility in Wilson, North Carolina.
It will bring more than 500 specialized jobs paying about $109,000 a year into eastern North Carolina.
The first 10 years of operation are estimated to have an economic impact of $3 billion statewide.
Johnson & Johnson is also committed to investing in local education, STEM, workforce, and research.
The new facility will support Johnson & Johnson's plans to advance transformational medicines for cancer, immune-mediated, and neurological diseases.
The investment will have a huge and life-changing impact for our region.
Mr. Speaker, proudly I stand here today proudly to say: And still I rise.
And still I rise, a proud, liberated Democrat, unbought, unbossed, and still unafraid. And still I rise, Mr. Speaker, not only as a proud, liberated Democrat, but also, Mr. Speaker, censured, not silenced, censured but not silenced. I still carry my cane, which has been called many things, but for me it provides comfort.
It provides comfort because I am a believer in the 23rd Psalm, that part about ``Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil . . . Thy rod and Thy staff they comfort me.''
This is my comfort.
Mr. Speaker, there are people who don't believe that I should have the free speech that the Constitution affords me, and I am not always in the company of people who can protect me. So my cane has become my staff and my rod that comforts me, Mr. Speaker.
I wish it were different, but it is not. We seem to live in a society now where if you are willing to speak truth to power there are consequences beyond simply having those who differ with you give their retorts. There are some who want to do more than give retorts. So we have to find ways to comfort ourselves when we no longer have those who are assigned the responsibility of providing us comfort. Protection is another way of saying comfort.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I want to expose what has been called to our attention in many different ways over the last many hours.
Mr. Speaker, we are at this moment in our country engaging in a big lie coverup. It is a part of a chat-gate, a big lie coverup.
Chat-gate, Mr. Speaker, is a security breach not defined as such because the person who would define it as such, if he should do so, would inculpate himself. So the Secretary of Defense, who has the responsibility of defining whether certain information is classified or not, chooses not to define that which is intuitively obvious as classified, he chooses not to define it as classified. He does not want to inculpate himself. So he has the ability to exculpate himself by simply saying something that clearly is classified saying that it is not.
Mr. Speaker, while he can say so, I think the American public will have the final word and will be the final judge.
I am honored to tell you who the players are in this coverup. One person is, quite frankly, a person who merits a lot of accolades. He is a person who ought to be acknowledged for the courage that he has demonstrated. He is a person who brought this to the attention of the public. He is a person who had no desire to be a part of this coverup, but he is only there in that he was the person who, in a sense, acts as a whistleblower. I am talking about Mr. Goldberg with The Atlantic magazine.
Mr. Goldberg is the person who had messages sent to him that he did not seek and that he did not ask for. According to the reports that I have read and you have probably seen and heard televised, he was there minding his own business when he received messages, messages that were intended for a select group of people, many of whom I will name in just a moment.
In receiving these messages, he was made privy to information that should not have been exposed to the public. In the opinion of many experts, they should not have been exposed to the public.
I will read some of the information that was captured by Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Goldberg captured this, and this comes from The Atlantic magazine. They published this information. It has been made public. My belief is that the persons who engaged in this coverup had no desire to have this published, but once it was, there was a decision made by the person who had the power to do so to say: Well, it is simply not classified information, so no big deal.
Here is the big deal. Mr. Goldberg indicates that at 11:44 a.m. eastern time--he gives the name of the person, it is the Secretary of Defense, posted in the chat in all caps: ``TEAM UPDATE:'' Then, Mr. Goldberg indicates that the text beneath this began: ``TIME NOW (1144et): Weather is FAVORABLE. Just CONFIRMED''--with, it says w--``w/ CENTCOM we are a GO for mission launch.'' We are a go for mission launch.
Let's go on. These are excerpts. I shall not read it all.
The next comment reads: ``1215et: F-18s LAUNCH (1st strike package)''.
Thereafter: ``1410: More F-18s LAUNCH (2nd strike package)''.
Thereafter: ``1536: F-18 2nd Strike Starts--also, first sea-based Tomahawks launched.''
Now, all of this was intended for a select group of people. It was not intended that this be published, but since it has been published, the Secretary of Defense has indicated that this was not classified information. Now, if the Secretary of Defense who was a participant in this chat, what I call the ``chat-gate,'' if the Secretary of Defense sincerely believes that this is not classified information--and there is more of it, I have only read you some excerpts--if he sincerely believes this, then he is not the person who should be charged with the responsibility of making a decision as to whether this type of information is classified.
That is because there is no way a person who has intelligence at heart and an understanding of it within the mind to conclude that this is not classified information.
Too many experts differ with him. We had persons who are on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in the House to indicate that this was clearly classified information. In fact, they indicated that things that are less serious in nature have been classified. But the Secretary of Defense has the ability to exculpate himself, so his exculpatory statement is that this is not classified information.
I believe that if any other person beneath the Secretary of State had allowed such information, the same information, to be exposed to the public, then I don't think the Secretary of State would have come to the same conclusion.
The Secretary of State has sacrificed his honor and his dignity by indicating that this is not classified information. But he didn't do it without the aid and comfort of some others.
Let's just talk about the other people who were on this call--pardon me--this chat with the Secretary of State:
We had the Vice President of the United States of America as a part of the chat. Now, I don't believe that the Secretary of Defense and the Vice President of the United States would get on a chat and have this type of information that I have called to your attention much more available, they would not get on a chat and have this be exposed to the public. There was no desire that it be exposed to the public. They said it is sensitive information. It is sensitive because it is classified information that has not been declared such because it would inculpate the Defense Secretary.
So you have the Vice President of the United States on the chat, then you have the CIA Director. Now it is the Vice President of the United States, Secretary of Defense, and the CIA Director, and this is not classified information that they are discussing. They are just having a little talk that could be exposed to the public, but they chose not to but for it having been sent to Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Goldberg, by the way, deserves a Congressional Medal of Honor. He is the hero in this story. He is the person who has had the courage and also the wisdom and insight to understand that before you release this, you need to do some checking. So he did his due diligence before releasing information.
Mr. Goldberg, the person who released it, has been called many names by people who would not have him release the information. Mr. Goldberg has been scorned. He is a person who called to our attention something that was done improperly, and yet he is being made the villain. He is not the villain. He is the hero in this process, and he ought to be acknowledged as such.
I am going to have a flag flown over the Capitol of the United States of America in honor of Mr. Goldberg for what he has done. I will not allow his reputation to be tarnished without a fight to protect it. I am going to do what I can to protect his reputation.
So we have the Director of National Intelligence on the call, on the chat. The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State were on the chat.
Again, the Defense Secretary, the Vice President, the CIA Director, the Director of National Intelligence, and also Special Envoy Witkoff were on there. Witkoff was on there, and by the way, he was in Russia at the time he was on. We all know that you should not be on an unsecured line if you are going to be in Russia talking. Those of us who have been to Russia are very much aware. Of course, the Secretary of State was on.
These are the players. All of them were on a chat and all of them are engaged in the coverup of this big lie. It is a coverup because they all have at one time or another implied or stated explicitly that this was not classified, that this was not classified. They had the cover of the Secretary of Defense to give them this opportunity to contend that it wasn't classified because he had to protect himself. To protect himself, he declassified what should have been classified. He avoided being inculpated by declassifying this information that should have been classified.
Now, this is egregious. It is always said that the coverup is more egregious than the action that precipitates the coverup. It is true. The coverup is more egregious than the action that precipitates the coverup. There is something that occurred here that is more egregious than the action that precipitated the coverup, than the coverup itself, and that thing is the ability of all of these actors to do this and commit any Federal crime with impunity. As a matter of fact, we could say it is with immunity.
These actors, these participants, they all have the blessings of the President of the United States of America. The President of the United States of America is now under the impression that he has absolute immunity, knowing that he is not likely to be prosecuted for anything other than impeachment while he is holding the office of the Presidency. Knowing this, believing he has absolute immunity and having already demonstrated that he will accord exoneration by way of pardon to people who would assault the citadel of democracy, the Capitol of the United States of America, assault it, and he, the President of the United States, used his awesome pardon power, the awesome power accorded him in good faith under the Constitution of the United States of America, he uses it to release, and to a certain extent to exonerate, a limited extent, persons who actually assaulted the Capitol.
Now these participants in this event, they know that they have got the President backing them up. They know that even if they commit a Federal crime all the President has to do is pardon them. It is really that simple. You have got a President now who sits on high, understanding that all beneath him, all of his minions, all of his plutocrats and others who are beneath him, he has the ability to protect them from breaches of the Federal law.
This is more egregious than the action that precipitated the coverup and the coverup itself, to know that we now have an administration where all of the parties involved can rely on one person to protect them regardless as to what they do if it is a Federal offense.
Yes, there was a coverup.
Yes, that coverup is something that they understood they could get away with even if they were caught red-handed. They knew they could get away with it because they knew that the President was there to back them.
By the way, the President is also there to do what he normally does, and that is throw his acolytes, his underlings, his persons who are beneath him, if you will, throw them under the bus, and he did. He threw them under the bus. He doesn't know anything about this. He just happens to have heard about it. The President gets briefings on all important issues, but for him to sit and say, oh, I know nothing about it, which is what he always does, and then he pushes someone else under the bus, but he knows that he can push them under the bus and then extricate them because he has the magic wand, the power to pardon. He will use it, as has been demonstrated by his causing many persons who assaulted the Capitol, persons who came here with gallows, persons who came using flags and trying to stab and all sorts of sprays, persons who came into the Capitol and defecated, he caused all of these persons to be released, if not all, I would say to you nearly all. I don't have the exact numbers, but he went on a rampage and just started pardoning people who engaged in this assault on the citadel of democracy.
We have ourselves now a circumstance where people who are trusted with the Nation's most sacred secrets--sacred, they are so important that they are really sacred, sacred secrets--these persons have demonstrated that they will forfeit their dignity, their self-respect, and their honor. They will forfeit these things to protect themselves and to protect the President, themselves and the President.
What we have when this occurs with all of these people doing this, we have now a group of people who have sacrificed their honor. When you sacrifice your honor in this fashion, the people who serve under you lose respect for you. They lose respect for you. There are men and women, persons in our military, who no longer respect the persons who serve in these high and lofty positions. They don't respect them because they are persons with a reasonable amount of intellect, superior intellect, and understand that this whole scenario, this fiasco, this level of buffoonery, they understand that this is not based on truth to say this was not certified, this was not classified information. It wasn't certified as such, but it was classified. The only reason it was not certified as such is because the Secretary of Defense would inculpate himself if he should do so. He would put himself in harm's way.
He chose to keep himself out of harm's way. His cohorts agreed with him. They all now are going to contend that there is nothing to see here, just a chat between persons who happened to want to discuss sensitive information, and the reporter who reports it, he is the culprit in all of this.
The people who serve in our military, they know better, and they know now that the people at the top are not honorable people. That has an impact on morale. Don't you think for one second that someone in the military will not at some point in time use the same argument that you are using. They are going to mention how this very incident occurred and how people just walked away from it unscathed. That is what they will do. People are not going to allow this to just be a one-off. If something happens and they should be charged and they believe this scenario can aid and comfort them with their defense, they will use it.
We now have at the highest levels of our government people who have given up their dignity, their self-respect, and they no longer have the honor and respect of a good many people that serve under them.
Mr. Speaker, this is a very sad time in the history of our country, very sad. Here is a final reason why it is sad. I was silenced in a sense when I was shouted down by my colleagues. They shouted me down when I was trying to explain to the President--I never called him a name. I merely said to him: ``You do not have a mandate, you do not have a mandate'' to cut Medicaid. My colleagues were shouting loudly to prevent my voice from being heard, at least that is the way I received it. So I repeated what I said. Their voices grew louder. I repeated it again, and I was removed. I am not mad at the Speaker. I am not angry with them. I am not angry with anyone. I was censured for what I did. I was censured, not silenced. My voice will not be silenced. I was censured, but not silenced.
Here is the point: What I did this Congress decided--not all, not all, let me not include everyone, but all of my colleagues across the aisle and 10 colleagues from this side of the aisle, they decided that I should be censured. I hold no animus toward any of them.
I want to make a point. The President of the United States and his men and women are now going to perpetrate this coverup and walk away unscathed except for loss of dignity, self-respect, and honor.
Mr. Speaker, I would rather be censured than lose my dignity, sacrifice it, my self-respect. I admitted that I did what I did intentionally. They won't admit that they were in this chat and that it should have been in a much more secured location. They won't admit it. They don't have the self-respect and the dignity to just tell the truth about what happened. I admitted that I did it intentionally. I said that when you do things and you do them with intent and if it is a form of protest in my case then you have got to be prepared to suffer the consequences. I have been prepared to suffer the consequences. It doesn't mean that I agree. You don't have to agree with the consequences you suffer, but you have to be prepared. They chose not to be prepared, chose not to suffer any consequences by covering up with a big lie.
I respect Mr. Castro. I saw him. When he questioned those persons who were before him yesterday and when he questioned them about this he called each name--I have such great respect for Congressman Castro. He had the courage to tell them to their faces that they were lying. It takes courage to do what he did. Courage is what is missing. You have got to have courage if you want to make big change. You have got to be willing to stand and say it as he did. This is not to say that others did not deliver great commentary. I singled him out because of the way he did what he did and in the presence of the people. He didn't wait until he was out behind their backs to say what he said. He said it in front of their faces. In my neck of the woods when you tell a person something to his face or her face or their face, that says something about you as a person. This is why I wanted to tell the President to his face that you don't have the mandate to cut Medicaid and Medicare, by the way, as well, and Social Security. He doesn't.
All of this, all of this, this censure of a person for speaking out against a President who, by the way, on that same evening called Democrats lunatics--there was no censure of the President, no reprimand, nothing said from the House, just the President being himself. Others on the other hand can be censured for calling things to the President's attention. I am also the only person to have ever been removed, evicted from a joint session of Congress, the only one.
I am only saying this because I don't want anyone to believe that this censure and this eviction is the end of the story. It is just not.
I am grateful to all of those who have been kind to me and for the well wishes that I have received and all of the persons who have indicated that they would have me speak at various events.
I am grateful to you, but I want you to know that the story does not end with the censure, just as the story with these persons who engaged in this coverup will not end with them simply saying that this was not classified information. It will not.
The story is still unfolding and still being told. In the end, posterity will judge all of us. Posterity will see and know the truth. Time tells. History judges. The truth is known. The truth will be known.
At some point, someone is going to reveal even more information about what happened on that chat. It will happen maybe not now, maybe not this year, but at some point in time, the story is going to be told. All of them will have to face a shaming that they have tried to avoid by contending that classified information was not such.
You cannot get away with this kind of thing. ``The arc of the moral universe . . . bends toward justice.'' What you have done is unjust, and it will be told. The story will be told truthfully.
I close with this: We who are given the honor of serving have been accorded the trust of the public. It is said that we hold public trust. When we hold public trust and we make mistakes, believe it or not, you can say that you made a mistake, or you can say: I didn't make a mistake. I did this intentionally, and I am going to suffer consequences. I am prepared. I may not agree with them, but I am prepared.
We hold public trust. Those persons who participated in this coverup are not persons worthy of holding public trust.
Mr. Secretary of Defense, you, sir, should not hold public trust. You are not the person to determine whether something is classified or not. You have demonstrated, wittingly or unwittingly, that you are not capable of doing it. You just don't have what it takes within to speak the truth when you have committed a transgression. You shouldn't hold public trust.
Sir, you should do the honorable thing. You should resign. If you don't resign, the people of this country, notwithstanding all of the President's power, the people of this country, we the people, will have the last word.
You are going to see protests. You are going to see more protests because we the people refuse to allow coverups to go unnoticed. You are going to see more protests, but I say to everybody: Make it a peaceful protest. Do not protest in any way other than with peace in your mind and your head and your heart.
Peaceful protests. Peaceful protests can make a difference.
It made a difference for the farmers when they came here with Tractorcade and protested their farmlands being foreclosed on.
It made a difference when the military veterans came to Washington, D.C., to protest the bonuses that they were promised.
It made a difference when Dr. King came here and stood on the Mall and read his ``I have a Dream.'' Actually, he didn't read it. He actually stated it, his ``I have a Dream'' speech, when he gave that ``I have a Dream'' message.
It makes a difference. Peaceful protest makes a difference. It is as American as the pilgrims landing at Plymouth Rock.
Peaceful protests will continue. I will be a part of it. If I should get in the way, as John Lewis says it, I will be prepared to suffer the consequences, but I refuse to give up my right to protest. We the people will have the last word.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to address their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak here as we conclude the week.
Mr. Speaker, I wanted to take the time today to highlight some of the work that we are doing in the Western Caucus, made up of over 90 Members of the U.S. House of Representatives.
I have been privileged to become the chair of that group this year. Chairing the caucus, I get to bring up a lot of key issues on the floor and kind of illustrate to the people who are watching and wish to pay attention how important the issues are that we are taking up and continue to advance while working with the Trump administration.
One of the cornerstones, indeed, is energy. We call ourselves the Western Caucus, but the issues are a little beyond the Western States. Indeed, they are rural issues. They are issues that affect all of our States and the opportunity to strengthen our entire economy with what we have available in the Western States and in rural areas. Indeed, our oil and our energy come from many, many parts of the country. The original oil patch was actually in western Pennsylvania.
The Western Caucus is less about maybe what the real estate is, but more about the concepts of advancing rural issues and the ability to extract resources and to utilize resources in an ecologically sound way. We are all about that, too.
The U.S. gets a bad reputation sometimes that people who are in these industries are misconstrued by environmental groups and such as being against the environment and against doing things properly. The bottom line on that topic is that unleashing American energy and our mineral resources, strengthening agriculture, and tackling the real challenges facing our country, like the devastating wildfires in the West, are key issues that the Western Caucus faces.
One of the things that can help with some of these issues will be modernizing the Endangered Species Act that has been around for over 50 years, and I see the futility as it is interpreted these days in layer after layer of court decisions and lawsuits that basically just hamper the ability for us to do the things we need to do to have stronger energy availability and have the other resources that are key to a strong economy for our country and not import all of these products.
Indeed, with the goals set out, at least by some, to have further electricity usage for appliances, which we have talked about this week on this floor, there is requirements. There is people being mandated to change what their appliances are powered by.
When you have a gas-powered stove, gas water heater, and on and on with mandates, whether it is my home State of California or has come through the previous Biden administration, this has taken away consumer choices and taken away the best choice for a lot of people for how to power these devices.
That extends also to automobiles, trucks. If you have it, a truck brought it. That is an important aspect to remember, as well, is that just by merely sweeping away the ability to have gasoline and diesel, as California is doing and that they are trying to do and that the Federal Government had been doing until the end of the Biden administration, that is going to cost a lot. It is going to make it a lot less convenient and a lot more difficult to get raw materials and products from where they are created to where they are needed.
The Endangered Species Act is part of the issue that needs to be modernized, as well as getting over the lawsuits and litigation that is used as a weapon, whether it is by Federal agencies or by so-called NGOs or environmental groups.
We have been working in this Chamber, as I mentioned, this week to help deliver solutions to lower energy costs, cut red tape, and reverse the Biden administration's relentless overreach, from blocking costly energy efficiency mandates on consumer products to stopping unnecessary restrictions on American manufacturing and energy production.
We want these things to be manufactured here by American workers, using American technology, American efficiency, and the cleanliness that comes with it. We are much more efficient and much cleaner than what happens in Chinese manufacturing. Our natural gas that we use in this country is actually cleaner than Russian natural gas. We should be exporting more of that to Europe and helping them out instead of them becoming dependent on the long reputation we have had with Russia there.
When we are talking about these overreaches by government by these regulations, it really drives up prices, burdens businesses, and makes us more dependent on foreign products, foreign energy, et cetera.
Let's restore American energy dominance, support these industries that put food on the table, clothing on our backs, and shelter above us. We should support them to make our country stronger and more independent. We will push back against the policies that are failing and harming rural America.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to hearing from my colleagues, some of whom will be joining me during this time here, and what they are working on as part of our Western Caucus partnership here.
I see a couple of my colleagues have arrived here. I would like to recognize, if the gentlewoman is ready, my executive vice chair. The gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy) is with us here--I am pleased to have her as a partner and friend on the Western Caucus--to inform us on the issues that are particular to Utah, but also the Western States, as well.
I am really, really pleased that she has stepped up to be in this role here, and I appreciate her quite a bit.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy).
Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to be here today, and I commend my colleagues in the Western Caucus for their unwavering dedication to preserving the values and livelihoods of rural America, the Western States, and our Western values that we both represent.
I will highlight today three pieces of legislation that I have introduced. One of them addresses abuses of the Antiquities Act, one of them addresses the inefficiencies and unfairness of our permitting system, and the other one addresses the need to get geothermal energy up and going more quickly and more efficiently.
Mr. Speaker, I will start with the Antiquities Act. For decades, the executive branch, Presidents of the United States, mostly Democrats, have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 to designate vast areas as national monuments, and that is in an authority that we delegated to them in the Antiquities Act of 1906.
The abuse of that narrow delegated authority has resulted in restricted access to lands, hindered economic opportunities, and it has left local voices unheard and frustrated.
In my district, the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was created by Bill Clinton in 1996, over the objections of Utah's Governor, Utah's Federal delegation, and local, county, and State- elected officials. Those frustrations and scars and wounds have not healed in the years that have passed since then.
Mr. Speaker, my Ending Presidential Overreach on Public Lands Act ensures that the decisions of this magnitude affecting public lands are made collaboratively, respecting the role of Congress with our jurisdiction over public land, and taking input from local voices. It should be Congress that makes those widespread, large-scale land management decisions.
Mr. Speaker, the next one I will talk about is the FREE Act, which encourages agencies to look at the permits they issue and determine which ones can be done by permit by rule, which means they have a predetermined list of requirements for a permit and firm timelines on making those decisions. An applicant can bring an agency everything on that list, and the agency can either say: Yes, this is adequate for
Right now, it takes years and millions of dollars to permit infrastructure projects, especially in States like Utah, where most of the land is managed by the Federal Government and everything we do has to go through multiple layers of Federal processes.
Lastly, the GEO Act addresses the time that it takes to permit geothermal energy projects. Geothermal energy is abundant in Utah. We are leading out in a lot of ways on developing new geothermal resources. Yet, the time it takes to get the permit to build a geothermal plant is prohibiting us from developing some of the resources and getting clean, reliable baseload power online that this country needs now and will need even more in the future.
These three bills are not all of my bills, but I wanted to highlight those three today because they are about safeguarding public lands, fostering economic growth, and empowering our communities. They are about letting ranchers, families, small businesses, and entrepreneurs benefit from thoughtful and responsive government as opposed to government that drowns out their voices and ignores their needs.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support these measures, which offer pragmatic solutions to real challenges in Utah, throughout the West, and throughout the whole country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Maloy for her remarks. I appreciate it.
Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the gentlewoman a little bit about the Antiquities Act because I have shared a lot of that frustration, as well.
The Biden administration, on the way out the door, declared several monument areas--a couple in California, one on the ocean area. It really seems it has been down to just being an executive action with very little input by Congress, and I know that is what she is working on in her legislation.
I can think of a couple of recent examples. Over 600 million acres are turned into an ocean monument area. When you do the math on that, that ends up being about a million square miles of a 1,000-mile square. That is a giant chunk of ocean that is no longer really usable for normal things like fishing and things like that.
In my home State, up in my district, they declared almost a quarter- million-acre area--they really had little consultation with the folks there. It had like a mining operation, and the timber management needed to happen, so it has been quite abusive.
I ask the gentlewoman what she thinks the long-term effects have been on energy in the West, energy exploration, and the types of things we need to be doing.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Utah (Ms. Maloy) for the purpose of a colloquy.
It has had a negative impact on energy production--as soon as I get in front of a microphone, I have a tickle in my throat--by restricting the areas that are open for use, withdrawing them from mineral exploration, oil and gas exploration, and energy production.
The original intent of the Presidential proclamation authority in the Antiquities Act was for the President to be able to move quickly and declare a national monument in an area with antiquities, or an area of scientific interest, to hold it until Congress could make a decision.
Since 1976, when the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, FLPMA, passed, it has been the policy of the Federal Government that we don't dispose of land anymore, so that threat has been removed. The need for a President to move quickly no longer exists, and the act is just being used to create land policy that couldn't get through Congress.
The process matters when it comes to land management. We need to take back the authority we gave Presidents because they are not using it in the way Congress intended it to be used. It is being abused, and we need to end that abuse by exercising our legislative powers.
I agree. It seems that it has really flipped into this one direction on the invoking of a new monument or wilderness area, what have you. I know your State of Utah has been hit pretty hard by several.
It is not that we are against these measures to protect particular areas, but what we are talking about is gigantic swaths of land instead of something a little more focused.
The original intent was a focus on the particular historic or geographic areas, maybe like an old-growth forest area or something like that, areas where there might be Native American ruins that we want to particularly focus on. Instead, we get these gigantic acreages.
I know the Trump administration is going to be looking at some of these here as he did previously.
I also like what you were speaking about on your geothermal process there because it should be an all-of-the-above way of looking at things, on types of energy we have available, and geothermal is clean power. It is one that is available 24/7. You don't have to wait for the wind to blow, the Sun to come up, or the clouds to go away.
We need a lot more baseload power. Look at what is going on with the tech centers, the amount of AI that is going to be coming onboard and the amount of energy that it is going to be consuming.
These data centers are going to use a mass amount of new electricity if they are allowed to, and they have talked about wanting to do it all as renewable.
If geothermal can be a source in those areas, that is one thing, but we are going to have to get real on where our power is going to come from because we have to have reliable baseload power.
Geothermal has had a very difficult permitting process. Any idea what kind of timeline? How many years does it take to get one through if you can get them through?
I don't know what the current timeline is, but I know it has taken years when it should take months.
We know what a geothermal power plant looks like. We know how to do it in a way that is environmentally sensitive. We are just taking time and money to get to that end point that we already know we are headed to.
Indeed, as another example, there was a copper mine--it is not the same as a geothermal power plant, but one particular one in the West took 29 years to permit. When you are talking about any kind of thing that is moving forward on self-sufficiency in minerals or energy dominance that the U.S. needs to have, it takes a decade or more, in many cases, to get this done.
A desalination plant in southern California, along the coast--I think out of Huntington Beach; the Poseidon project it was called. They fought for two decades to try to get a desalination plant.
We can't build water storage in California, it seems, or other areas, so everybody says, ``Desal, we can use the Pacific Ocean,'' until you try to permit it. They fought for 20 years to work through the permit process and jumped through every hoop, like what requirement will make them happy to take care of the brine, the landscape itself. After all that time, they were still denied by the California Coastal Commission and others to be able to do that.
Permitting does need to be reformed, not thrown away, because we want to have a process where people can have a say and a look at what is happening.
By the same token, when we talk about the Antiquities Act, people need to have a say, as well, not just 2,500 miles away in Washington, D.C., where a stroke of the pen does it, as Ms. Maloy mentioned here. Local input from their legislature, their Governor, and their delegation to D.C. basically was ignored on national monuments that were done in Utah. We didn't hear a whole lot up in northern California on the one done recently, either. It was kind of one-sided.
I appreciate you bringing those to the forefront here today, and you are welcome to make any more comments you wish, but we will move on a little bit to Western water for right now, too.
It is a key issue for agriculture and hydroelectric, with safety from flood, and even recreation, as well as a lot of
I will point out as an example here Shasta Dam in northern California. It is the Central Valley Project, as it is known. It is a Federal project built in the thirties that came online strongly in the early forties.
This is an amazing project. Indeed, it is the cornerstone of California water as well as some of the Colorado River water sources we have, but this is 4.5 million acre-feet in one dam and one lake up in Shasta County, California.
The way it is operated is extremely important, and when we don't have as good of decisions being made, at least in my opinion, on how that water is stored, how it is kept, and how it is allocated, then people suffer on that unnecessarily.
Right now, this lake sits at about 600,000 acre-feet still to fill it up. The thing that gets me is that we are seeing farmers and others in the water districts in central California in San Joaquin Valley, where so much of our important food supply for the whole country comes from, stuck at 35 or 40 percent of what used to be the normal allocation.
Part of that is that they can't point to the water supply. I think it is a bit of a misnomer. There is plenty of water around. I will illustrate that here in a moment, but this lake, when it is 4.5 million acre-feet full, along with our other lakes, why isn't that allocation to agriculture and others closer to 100 percent?
It hasn't reached 100 percent in a long time, and a lot of that is based on what we talked about a moment ago here, the Endangered Species Act and its weaponization in the last 50-plus years.
It is not a matter of us not caring about species and trying to recover them and conserve them. It is that it is used as a weapon to stop further water storage or the other issues we were talking about, other energy projects, even forestry practices that would be helpful to not have continued wildfire at the massive scale we are seeing, especially in the Western States.
What I want to see happening for Lake Shasta, for example, is that they can use more scientific forecasting of what the systems of weather are going to be looking like in a given year, in a given season. We are about to end the rainy season as the Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers--Army Corps is in charge of flood controls, so they control the top portion of this dam, Lake Oroville down near where I live, and many others around the whole country. Their charge is for flood control.
They will require that a certain gap from the top of the dam down 40, 50 feet or so. A particular amount of storage has to be available until the end of the rainy season, which is pretty much April 1. At that point, you are allowed to fill the lake. The lake can fill on up.
Over 600,000 acre-feet down, they are assessing the snowpack, more or less, as I speak, but with still another weather pattern coming in here quite soon that would probably enhance that snowpack number, as well.
What gets me is that we have allowed Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps 2 million acre-feet to leave this lake, to leave this system, since early January, and that has flowed down, in this case, to Sacramento River and on out to the delta.
If you want to see something about delta numbers, this poster here isn't quite updated, but it illustrates how the water flows down from the north and such and flows through the Bay Delta out to the ocean. These numbers are a little bit older. I have to update my poster here, but it shows a gap. In this case here with this timeline, 29 flowed into the delta. Down below, it shows 22 million acre-feet flowed out. That is a heck of a lot of water to lose that we didn't capture more of.
We have an excellent opportunity to do better at that and keep more water for hydroelectric power, agriculture, recreation, and people's use in the urban areas. There is a bit of a misnomer that people in agriculture use way more water than what is actually the case.
Of stored water in the State, 50 percent goes for environmental purposes, 40 percent and descending goes for agriculture, and about 10 percent for urban and people's use. That is of captured water. There is about another 50 percent of the total rainfall and snowpack that falls on the State that flows out to the ocean or other areas that ends up being--basically, you could call it environmental water as well because people don't get to use it. It is doing what it does in the rivers and streams and such.
We keep hearing that these farmers are wasting water, and people in the cities have to conserve more. Conservation is good. Farmers using better practices is good, as well. If you are telling people in the urban areas--and wait till this really happens to them. This is when we will get their attention, when they get rationed down to 42 gallons per day per person and you see these kinds of numbers.
When you see that much water going out to the delta because we have people refusing to build the storage and run the pumps, for example, at the south end of the delta, that could be filling up what is known as San Luis Reservoir, which hasn't been topped off yet. It was topped off 2 years ago, but last year and this year, under similar snowpack and rain circumstances, they haven't allowed the pumps to run hard enough to fill it.
I am hoping--a lot of stuff seems to be based on hope--that we can have enough melt into Shasta Lake or Lake Oroville and the other large ones that they will fill up and there will be enough water for everybody.
How do you count on having that amount of water, that amount of rainfall, in March and April? I have lived there my whole life. You don't always get heavy rains in March and April that would help top off these reservoirs.
It is, indeed, important to California, but it is an important Western issue, and what gets produced in those areas is important to everybody. I recognize that it is not just a California issue, but an entire Western issue. That is why the Western Caucus will be focusing partly on that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Begich), another colleague of mine who will bring his perspective on what is happening in the great northern area of Alaska and the amazing amounts of resources they have there that this country enjoys and consumes, and it does so responsibly as well. I thank him for joining us.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss the many opportunities of Alaska.
As America's most Western State, most Eastern State, and most Northern State, Alaska is nearly 20 percent of the United States' landmass. We have more than half of the United States coastline, and it is estimated that we have more undiscovered estimated natural gas and oil resources than any other State in the country.
We have nearly every critical mineral on the critical minerals list in Alaska. We have base metals, precious metals, and of course we have rare earths in abundance. We have incredible timber resources, and we produce about 60 percent of America's seafood. Alaska is a crucial State, and I am proud to be a member of our House's Western Caucus.
I am the only Member from the State of Alaska. We have about 730,000 people who live in a State that is 2\1/2\ times the size of Texas. We are vast. We are independent, and we want to make sure that we have the ability to develop the resources that we have been blessed with.
Under President Trump's leadership, we have seen executive orders that specifically allow for development of our critical minerals, those rare earths that I spoke of, and of our natural resources, including tremendous energy resources in ANWR, NPR-A, and elsewhere. That is what Alaskans want. Alaskans want the ability to be independent, to develop their resources responsibly, and to stand on their own two feet.
I am thrilled to be a part of this body, a body that is focused on making sure that Alaska's resource potential is fully unlocked, that our mineral potential is fully unlocked, and that we restore domestic supply chains again.
As we restore those supply chains, we know that those supply chains begin with resources and begin with energy
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Mr. Begich's remarks. Indeed, with all the rich resources we have in Alaska, it would be amazing if we could get the permitting process so they can produce these rare earths and critical minerals in our country instead of relying on them from adversaries that are not going to be reliable long term. I appreciate him bringing that to our attention, and the work that he and others are battling to do up there.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Downing), one of our new Members here as well who represents half of Montana. He doesn't get to have the whole State anymore, I think, with two Members there. I appreciate his joining us here.
Mr. Speaker, indeed, these large States are home to so many rich resources that are important to our country, and we are glad to have Western Caucus membership that is recognizing that and working with us here.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California for yielding.
Montana has many mottos, official and unofficial: The Last Best Place, Big Sky Country, the Treasure State. This last one recognizes the rich natural resources we have in the great State of Montana right underneath our feet.
Up until recently, Biden's anti-American policies have allowed foreign actors to dominate mineral markets, and this has stifled domestic energy production to the detriment of Western States like Montana.
I had the opportunity to return home last week, and I heard about these issues firsthand from miners across the Second District. In fact, I probably spent more time below ground than I did above it. Actually, I really enjoyed that.
I am going to talk first about Stillwater County. In Stillwater County, the miners of the Sibanye-Stillwater Mine are hard at work producing the only platinum and palladium that is mined in America. Years of feckless trade policy on the part of the Biden administration has allowed malign foreign actors like Russia to flood commodities markets, crippling smaller producers like Sibanye-Stillwater.
Russia, which represents more than a third of the market, has been subsidizing and dumping these critical minerals, causing artificially low commodity prices.
This resulted in the layoff of approximately 700 hardworking miners just last year as the negative effect from dumping has not only affected the commodity price, but it has made it so that the commodity price is below the actual cost to extract it. The ripple effects are still being felt throughout my district.
This is why Montana's congressional delegation is stepping up. I stand shoulder to shoulder with Congressman Zinke and Senators Daines and Sheehy. We introduced the Stop Russian Market Manipulation Act. This bans imports of critical minerals from Russia.
We are creating a competitive market for U.S. mineral producers not driven down by dumping from foreign actors and extending a vital lifeline to operations like Stillwater. This not only allows these mines to support their work forces, but this also drives the local economy, my State economy, and is also a factor in the security of the United States of America.
Our bill encourages domestic production, decreases reliance on foreign minerals, shores up supply chains, and significantly bolsters national security, all while dealing a critical blow to Putin's war machine. These factors combine to make a real difference in the lives of hardworking Montanans who rely on these jobs to make ends meet.
Signal Peak Mine, in Musselshell County, has faced a similar reality after years of regulatory foot-dragging and America-last energy policy threatened Montana's only underground coal mining operation.
I spoke with miners who expressed concern about Signal Peak's future amidst permitting uncertainty and resource unavailability. My Crow Revenue Act eliminates this uncertainty by facilitating a critical land transfer that unlocks access to minable Federal coal while providing the Crow Tribe with a piece of the revenue. With bicameral support, I am confident we will get this bill across the finish line for our Tribal communities and our State economy. More importantly, this is another step in ensuring American energy dominance.
In closing, let me make one thing abundantly clear: There is a new sheriff in town. None of these efforts would stand a chance of becoming law without this administration. President Trump has taken swift executive action to declare a national energy emergency, reopened exploration on Federal lands and waters, appointed an all-star Cabinet with the likes of Secretary Wright and Secretary Burgum to streamline permitting and unleash American energy.
This is why I am hopeful for projects like Black Butte Copper near White Sulphur Springs that are committed to unlocking the Treasure State's resources and driving rural economic development, all in a responsible manner. I can't wait to see what these next 4 years bring for my State and others like it. Let us not squander this opportunity and work together to make American mining great again.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Downing for his perspective on that. We are finding that these Western States, the Western Caucus focus area, I guess, is very rich in so much of what we need here. I appreciate his work with those folks in the mines to illustrate how important they are to the whole country and our energy grid, et cetera.
I thank him for his time with us, and the technical issues with the podium emphasized the point.
I am pleased to have excited, new freshman Members who really want to take charge and get going here. It is good stuff.
Mr. Speaker, I yield now to the gentlewoman from North Dakota (Mrs. Fedorchak), a new Member who has shown a lot of enthusiasm in jumping in with us here in the Western Caucus and helping to make it happen.
She represents another at-large district, which means the entire State. Even though there are maybe not a lot of people in these areas, what they do is extremely important.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be here. This little podium seems to have a mind of its own, so I will leave it down so it doesn't scare us all again.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues in the Western Caucus for leading the charge to strengthen rural America's future.
As a fourth-generation North Dakotan, I have seen how the hard work of our energy and agriculture producers fuels our economy, strengthens our communities, and secures our very way of life.
That is why on Monday, I introduced a resolution to overturn the Biden administration's reinstatement of the Once-in-Always-in rule. This is a shortsighted, bureaucratic mandate that punishes energy producers, manufacturers, and small businesses for investing in emissions reduction.
This rule permanently classifies certain industrial facilities as major sources of hazardous air pollutants, even if they take meaningful steps to reduce emissions below the Federal thresholds. That makes no sense. Facilities that make major investments to reduce emissions should be rewarded, not locked into outdated, costly regulations that discourage further improvements.
By refusing to let businesses reclassify after making progress, this rule removes any real incentive to invest in cleaner technologies. Instead of supporting innovation, it sends a clear message: Don't even bother.
Democrats like to use the mantra of hope and change. This regulatory approach says there is no hope, so don't change. That is not environmental stewardship. That is Washington overreach.
The United States has reduced emissions more than any other nation since 2005, all while leading the world in energy production. We should be building on that success, not undermining it with policies like this outdated, overly
North Dakota is proof that responsible energy production and environmental stewardship go hand in hand. It is not one or the other. Our State has never violated Federal air quality standards. I will say that again. Our State has never violated Federal air quality standards, while being one of the largest energy producers in the whole country. This is a testament to the more than $2 billion our energy producers have invested in emissions control technologies. They did that because they took their responsibility seriously. They want to be good stewards of our resources and of our air and water.
American businesses are dedicated to protecting the health, safety, and vibrancy of their communities. What they need is regulatory certainty, not a rule that locks them into compliance with outdated standards even after they have done the right thing. This is about more than just one burdensome regulation. It is about standing up for the industries that power our economy and rejecting Washington's one-size- fits-all approach.
American energy solutions are climate solutions. American energy producers are providing the solutions that are going to solve energy needs and environmental needs for the world over. Let's encourage investment in technology, not support regulations that make it impossible to do business.
I am proud to lead this effort in the House, and I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. Let's restore regulatory certainty, the number one cry from the industry that I meet with. We need regulatory certainty. Let's send a clear message that we stand with American energy producers, farmers, manufacturers, and we stand with innovation.
Mr. Speaker, our Nation has been blessed abundantly with natural resources. Misguided regulations and policies are strangling the very people in our Nation who are building and producing everything that we need. They are strangling the people who create jobs, who produce the products, the food, who pay taxes, who employ people. People make our communities strong. We need to stop doing that. We need to correct course in our approach for government and regulations.
Our Republican House Conference, the President, and the Senate Republicans are committed to doing this for America and to making our Nation, our States, our energy producers, our farmers, our manufacturers, and our communities great again.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Fedorchak. Those were great points she emphasized for us. It is a common theme here, and I thank her for that.
Mr. Speaker, there is red tape and endless delays in doing the work that needs to be done to produce what comes from the Western States, Western Caucus, and our whole country. I have to remember and to emphasize these products come from all over. When we talk about mined materials, farmed materials, and wood, it is all important. The same laws that affect us in the Western States affect us everywhere.
Why do we spend so many years on permits to do things that we know how to do well? Indeed, the United States does this with a better set of environmental regulations and are way more conscientious than what will be produced in China or some of the other Pacific Rim areas. We have the technology to do it the best, as Mrs. Fedorchak was talking about.
I don't talk about CO2 a whole lot because I think CO2 is an essential building block. It is not a pollutant, as has been whipped for so many years amongst regulatory agencies and NGOs and such. If we look at how the United States has been doing, we are one of only a couple of countries that has been able to level off and even reduce CO2 production.
We are going to get to the point where it will be so critically harmful to our industry that we need to reassess how burdensome these regulations are, especially as CO2 is not a poisonous pollutant, per se. I mean, plants need it, and all things in moderation we might say. It is important that we have some reality on how these regulations affect us.
We have talked about water storage. We have talked about energy production. When we talk about our water storage, we know how important hydroelectric energy is in that it is a CO2-free source. Ms. Maloy talked about geothermal. That is a clean source of energy to produce electricity.
What we haven't touched on much but is a potential issue the Western Caucus will be working on is nuclear energy, another CO2- free source of electricity. If we want to deal with CO2, here it is.
These forms of electricity generation continue to be pushed out or pushed off in the regulatory climate we have here. We have the opportunity to mine uranium--a lot of it in the Western States--and build the plants that are going to serve our urban centers.
I was talking earlier about how AI and data centers are going to use so much more electricity, as well, if the electrification of cars and trucks keeps getting pushed. Where is that electricity going to come from?
It is amazing how we mandate this in a lah-de-dah atmosphere of, well, we are just going to have more EVs. The folks regulating that and pushing that are not accountable for where that electricity is going to come from. They think more and more acres of prime farmland covered with solar panels is going to do it or offshore windmills will produce a certain amount of electricity. They find that they have problems with that. There might be negative effects on the wildlife and the ocean life there.
We need to have the ability to take a look back at these layers and layers of court decisions since these laws were made with good intentions back in the early 1970s. We talk about the Endangered Species Act, NEPA regulations, Clean Water Act, or the Clean Air Act. All had good intentions, but they have been weaponized by NGOs, environmental organizations, and even those certain belief systems of government. My home State of California is weaponized to stop some very good projects from happening.
When we talk about the Endangered Species Act reform, there are species that are basically used to stop water storage, stop highways from being built, stop power plants from being built, and even things like levees being repaired in areas that have the potential to be flooded.
One project in my district took 20-plus years to finally get approved and through for a project on a levee that already existed. They required that it be set back from the river more. Then a bunch of habitat created out of the farmers' orchards that were adjacent to that on the outside of the old levee but now inside the new levee. That took over 20-plus years.
It is because a species was listed as an endangered species by the Fish and Wildlife 20 or 25 years ago, maybe longer. Fifteen years ago they recommended to delist it. Mr. Speaker, it seems you can hardly delist anything under the way these rules have been misinterpreted.
One issue ravaging much of the West and right now has really taken hold in my district has been the wolf population that has been introduced. I know the Biden administration had done some of that at the end with over 40 wolves being dumped into Colorado last minute on their way out the door.
Wolves in California have really taken hold in the northeast part of the State. They are ravaging Modoc County, Siskiyou County, Lassen County, Eastern Shasta, and other areas to a little bit lesser extent. The deer population is being decimated.
When they run out of deer, guess where they look next? They look at livestock. Here is an example. I don't mean to be morbid, but people need to see what this really looks like. Here is a wolf toting off a deer right here. There is a deer head right there. This isn't native to that area. These are Canadian gray wolves. These are great big, powerful, scary wolves that really aren't indigenous to the farther Western States.
It is still listed. We are making efforts to delist this wolf from that list, but it is running into problems and difficulties because of the environmental movement saying, no, we need to have mating pairs in every county in order to satisfy their desires on that.
These wolves are plentiful in areas like Minnesota and neighboring States
I like the giraffe analogy. If we want to look at a giraffe, go to places in Africa. If we want to look at it in North America, go to the zoo. We don't have them here. We can't deem them an endangered species in North America because we don't have them here. Someone would have to start a new program to encourage and build a giraffe habitat to bring a species that really doesn't belong in that area.
It doesn't make a lot of sense, and it is really devastating. Over 200 calves have been taken in the northern California area and part of Oregon, as well. Here, we see a calf that has been devastated. It has been just completely annihilated and fed upon by a pack of wolves there. Again, I am not doing this to be morbid.
Mr. Speaker, I hope it does shock you. I hope it does shock you because this is really happening to the livelihoods of the people who are producing food that Americans want and that others want. They can't do so because of a wolf population that has been introduced by government at the behest of basically urban people who think, oh, that would be a nice ideal to have these wolves in that area. They don't have to live with the results.
These wolves have become so brazen in how they act in the area. It has taken a sheep. Any livestock is on the menu for them because when they start running out of the local wildlife, they are going to take what they need.
The ability for people to push back on that, to haze them, or to move them away is very, very limited by how U.S. Fish and Wildlife has made the rules. They have very, very few options to keep them not only out of their herds but away from their doorstep, including this doorstep right here.
Yes, this is the family dog right here. This is what is happening to families that are working in and living in those rural areas for four, five, six, or longer, generations. They provide food and put it on the table for Americans, and this is what they have to live with today. They can't let their pets out in some of these areas anymore. They can't let their kids go down to the bus stop without being guarded and to do normal things like go to school.
People are afraid to go outside their homes at night in certain areas because they hear the wolves howling, and the wolves don't feel any fear of mankind. They don't feel any deterrent due to the very limited and meager measures that people can take to deter them. They are not allowed to shoot them. They are not allowed to shoot over them. They are not allowed to be very aggressive with vehicles and such.
Indeed, one anecdote I received on visiting some folks in the district is that they have drones they try to fly over and move the wolves away from the herds and away from their area. Funny, the wolf just looks up at it and lays down and watches it. They fly pieces of a flag or a ribbon on their fence and hope that ribbon flapping in the wind will scare the wolf away. It is called fladry.
The wolves are pretty smart. They are going to go around that. When they are running in packs like that, they are very effective at moving the livestock, moving them, herding them to other areas. There are stories about them coming in and wiping out an entire flock of sheep on one farm just for the heck of it. A single wolf in one case killed 30 sheep, killed the dog, and basically scared the horse, ran the horse over a cliff area, killing it. That is more or less for sport.
This is what is happening to people. This is what is happening in the northeast part of my State and all over the West. The elk and deer population is being devastated in these areas. We don't talk about that much because it is an ideal under the Endangered Species Act that we have to move these animals wherever someone deems they need to go, indeed, when we have populations that will sustain and prevent extinction just from what is in the upper Midwest and Canada.
What is it going to come down to? Do people have to be victimized to get a nice, idyllic scene like this with people hiking the trails? The Pacific Crest Trail runs through that portion of my district. Have warnings been sent out by the people promoting this wolf population to those who are looking to utilize these trails, such as the Pacific Crest Trail, or to climb the different mountains around northern California?
Are there adequate warnings going out to the urban areas when people expect they are going be able to do this as they come travel and recreate a little later on this spring and summer and fall? Are they doing that?
We have this idyllic scene of a family hiking out there. Do they know possibly there might be wolves lurking in here if they are hungry and they have run out of deer to attack? The farmers and ranchers have sold their livestock herds or pulled them out or just lost them to wolf attacks. They are going to get hungry and start coming after anything they can find. Are people going to be on that list?
Am I being dramatic? No, this is the reality. This can happen. Will this scene be allowed anymore in those areas? Well, it is a wolf habitat now. We don't have any people recreating on their lands, on their national lands, on their parklands, the forestlands that are deemed to be multiuse. That use is being narrowed more and more to not doing timber operations and preventing wildfire and having wildlife flourish but to satisfy a very narrow group.
This is part of the work that we need to get done. The Western Caucus is going to be focusing on endangered species reform, our energy, and agriculture. We need to make the farm bill a reality here soon because the farm bill has had extensions so far. We need to pass a full farm bill this year that is good for 5 years. Agriculture is a very important cornerstone of Western Caucus priorities, as well as a national priority.
We have our work cut out for us, but we have a great team on our Western Caucus staff. Nearly 100 Members of the House are in this, as well as our colleagues over in the Senate, led by my good friend, Senator Lummis from Wyoming. It is a very positive thing, and I am looking forward to the work here. I am honored to be able to chair that.
Mr. Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to inform folks throughout California and the entire country of one of the biggest scandals in our State's history, which is that Governor Newsom is literally bankrupting Medicaid in our State. He is driving it insolvent through a policy that exists nowhere else in the country, in no other State, a policy of offering free, comprehensive, universal Medicaid, or Medi-Cal as we call it, to the entire population of illegal immigrants in our State who meet the income threshold. No other State has done this, and in California, it has been an absolute disaster.
Initially, it was estimated that this unprecedented expansion would cost just a few billion dollars. It turns out that it is going to cost $9.5 billion just for this year.
Because of that enormous cost overrun, because of the resulting shortfall of some $6 billion, Governor Newsom has just taken out an emergency loan from the general fund in order to cover payments. On top of that, he has asked the legislature to appropriate even more money, billions more.
Think about what this means over, let's say, the next 10 years. If the cost has grown from a few billion dollars to $9.5 billion just in this first year, what can we expect year over year going forward? We are likely talking about hundreds of billions of dollars of money from California taxpayers that will be spent this next decade implementing a policy that exists nowhere else in the country to provide comprehensive care, comprehensive government-provided healthcare, to those who are in our State illegally.
Here is the worst thing. Not only is this fiscally unsustainable, but those are funds that could be going to shoring up Medicaid, Medi-Cal, and improving the system, improving access to
If you are a California citizen on Medicaid right now, the kind of coverage that you get, the kind of actual delivery of service that you get, likely is not that good. Doctors throughout the State simply will not take Medicaid patients because the reimbursement rate is so low.
This policy of Governor Newsom and the supermajority in California is a conscious decision to put the entire solvency of our system at risk, to diminish access to care for our own residents, and to, in fact, make it harder to get appointments because now there is a whole new population that is looking to get into the system and doing so in a way that has no precedent anywhere else in the country.
In fact, in many cases, it actually costs the State more money to provide Medicaid to a person who is in the State illegally because, number one, there is no Federal funding for such enrollees, so the State bears almost the entire cost. Even the overall cost, forgetting about who is paying for it, can be higher. When you look at, for example, the rebates for prescription drugs that are available at the Federal level because the Federal Government negotiates in bulk, that is not available for this population that is covered by State funds, so we are actually paying more than we would for our own citizens.
Mr. Speaker, this outrageous policy simply cannot continue. I am calling on Governor Newsom and the State legislature to reverse it immediately. That should be the obvious next step when the system has gone insolvent to the extent that the Governor is forced to take out an emergency loan.
Here in Congress, I have introduced legislation that will preserve Medicaid benefits in California and across the country for only those who are legal residents of our country. I think we also have an opportunity to rein in what Governor Newsom is doing through the reconciliation process, and I look forward to doing that in order to protect Medicaid for Californians.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide an update on the latest unbelievable revelations concerning high-speed rail, the high-speed rail disaster in California.
Yesterday, California's legislative analyst testified before the State legislature that the project faces a $7 billion budget gap and that the funds must be secured by next June. The legislative analyst's spokesperson said: ``There is no specific plan to meet that roughly $7 billion gap. We also think there is some risk that that gap could grow.''
Indeed, the hearing at which the legislative analyst testified was very brief because the California High-Speed Rail Authority submitted an incomplete update to those who had organized the hearing. The high- speed rail authority can't manage to complete anything on time, even its own reports to the legislature, let alone a high-speed train from Los Angeles to San Francisco or even that very first segment from Bakersfield to Merced, which is now projected to miss the 2033 deadline.
Listen to the bipartisan pushback that this is getting. Assembly Member Steven Bennett, a Democrat from Ventura, said: ``We have no plan. We have a good likelihood it is going to get worse, and we have a short time to solve the problem.''
``The definition of insanity,'' said Democrat Assembly Member Cottie Petrie-Norris, ``is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome.''
The truly amazing thing is the legislative analyst testified that this update that the rail authority provided, even this incomplete update, assumes there will still be Federal dollars. They are saying there is a $7 billion budget shortfall for just the next few months, and that has an unrealistic assumption that goes with it that there is going to be further Federal funding.
I can say this right now: There will not be further Federal funding. How do I know that? Because I was at a press conference with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy just a few weeks ago in Los Angeles, where it was made very clear that this project is a failure. In fact, there is now an investigation that has been launched by the Department of Transportation to claw back billions of dollars that have been granted.
I have also asked for an investigation by FBI Director Kash Patel to figure out how it is exactly that they have already spent $17 billion, that the overall cost has grown to in excess of $130 billion, yet no track has been laid after 16 years of some kind of work supposedly being done.
Finally, I have introduced legislation to make the high-speed rail project ineligible for further Federal funding at any point going forward, which, again, the rail authority is entirely reliant on the assumption of Federal funding just to get to a point where there is only a $7 billion budget gap for just the first next few months.
The fact of the matter is that this project has failed. It is not going to happen. There is absolutely no justification for spending another dollar of taxpayer money, especially when our roads continue to crumble and be rated among the worst in the world.
I will be advancing my legislation here, and I am calling on Governor Newsom and the legislature to do the right thing and bring an end to this failed and embarrassing project once and for all.
Mr. Speaker, today on the House floor, there was an amendment offered that suffered the most overwhelming defeat that I have ever seen in the United States Congress, and for good reason. It is perhaps the most abhorrent legislative proposal I have ever seen in the United States Congress.
The Representative from Michigan, Representative Tlaib, introduced a measure that would classify Israel as an adversary of the United States alongside the likes of China, Iran, and North Korea.
Fortunately, this proposal was swiftly and nearly unanimously rejected by the House of Representatives. Look at the vote total. A grand total of three people, including the author, voted ``yes.'' Every single other Member, Democrat or Republican, over 400 Members, voted ``no.''
This sent a very important message regarding what was being suggested with this proposal, that one of our most important allies in the entire world, Israel, at this time when it faces so many challenges, is somehow a country of concern, an adversary of the United States comparable to Iran or North Korea, and to single out this one country, Israel, of all the countries in the world.
We have seen across America, and in particular on college campuses, deeply disturbing, abhorrent anti-Semitism, which has absolutely no place and that we never thought we would ever see anything like it in this country. I think when you have proposals in Congress that encourage that, that are very much thematically aligned with the pro- Hamas, anti-Semitic encampments that took over universities in the country, it is very important that that is condemned strongly and unequivocally. I am very proud that that is exactly what the House of Representatives did today.
Mr. Speaker, the California Center for Jobs and the Economy has just released an absolutely stunning report that shows how deeply Governor Gavin Newsom has driven our State's economy into the ground. Among the findings was that for the month of January, job growth in our State was nonexistent.
The number of net jobs that were added to the California economy was exactly zero for the month of January. By comparison, Texas added 27,900; Florida added 16,500; and even New York added 20,100. California added zero. Indeed, California is one of only five States in the country that has not recovered the jobs that it lost during the COVID shutdowns.
As things now stand, our unemployment rate is the second highest in the country. It is the second highest out of all 50 States. Indeed, there are 1 million Californians who are unemployed, and that has been true for 13 straight months. What is more, even those jobs that have been created in the COVID recovery are entirely government or government-dependent jobs.
So to quote the spokesperson, or the head, of the California Business Roundtable, Rob Lapsley: ``To put it more directly, other than in trade, California has not grown jobs during the past 4 years of recovery; it has bought them with public funds.''
We would have zero job growth and zero recovery if it weren't for government jobs.
What is more, beyond that, even when you look at folks who are employed, Mr. Speaker, the average number of hours per week is shrinking in California as well.
This is truly stunning, Mr. Speaker, when you consider everything that our State has to offer, not only being a place that has a greater diversity of natural wonders and attractions and beauty than just about any place on Earth, but it also has so many dynamic and thriving industries, so many incredible companies and employers. It has such a rich history of innovation and of driving the Nation forward.
Somehow this Governor and the existing legislature have managed to turn it into the State that does the absolute worst when it comes to jobs of any State in the country.
So why is that the case?
It is no mystery, Mr. Speaker. You can just look at misguided policy after misguided policy which has served to discourage companies from starting, discourage companies from adding jobs, discourage companies from staying here, and indeed, has made more people leave this State than any other for several consecutive years.
I am working on legislation in Congress inasmuch as we can use the levers we have here at the Federal level to try to bring some sanity back to the economic policy environment in California because there are areas where Federal and State policy intersect.
For example, we are getting rid of all of these EV mandates or electric train mandates or electric truck mandates or electric lawnmower mandates. I will soon be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution to end Gavin Newsom's plan to ban gas-powered cars in California.
Beyond that, there are a number of State policies that everyone knows are causing immense harm and yet remain on the books. So if our State's leadership has the chance to look at this report and get a little dose of reality and has any inclination to actually try to turn things around and help folks in our State, here are a few suggestions:
Repeal AB 5, which has effectively banned independent contracting in our State and has put countless freelancers out of work.
Overturn the Private Attorneys General Act, PAGA, which is the bane of many small businesses' existence and accounts for the nonexistence of many that have been forced to close because of the harassing lawsuits that it leads to.
Reexamine every mandate that we place on employers, especially those that don't exist in any other State, and evaluate the impact they have on the incentive to hire.
Take a cue from President Trump who has said we are going to repeal 10 regulations for every new regulation that we offer.
If there is any place where the regulatory thicket can rival or even surpass that of the Federal Government, it is the bureaucracy that we have in California.
Speaking of the bureaucracy, find ways to rein in these massive, unelected policymaking bodies we have in California such as CARB, the California Air Resources Board.
These are just a few suggestions, but our State has absolutely enormous potential that currently is being dramatically underutilized. It is truly a sad thing as we see it in every community in this State. You see your favorite restaurant or another cherished small business that suddenly closes its doors for good, and you see so many of our fellow citizens who are lacking the sort of opportunities that a well- governed State would allow them.
So I would hope that if anything could be a wake-up call, then this latest stunning report with this very round number of zero new jobs will serve as that wake-up call that can catalyze and motivate some real reform in California.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate and thank SpaceX and its Crew Dragon capsule for successfully returning the two astronauts, Barry Wilmore and Suni Williams, who had been stranded in the International Space Station for 286 days.
Most Americans are now familiar with the story and with the issues that arose with the Boeing Starliner that made them unable to return on that vessel and the delays that ensued after that such that these astronauts had to overstay their planned trip by many, many, many weeks.
It was just on March 18, a little over 1 week ago, that they finally were brought home thanks to SpaceX and splashdown in the Gulf of America.
This was a great moment for our country, certainly a great moment for the astronauts and their families, and I think it serves as a reminder of how important America's lead is when it comes to the commercial space industry.
We saw just this last year repeated efforts by the Biden administration to hold back that progress and to specifically target SpaceX.
Now, it needs to be noted that SpaceX accounts for over 90 percent of the total payload brought into orbit in the entire world, and so targeting SpaceX is truly weakening our own country given how important our global dominance in space is. So this latest demonstration of the capacity of this particular company and American ingenuity in general to accomplish amazing feats should hopefully serve as a reminder that we have now turned a page, that we are now encouraging innovation, and that we must never return to the misguided policies and, frankly, discriminatory treatment that prevailed during the administration of President Biden.
So I thank SpaceX again and welcome home, a long delayed welcome home, and welcome back to Earth to our astronauts.
Mr. Speaker, I have the honor of chairing the subcommittee that has jurisdiction over all of K-12 education, and I wanted to let folks know about a very important hearing that we are having next Tuesday at 10:15 a.m. eastern time on artificial intelligence and its uses in education.
Now, some folks might hear the topic of that hearing and think about things like: Is AI making it easier for students to cheat, or is this going to absorb young people even further into digital worlds?
Those are certainly concerns. However, the focus of our hearing is going to be on the upside. It will be on the tremendous potential, the boundless opportunities that AI--even as it exists right now, let alone what its capabilities are going to be in a matter of weeks, months, and years, the unbelievable opportunities to close achievement gaps and advance student achievement.
I firmly believe, if it isn't already true now then it will be true in a very short time, that every child in America now has the ability to get a richer and more immersive education than any child did just a few years ago.
I was part of an organization when I was a teacher that was aimed at closing achievement gaps in America. The different opportunities that are afforded to young students depending on the ZIP Code that they live in is an ongoing failure of our public education system. There are many policy changes that we need to make to address that, such as providing for greater choices for students and their families.
However, the use of artificial intelligence is another incredibly powerful tool for closing these achievement gaps. That is because now, no matter where you were born, the ZIP Code that you live in, or the neighborhood school that is closest to you, Mr. Speaker, you, as a young person growing up in America, can access the entirety of human knowledge. It can be conveyed and given to you in a way that meets your own starting knowledge level, your own ability level, and your own strengths and weaknesses in the modality that fits you.
We are seeing incredible things that are being done already at different schools across the country as well as with platforms like the Khan Academy where you can have a direct dialogue with a chatbot or, for example, a reanimated version of Albert Einstein that
In addition, beyond giving the student this novel, immersive experience that is uniquely tailored to them, it also liberates teachers to focus on those sorts of things that only a caring human instructor can do. So we are still in the very early stages, and the capabilities of AI systems are growing by the day.
I think this is going to be a very important moment for us to look at what is being done now and what we can do going forward to expand these incredible learning opportunities to every child in America.
So you can tune into our hearing next Tuesday at 10:15 a.m. eastern time.
Celebrating the 100th Anniversary of the Rotary Club of Grass Valley
Mr. Speaker, I wish to mark and to celebrate the centennial anniversary of the Rotary Club of Grass Valley based in California's Third Congressional District.
The Rotary Club of Grass Valley was established in 1925 by 25 local business and professional leaders who were inspired by the Rotary movement's ideals of service and ethical business practices.
Club members represented a cross section of the community and included businessmen and professionals associated with and directly involved with the major regional economic activities of mining and timber harvesting.
The outbreak of World War II had a profound impact on the activities of the Rotary Club as many of its members were called to serve in the U.S. Armed Forces. Those who remained in Grass Valley continued to support the war effort through various initiatives, such as organizing blood drives, collecting scrap metal, and helping military families.
The history of the Rotary Club of Grass Valley is a testament to the power of community spirit and collective action.
Today, the Rotary Club hosts several community events meant to support the numerous programs and activities that provide the resources needed to promote the quality of life of Grass Valley residents, the surrounding region, and communities across the globe.
For more than 10 decades now, the club has demonstrated an ongoing commitment to service, fellowship, and leadership. Their contributions are an indelible part of the Grass Valley community and have made a lasting impact on our region.
Therefore, on behalf of California's Third Congressional District and the United States House of Representatives, I am pleased to recognize the Rotary Club of Grass Valley for their outstanding contributions throughout their 100-year history, and I commend them for their ongoing and tireless devotion to community service.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 1 o'clock and 43 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday next, March 31, 2025, at noon for morning-hour debate.
