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.
100 public bills, H.R. 2807- 2906; and 13 resolutions, H.J. Res. 92-93; H. Con. Res. 26-27; and H. Res. 323-331, were introduced.
Pages H1595-H1600
Reports Filed
There were no reports filed today. Guest Chaplain: The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Dr. Michael Gossett, Green Acres Baptist Church, Tyler, Texas.
Page H1567
Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034
The House concurred in the Senate amendment to H. Con. Res. 14, establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034, by a yea-and-nay vote of 216 yeas to 214 nays, Roll No. 100. Consideration began yesterday, April 9th. H. Res. 313, the rule providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) was agreed to yesterday, April 9th.
Pages H1579-80
Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act
The House passed H.R. 22, to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, by a yea-and-nay vote of 220 yeas to 208 nays, Roll No. 102.
Pages H1569-79, H1580-81
Rejected the Johnson (TX) motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on House Administration by a yea-and-nay vote of 211 yeas to 215 nays, Roll No. 101.
Pages H1580-81
H. Res. 294, the rule providing for consideration of the joint resolutions (S.J. Res. 18) and (S.J. Res. 28) and the bills (H.R. 1526) and (H.R. 22) was agreed to Tuesday, April 8th. Work Period Designation: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he designated the period from Thursday, April 10, 2025, through Sunday, April 27, 2025, as a ``district work period'' under clause 13 of rule 1.
Page H1586
Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group: Appointment
The Chair announced the Speaker's appointment of the following members of the House to the Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group: Representative McCaul, Chair; Representatives Valadao, Gimenez, Ciscomani and De La Cruz.
Page H1595
Quorum Calls: Votes
Three yea-and-nay votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H1580, H1580-81 and H1581. Adjournment: The House met at 9 a.m. and adjourned at 1:34 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: 70 of 147 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Welcoming Guest Chaplain Dr. Michael Gossett
The SPEAKER. Without objection, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Moran) is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to introduce Dr. Michael Gossett, pastor of Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas, to the United States House of Representatives to serve as the guest chaplain this week and offer a prayer this morning.
Dr. Gossett and his wife, Katie, lead the largest congregation of believers in east Texas. They also proudly shepherd a flock of four wonderful children at home.
Pastor Michael, as he is known, and Katie are passionate about their call to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They are personable and approachable in their style, showing the same love and grace as our risen Lord and Savior.
Having been a firefighter for 5 years before entering full-time ministry, this Liberty University alum is tough-minded, disciplined, and steady in his leadership. He is authentic and genuine and always faithful to preach the truth of the inherent Word of God. Because of that, he has been a strong and effective leader for Green Acres since he arrived in 2019.
I am proud to call him my friend and proud that he dedicated his life to being salt and light in this lost and dark world.
To God be the glory for the great things He is doing through the Gossetts and Green Acres Baptist Church in Tyler, Texas. We welcome Pastor Gossett.
Mr. Speaker, the March jobs report shows that 228,000 jobs were added last month, far exceeding expectations. Private-sector growth led the way with 209,000 new jobs, nearly double the pre- election average. Wages are rising with hourly earnings up nearly 4 percent over the past year.
Government job dependence is shrinking with only 42 percent of new jobs in government-related sectors, down from nearly 75 percent under the Biden administration. Federal employment dropped by 4,000 as the administration cuts government bloat.
In the 365-day period from the day President Trump was elected, there was a deficit of $2.2 trillion. In the 365 days previous to right now, it is only a deficit of $1.6 trillion. We have a long way to go, but it is a giant improvement.
Construction jobs remain strong, and industrial production is hitting a record high. Manufacturing output has grown nearly 1 percent over the month. Auto production has surged 8.57 percent, and core CPI inflation is at a 4-year low, easing pressure on consumers.
Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago today, the blast of an AR-15 shattered a beautiful spring morning in Louisville as a lone gunman walked into Old National Bank on Main Street and opened fire. We lost Josh Barrick, Deana Eckert, Juliana Farmer, Jim Tutt, and my friend, Tommy Elliot. Five friends, neighbors, and loved one were taken too soon.
Among the eight wounded was Officer Nick Wilt. Just 10 days out of the academy, he bravely ran toward the gunman and was shot in the head. Miraculously, he survived. That same day, just blocks away at JCTC, two people were shot, and Chea'von Moore was killed at just 24 years old.
Mr. Speaker, I stand here today as a lifelong Louisvillian, still sad my community joined the long list of cities devastated by mass shootings. On behalf of all of our communities, we can and must do more to stop senseless gun violence.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor The Ohio State University Buckeyes whose remarkable victory in the 2025 College Football Playoff National Championship cements their legacy as one of the greatest teams in college football history.
As those of us who watched the game, many of us on the edge of our seats, can attest, the championship is up for grabs until the clock runs out. However, we would be remiss not to mention the Buckeyes' impressive overall season, where they secured wins over five different top five opponents. This is something that has never been accomplished before.
This season the Buckeyes boasted exceptional talent, strong coaching, and die-hard fans. Woody Hayes once said that success is what you do with what you have got. This season, OSU was undeniable. As a fellow Buckeye, I extend my heartfelt congratulations to the entire team and coaching staff for this incredible achievement.
Mr. Speaker, every day nearly half a million Americans sit in local jails without a conviction, overwhelmingly for nonviolent, low-level offenses. They are not there because they have been found guilty but because they can't afford bail or are stuck waiting for their day in court. While they wait, taxpayers pay the price.
That is why I have introduced the Justice Forward Agenda, a target, results-driven plan to reduce crime and use taxpayer dollars more wisely. The Community First Pretrial Reform and Jail Decarceration Act helps local jurisdictions cut unnecessary pretrial detention and expand proven alternatives.
The DART Act builds off my work as a St. Louis County prosecutor by giving law enforcement better tools like diversion programs and mental health courts to connect people with treatment, housing, and support that actually stops the cycle of incarceration.
This isn't leniency. It is strategy. It is about investing in what works, in what has proven effective, and building safer, stronger communities.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to pay tribute to a good friend, Fort Bend County Sheriff's Deputy David Fontenot.
David was a dedicated law enforcement officer with over 30 years of service, 26 of those years with the Fort Bend County Sheriff's Office.
David and I worked many long days, serving and protecting our community. David loved serving his community. He was not only a great sheriff's deputy but he was also a great friend. He was a man that I could depend on and a true professional.
I am saddened to say that on March 29, my friend, David, passed away after a battle with cancer. My prayers are with his family and loved ones, especially his sister, Camile, and his brothers, Chuck, Michael, and Stephen. We love them.
Mr. Speaker, I and the entire law enforcement community of Fort Bend County, Texas, will miss him dearly. God bless him.
Mr. Speaker, April 19 will mark 30 years since the deadliest act of domestic terrorism in the United States, when 168 innocent lives were taken on that quiet morning in Oklahoma City.
As many as 750 people were hurt, and thousands more were scarred by trauma. The main perpetrator was radicalized by extreme hate toward the Federal Government. He was quickly captured, convicted, and put to death for his crimes.
Today, we think of the toddlers at the Murrah building's daycare center who would be in their thirties today. We pray for their moms and their dads, but we must also pray for our country again. The rise in political tribalism and the hate for others must stop. Our faith in this government must never be diminished in any way that turns to hate and violence.
American author Napoleon Hill wrote that ``Every adversity, every failure, and every heartache carries a seed of an equal or greater benefit.'' May we never forget those words.
Mr. Speaker, the robotics industry is quietly reshaping the manufacturing and distribution economies of Indiana and our world.
I rise today to congratulate a team of extraordinary young students at Greenfield-Central High School back home in my district for their winning performance at our Indiana State robotics competition.
Greenfield-Central's team surpassed 62 other terrific Hoosier teams to claim top honors. Coach Jason led The Exothermics, Greenfield Central's team, comprised of juniors Simon, Hayley, and Brayden.
These talented young Hoosiers will again showcase their talents at VEX World competition in Dallas later this year. These students exemplify the best of the next generation of innovators, engineers, and scientists. Their work underscores the importance of a STEM education.
Many Hoosiers have celebrated victories on basketball courts, and I am proud to take this opportunity to spotlight these victories of our young Hoosiers in robotics innovation. Their talented minds will reshape our economy.
Mr. Speaker, in just 2 days, Wall Street lost $6 trillion in value in the worst selloff since 2020. Many of my constituents lost tens of thousands of dollars, money saved over decades.
Now we are all scrambling with the news of a 90-day pause on tariffs after
How does Mr. Trump expect people whose 401(k)s and kids' college savings accounts just took a nosedive to feel secure in their retirement? How does he expect people to save for retirement at all? The short answer is that the President does not know, and, even worse, he does not care.
Mr. Speaker, the President lost $11 trillion in value in the first 11 weeks of his second term. I call upon my Republican colleagues to please call out the President's destructive decisions. It is time to say that the emperor has no clothes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 2025 men's basketball NCAA national champions, the Florida Gators.
On Monday night, the Gators defeated the University of Houston in the national championship game to become the three-time national champions, winning the first title since the 2006-2007 season.
Led by Coach Todd Golden, the Gators were one of four tournament one- seeds, advancing through the rounds of 64 and 32 before dancing their way through the Sweet 16, Elite Eight, and Final Four.
After winning the title this week, the Gators ended the season with a 36-4 record making Gainesville, a/k/a Titletown, incredibly proud.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Coach Golden, the entire team, and, of course, the Gator nation. These guys are absolutely incredible.
As always, it is so great and sweet to be a Florida Gator.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 294, I call up the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 294, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on House Administration or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Steil) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include additional material on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, known as the SAVE Act, introduced by my colleague, Chip Roy of Texas.
As chairman of the Committee on House Administration, I have been focused on improving election integrity and increasing confidence in our elections.
Let me be clear: Noncitizen voting reduces confidence in our elections. American elections are for American citizens, and we intend to keep it that way.
The SAVE Act will strengthen our elections administration and restore Americans' confidence in our elections. The SAVE Act contains critical reforms to update the National Voter Registration Act which currently requires States to give registration forms to everyone who receives a driver's license, regardless of citizenship.
The bill before us will help States prevent noncitizens from voting in Federal elections by requiring States to obtain documentary proof of U.S. citizenship in person when registering an individual to vote in Federal elections.
Mr. Speaker, you are sure to hear from my colleagues on the other side that noncitizen voting doesn't exist or that it rarely happens so we don't need to do anything about it. It couldn't be further from the truth.
However, let's look back 2 months ago. The secretaries of state that I had conversations with shared with me their difficulties that they are experiencing in administering the most recent election. Two of their top concerns were about integrity of voter rolls and noncitizen voting.
In a most recent election, we just saw 13 individuals referred by the Michigan Secretary of State to the attorney general for noncitizen voting in the State of Michigan. In the House of Representatives where we often see close elections, we have one Member here who won her election by simply six votes.
It is clear we must pass the SAVE Act and prevent noncitizen voting.
There have also been many other examples of noncitizens voting or being
Every State also needs access to the tools necessary to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls. Right now States don't have free access to the Federal data that tracks citizenship status.
Another crucial element of the SAVE Act will provide States with cost-free access to existing Federal and State databases so they can perform this important voter list maintenance.
In recent years we have seen an increasing number of jurisdictions across the country allowing noncitizens to vote in municipal elections. Right here in our Nation's Capital, noncitizens are eligible to vote in these municipal elections. In Washington, D.C., a noncitizen only has to reside in the District for 30 days in order to register to vote.
Mr. Speaker, 388 noncitizens cast ballots here in our Nation's Capital in Washington, D.C., in the most recent election.
By passing the SAVE Act we can ensure that only eligible Americans are registering to vote.
Additionally, the SAVE Act is aligned with President Trump's recent executive order, Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of Elections, which will help restore trust in American elections, enhance our election administration, and make our elections secure.
This legislation is just one step that we can take to ensure President Trump's executive order could not be undone. Americans deserve to have confidence in our elections. We must pass the SAVE Act to prevent noncitizen voting and secure our elections.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, together with President Trump's recent voting- restrictive executive order, the SAVE Act would cripple American elections. It would end voter registration in the United States as we know it.
The SAVE Act would end mail-in registration. You heard that right, Mr. Speaker. All those States and all those people who register by mail--not vote by mail--registration by mail, it would end that. American citizens would have to appear in person at an election office and bring with them various documents and forms to register to vote.
Think about it, Mr. Speaker. Just to exercise your fundamental, inalienable rights as a citizen of this country, Republicans would force Americans into a paperwork nightmare, burying voter registration under a mountain of bureaucracy and red tape.
So what exactly would the SAVE Act do?
It would create enormous burdens for every American citizen who seeks to register to vote.
Let's dig into the details.
As my Republican colleague and friend admitted at the Rules Committee, under the SAVE Act, most Americans would be unable to register to vote using their REAL ID. Further, under the SAVE Act, almost 70 million American women will be unable to register to vote using their birth certificate simply because they changed their name upon marriage. The bill would disenfranchise survivors of domestic abuse who have changed their names for safety purposes, which is truly shocking.
The SAVE Act will also have a steep financial cost to American citizens because, yes, the SAVE Act does allow Americans to use their passports to register to vote, but one-half of all Americans do not have a passport, and a passport costs $130 plus additional fees. So the SAVE Act would cost American voters who do not have passports billions of dollars to secure them.
Americans are facing rising costs exacerbated by the recent Trump tariffs. Economists are warning about a looming Trump recession.
Let's face it. The SAVE Act would force U.S. citizens to spend billions of dollars to register to vote. This includes rural voters, many of whom now register to vote online or by mail, who will be forced to drive hours and cross hundreds of miles to present documentary proof. This includes senior citizens who are particularly likely to lack documentary proof of citizenship, including passports, copies of their birth certificates, or other documents.
What about the men and women in uniform who serve our country all over the world?
Can a member of our military use their military ID?
Surely military IDs should be enough to register to vote, but not according to the SAVE Act. Servicemembers will need to bring their military ID and a copy of their service record showing their place of birth within the United States. However, many servicemembers were born abroad, say to military parents overseas. Many are naturalized citizens. Those servicemembers will be blocked from using their military ID to register to vote.
Mr. Speaker, do you remember the SAVE Act's requirement that Americans show their documentation in person at an election office?
It will have drastic consequences. The SAVE Act will prevent members of our Armed Forces from registering to vote while deployed overseas.
Moreover, the SAVE Act is not actually meant to prevent noncitizens from voting. The SAVE Act is really about silencing Americans. This bill is about disenfranchising Americans, not noncitizens, but Americans, Americans like James Wilson.
James Wilson is an Arizona voter whom I met with last week. He was meant to join us in the gallery. He flew all the way to Washington, D.C., last week to watch Congress debate the SAVE Act. He was forced to fly home after the Speaker canceled 3 days of legislative work.
Mr. Wilson is an American citizen, born in Japan to a military father during the Vietnam war. Mr. Wilson is also a veteran. He proudly served our Nation overseas, including in Korea and Germany.
Like millions of Americans, Mr. Wilson does not have a passport because he does not need a passport. Like millions of Americans, Mr. Wilson does not have access to his birth certificate.
When Arizona introduced a restrictive voter registration law, a law just like the SAVE Act, Mr. Wilson's right to vote was imperiled. Mr. Wilson did not have any of the documents required by the Arizona law and required by the SAVE Act to prove his citizenship. But for a last- minute emergency court order, Mr. Wilson, an American citizen, a veteran, and a patriot, would not have been able to vote this past election.
If the SAVE Act becomes law, Americans nationwide will face the same bureaucratic nightmare that Mr. Wilson faced in Arizona. The SAVE Act will force Americans like Mr. Wilson to pay billions of dollars to exercise their inviolable right to vote.
House Republicans want to increase the burdens and amplify the costs in time, in money, and in effort for American citizens to vote. House Democrats do not.
The SAVE Act would cost American citizens something deeply important, something essential to the soul of this Nation, the right to freely and fairly participate in our elections.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge defeat of this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Lee), the chair of the Subcommittee on Elections and the former Florida secretary of state.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or the SAVE Act.
The SAVE Act is an important step forward that will ensure elections are more secure and accurate across the United States.
The vast majority of Americans agree that only U.S. citizens should have the right to vote in our elections. Just last month, President Trump took a strong stance reaffirming his commitment to the integrity of our elections. The President's executive order will help equip election officials with better data and more resources to administer elections.
Today, Congress has the opportunity to build on this momentum and ensure that these protections are part of our laws, that every State can follow these
Congress must commit to supporting election officials and voters by making voting accessible and secure.
While States are the primary authority on how elections are conducted on election day, it is our role here in Congress to ensure that we support them, provide resources to them, and promote uniformity and best practices across the country.
One way that we will be able to help provide those resources to States is by passing the SAVE Act. The SAVE Act will help protect our elections and ensure that only American citizens are casting ballots in American elections.
The bill will support State and local election officials by providing them with data and tools to help verify the accuracy and completeness of their voter rolls.
As Florida's former secretary of state and chief election official, I got to work with State and local elections workers across the country and saw their commitment to ensuring strong elections.
Now, as the chair of the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections, I am proud to work alongside Chairman Steil to advance policies that lead to stronger elections across our country.
These tools will help the States ensure their rolls are accurate and help prevent any unintended errors.
We know that some States have continued to discover noncitizens on their voter rolls, and there is evidence that some of them have voted in recent elections. We must take steps to ensure this doesn't continue.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to address the claim that the SAVE Act will somehow negatively affect married women or others who might have changed their name because their legal documentation or identification may reflect two different names. This legislation clearly contemplates exactly this situation and, indeed, directly addresses it. Page 14, line 19 directs the States to create a process for addressing this exact issue.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, ever since the 19th Amendment passed over 100 years ago, married women have been registering to vote and successfully voting. Indeed, I am among them.
This bill will accommodate women who change their name and have not yet updated their documentation to reflect a name change because the SAVE Act explicitly directs States to establish a process for them to register to vote, irrespective of those discrepancies.
Like other areas of the law, citizens will be able to use combinations of existing identification documents in order to register to vote. I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I always appreciate the work of my colleagues from the committee. We agree on many things, but this is certainly not one of them.
I want to reflect on what the gentlewoman from Florida and others have said several times, that the SAVE Act allows States to create a process to provide additional proof of citizenship. Why not write it in the bill? Why are we making the potential for 50 different standards to be set to prove citizenship? What additional forms would be used, a birth certificate together with an ID, also including a marriage certificate, also including a record of a changed name?
What must survivors of domestic abuse provide? Must they provide court orders protecting them from stalkers, restraining orders, divorce records, divorce papers? How much would that cost? How much paperwork do Republicans want Americans to drown in?
Further, how long will these new rules take? The SAVE Act takes effect immediately. What if States take months or years to amend their systems? What if they never do it?
You might have someone interested in voting, but their State hasn't acted. They have no way of proving that the name on their birth certificate, which differs from the name on their ID, is because they got married. They would be unable to register to vote.
Here is what we do know. President Trump's executive order doesn't want any alternative forms of identification, no alternative State processes, no additional avenues for voters. Why would we expect the EAC to disregard the President's clear desire to limit documentary proof of citizenship to a small, exclusive, difficult-to-obtain list of options?
I would say in addition to my dear friend--and I mean that sincerely--the gentleman from Wisconsin, I would like to remind him that an estimated 165,000 women in his district in Wisconsin have a different name on their birth certificate than is on their current photo ID. Under the SAVE Act, these women could not register using their birth certificate alone. Roughly 340,000 residents in Wisconsin's First District lack a passport, so the SAVE Act could cost voters in the district $45 million if they chose to comply that way.
I would also like to remind my colleague and friend, Representative Lee, an estimated 170,000 women in her district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their photo ID. Likewise, under this bill, these women could not use their birth certificate to register to vote because they have a different name now than at birth. Roughly 368,000 residents of Florida's 15th District lack a passport. It would cost voters in the district at least $47.8 million to secure a passport to register to vote.
These are the facts. This is what the bill requires. We should not gloss over it because this is a mountain of bureaucratic red tape. If you can't get it right in the bill, if you don't list marriage license in the Federal bill, and it is left to the States, who knows how and when we resolve these issues.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I rise today in strong opposition to the SAVE Act.
This bill will make it more difficult to register to vote, and it will prevent millions of American citizens, including married women who change their name and rural Americans, from exercising their right to vote. It creates an enormous and expensive unfunded mandate on election offices, and for what?
Federal law already requires people to attest under penalty of perjury that they are U.S. citizens when they register to vote. Noncitizens attempting to register to vote is exceedingly rare, and if they do, they face severe consequences, including fines, up to 5 years in prison, and deportation.
Mr. Speaker, more than 140 million Americans do not have a passport. Approximately 70 million women do not have a birth certificate that matches their current legal name. Millions and millions of rural voters would have to travel long distances to try to register to vote.
We don't have to guess what would happen if this bill were to pass. In 2011, Kansas had a proof-of-citizenship requirement.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, in Kansas, more than 30,000 U.S. citizens, 12 percent of everyone seeking to register to vote, were barred from voting.
Other States have tried. In all of them, a significant number of citizens have been wrongly barred from voting. It is unacceptable. It is voter suppression. It is wrong.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Miller), a member of the Committee on House Administration, to speak on the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the SAVE Act, which includes robust measures to prevent illegal aliens from participating in our elections.
Under Joe Biden, millions of illegal aliens flooded into our country, and many were given the benefits and privileges that should be reserved for American citizens.
In Illinois, JB Pritzker and the Democrats rolled out the red carpet
I do not have to tell you how dangerous this situation is for Americans, especially for Americans' confidence in the sanctity of our elections.
As far-left jurisdictions seek to allow illegals to vote in local elections, let me be clear about this one thing at this point: Every vote cast by an illegal alien is a vote stolen from an American citizen.
Congress must defend the integrity of our elections. We must aggressively push back against the left's attempts to change the electorate and dilute the voices of actual Americans in our democratic process.
This past week and today, all we hear are the Democrats sharing their concerns that rural Americans, women, and people of color are not capable of getting an ID. This is insulting and condescending and an untrue argument.
You need an ID for most everything else in daily life. Maybe if the Democrats would quit pushing for our schools--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, maybe the Democrats should quit wasting so much time in our public schools indoctrinating our children and, instead, teach them real-life skills such as reading, civics, and how to get an ID.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to make note of the point that REAL ID in the United States does not have citizenship in almost all States. A handful have it. You couldn't even use your REAL ID.
If we are talking about voter ID and photo ID, it doesn't even allow you to vote under the SAVE Act. The gentlewoman should read the bill. It doesn't allow it, and I think that is part of the problem.
I would also note, Mr. Speaker, in Representative Miller's district, an estimated 150,000 women have a different name on their birth certificate than their current photo ID. Under the SAVE Act, these women could not use their birth certificate to register to vote and would not be able to use their ID, their driver's license. Roughly 414,000 residents of Illinois' 15th District lack a passport.
The SAVE Act would cost voters in Mrs. Miller's district $53.8 million should they avail themselves of a passport to prove the requirements of the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Ross).
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the SAVE Act, which is a transparent attempt to disenfranchise millions of voters.
The SAVE Act would change voter registration guidelines to require proof of U.S. citizenship in very narrow ways. However, those documents, as we have heard, a birth certificate or a passport, are not always easy to come by for certain Americans.
This backward legislation would immediately disenfranchise the 69 million women who have changed their names after marriage or divorce and do not have a matching birth certificate. There is no cure in this bill.
Millions of Americans would be forced to navigate the complicated process to change their birth certificate or be forced to pay more than $130 for a passport.
Who would be prevented from voting? Working people who don't have the time to do it and low-income people who cannot afford to do it would be prevented from voting.
House Democrats will not be silenced while Donald Trump and Republicans try to disenfranchise millions of people.
Mr. Speaker, in every election, somebody wins and somebody loses. Democracy depends on the losing side trusting that the election was a fair and accurate reflection of the will of the majority, and the winning side depends on the same perception for the legitimacy of their office.
For centuries, our elections were the gold standard for the world because they were very hard to cheat in. Essential components of this process were 30-day registration, in-person election day voting, and proof of identity.
In recent years, in many States, the woke left has torn down these safeguards. Mail-in ballots where there is no chain of custody, counting ballots weeks after election day, counting ballots in secret, ballot harvesting, same-day registration, turning election day into election month, and forbidding proof of identity all make cheating easy and destroy the public's confidence in the process.
In many jurisdictions, the Democrats have made it clear that they intend to allow noncitizens to vote, the ultimate in foreign election interference.
I have news for my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: American elections are for Americans.
The SAVE Act restores this vital principle by requiring proof of citizenship and identity in the Federal elections that affect every American. Americans should pay close attention to this vote, for it will reveal those who would subvert their vote to foreign nationals.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I remind the gentleman that, in the United States of America, you have to be a U.S. citizen to vote in a Federal election. If you are not, you are subject to penalties for attempting to register to vote, and you are subject to felonies and deportation if you do vote and are not an American citizen. That is the current law.
I also remind my friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock), that an estimated 135,000 women in his district have a different name on their birth certificate than they have on their current photo ID, and roughly 290,000 residents of California's Fifth District lack a passport. The cost to those voters would be $37.7 million to get passports.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Georgia (Ms. Williams), my dear friend.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the Congresswoman for Georgia's Fifth District, the cradle of the civil rights movement and the home of Dr. King, Ambassador Andrew Young, and my predecessor, the late Congressman John Lewis. I carry their legacy with me every time I walk onto this floor.
Mr. Speaker, the SAVE Act is everything our civil rights leaders fought against. Don't think that it won't impact you or folks that you know. If you got married and changed your name, your ID won't match your birth certificate. If you don't have a passport and your ID doesn't match your birth certificate, you can't prove your citizenship. According to the SAVE Act, you won't be able to vote.
Right now, under Trump and Musk's disastrous economy, families like so many of those who I represent back home in Georgia are struggling to keep up with the cost of groceries, let alone adding $130 for a passport just to register to vote.
In Georgia, over half of the population doesn't have a passport, and our driver's licenses, even the REAL ID, don't prove citizenship.
This resolution could force Georgians to pay more than $700 million just to register to vote.
Mr. Speaker, that is a poll tax, plain and simple, and it is blatant voter suppression.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, voter suppression by any other name is still voter suppression. This resolution violates the 14th Amendment, 19th Amendment, 24th Amendment, and every tenet of a free and inclusive democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this disgrace of a voter suppression resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, or the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, under President Biden, nearly 5 million illegal aliens were released into the United States. Biden's failure at the southern border has diluted the voting power that is reserved for only American citizens. This crisis is not only a national security concern but one that can seriously alter the outcome of our elections.
Just this past election cycle, both the States of Alabama and Virginia removed thousands of registered voters who were not American citizens. Securing our elections is of paramount importance, and we must ensure that it is easy to vote and hard to cheat.
The SAVE Act will strengthen our election administration, improve voter confidence, and ensure that American elections are only for American citizens. Specifically, it amends the National Voter Registration Act to require States to obtain proof of citizenship when an individual registers to vote.
Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. This legislation does not prohibit married women from voting, and the absurd narrative of this has gotten out of control.
Mr. Speaker, when someone changes their name, just as I have when I got married, they have to provide their birth certificate and a marriage certificate. This is already required when you update your ID, your Social Security records, and, yes, your voter registration, too.
When your name is legally changed, it updates across government systems. REAL IDs, passports, and other valid forms of ID mentioned in the SAVE Act are sufficient proof of citizenship. Your birth certificate doesn't have to match your current ID.
I will add this: The claim is that it will disenfranchise married women and others who might have to change their names because the documentation might show two different names, but the SAVE Act itself addresses this point in the text. Page 14, line 9 directs the States to create a process for addressing this exact issue.
I find myself asking: Why are the Democrats refusing to take steps to safeguard our elections and protect the votes of every single American citizen?
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the SAVE Act, and I look forward to voting for it. I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I hate to disagree with my dear friend, the gentlewoman from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice), but the words ``marriage certificate'' do not appear anywhere in the SAVE Act. In fact, it could have been written in that way since Republicans are adding all these lists and requirements for people to do. Yet, it actually does make it harder for almost 70 million American women to vote.
Eighty-four percent of women choose their husband's name when they get married. That is just a statistic.
As we have discussed, under the SAVE Act, most Americans will be unable to use the standard-issued driver's license when registering to vote because most REAL IDs don't include citizenship on them. They don't automatically update if you haven't registered at all. When you go to register, there is nothing to update.
You have your birth certificate. In the case of Mary Beth Bauer, that is what it says on her certificate. Her driver's license now says ``Mary Beth Morelle.'' She would not be able to register using those two pieces of information. She would have to get an additional piece of documentation to register, which is not identified in the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I think we have talked about it at length. This is clearly intended to make it much more difficult. According to House Republicans, none of these women should be allowed to register to vote. They are roughly 25 percent of the U.S. citizen voting age population.
I also suggest to my friend from Oklahoma (Mrs. Bice) that an estimated 179,000 women in her district have a different name on their birth certificate than a current photo ID, and roughly 394,000 residents of Oklahoma's Fifth District lack a passport. The SAVE Act would cost them $51.3 million to secure passports.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. Mullin), my dear friend.
Mr. Speaker, free and fair elections are the foundation of any functioning democracy. The SAVE Act is a blatant attempt to undermine our election system, weaken American democracy, and unfairly suppress millions of eligible citizens from voting.
If the SAVE Act becomes law, eligible Americans would have to provide either a passport or a birth certificate to register to vote and cast their ballots. About half of American citizens, roughly 150 million people, don't own a passport.
If an eligible voter doesn't have the means to pay for a passport, they would need a birth certificate that states their current legal name. This act could suppress the votes of millions of women in this country who have changed their names after marriage.
To be clear, if you are a married woman, I guess Republicans don't want you to vote. If you can't afford a passport, Republicans don't want you to vote. If you are a college student whose birth certificate is back home, Republicans don't want you to vote.
Congress has a responsibility to ensure that all eligible citizens can participate in free and fair elections. The SAVE Act would do the opposite.
Mr. Speaker, bless my colleagues' hearts on the other side of the aisle for using married women as a gotcha for voting. I have never had to bring my birth certificate to prove that I was a registered voter. I have an ID that has a different name than my birth certificate.
Also, since we are using women as bait here, maybe in the next round of debates, Democrats could explain to us exactly what a woman is.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the SAVE Act. The American people are done messing around with a woke, weak-kneed system that lets our elections get hijacked. I am fighting for them, for me, and for every American who knows that our vote is sacred. It is time to lock it down with citizens only.
Mr. Speaker, let's cut the crap. Right now, people can walk up, check a box claiming that they are a citizen, and, boom, they are registered for Federal elections with no proof and no ID.
That is not a system built on trust. It is a system vulnerable to error, fraud, and exploitation.
In Colorado, the process was just expedited for illegals to receive a driver's license. In the State of Colorado, when you obtain a driver's license, you register to vote.
The SAVE Act is a commonsense measure designed to protect the integrity of our electoral process. At its core, it requires proof of citizenship to register to vote in Federal elections.
This isn't radical. It is not extreme. It is a basic safeguard to ensure that only those who are legally entitled to participate in our elections can do so.
Let's be clear. This isn't about denying anyone's right to vote. It is about protecting the rights of every American citizen, not adding votes and subtracting American citizens' votes.
Mr. Speaker, I support the SAVE Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind all persons in the gallery that they are here as guests of the House and that any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings is in violation of the rules of the House.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I note that while the previous speaker, Ms. Boebert, has not had to bring all of those documents, she hasn't had to register to vote under the SAVE Act. That is actually the point.
Mr. Speaker, I also remind her that an estimated 159,000 women in her district have a different name on their
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Ramirez), my friend.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the SAVE Act. The bottom line is that the SAVE Act suppresses the votes of women; Black, Brown, and indigenous people; veterans; and working-class Americans.
In advancing it, Republicans invoke those historical policies that were intended to disenfranchise Americans. Let me remind Members what they were: literacy tests and poll taxes for eligible voters, grandfather clauses that tied voters' rights to the grandfathers before the Civil War, all-White primaries to eliminate Black voters' presence in the electoral process, and now: Show me your papers.
The SAVE Act is the same trash, just a different day. It is the Republicans' latest attempt to make clear who the majority believes should have access to vote and who should not.
Anyone who votes for this resolution will go down in the history books with the likes of Confederate politicians, Jim Crow advocates, and white supremacists as bigots.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the resolution as a woman and as the chairwoman of the Republican Women's Caucus, not only for election integrity but clearly literacy because Democrats have not read the resolution. That much is clear.
This resolution is very simple. It ensures that only American citizens can vote in our Federal elections. This isn't hard. Eighty- seven percent of Americans agree that only Americans should vote in our elections.
Mr. Speaker, it makes me wonder why my friends on the other side of the aisle are always and consistently looking for ways to ensure that illegals can vote in our elections. It is almost as though they have an ulterior motive.
You have to show an ID to board a plane, to buy alcohol, to cash a check. You have to show an ID to buy cold medicine for God's sakes. Why should people not have to verify their citizenship to register to vote? I say to register because my friend over here keeps pointing out that women in every single congressional district will have to provide proof of their name change in order to vote.
I ask my colleagues across the aisle to read the bill, page 14. If you are registering to vote, there is a process by which the States establish. If you are already registered to vote, you are fine. Read the bill. Stop insulting women.
I am sick and tired and I know women across this country are sick and tired of being talked down to and being insulted repeatedly with the fear-mongering tactics of the left. It is disingenuous for them to stand there and to continue to say that women will not be eligible to vote.
This is about protecting one of our most sacred rights that we have as Americans, and I am so proud to stand here as a woman, as a married woman, and, again, as the chair of the Republican Women's Caucus in safeguarding and ensuring the integrity of our elections.
The Speaker pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
The point is, is that Americans around this country are sick and tired of the fear-mongering tactics that they have been subjected to by the left for decades. We need to ensure the integrity of our elections. It has been demanded by the American people, and we are making good on that promise today.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think my colleagues doth protest too much. I have read the bill many times. I have debated the bill. There is nothing in the bill that allows you to bring a marriage license to prove who you are when you register to vote. You will have to do all the things we suggest you will have to do, and that is exactly the problem.
I will also remind my colleague and friend from Florida that in Mrs. Cammack's district, an estimated 170,000 women in her congressional district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their current photo ID and that roughly 409,000 residents of Florida's Third Congressional District lack a passport. The cost to those individuals: $53.1 million to secure passports.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Alabama (Ms. Sewell), my dear friend and distinguished member of our committee and the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Elections of House Administration.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the House Republican's so-called SAVE Act, the most restrictive voting law to be considered by this body in decades.
The SAVE Act is just the latest in the ongoing assault on our democracy by President Trump and his allies in Congress. Instead of working to meet the needs of the American people, House Republicans are busy spreading fear and lies to justify their attempts to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters.
Let's be clear: It is already against the law for non-Americans to vote. This bill is a solution in search of a problem. The SAVE Act would create new barriers to the ballot box for millions of eligible voters. That includes almost 70 million American women who got married and changed their last name. It also includes 140 million Americans without a passport, and it includes Americans with military and Tribal IDs.
To be clear, this bill is not about protecting our elections; it is about making it harder for Americans to vote and easier for Republicans to win.
As elected officials, we should be working to expand access to the ballot box, not restrict it. Congress should be considering H.R. 14, the John Robert Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to ensure that every American can freely and fairly vote.
Mr. Speaker, this is very personal to me. I am not only the Representative of America's civil rights district, but I am also the proud daughter of Selma, Alabama. It was in my hometown where hundreds of foot soldiers were bludgeoned on a bridge for the equal right of all Americans to vote. This legislation before us today makes a mockery of their legacy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I thank very much the chairman for yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, one citizen, one vote. It is the pillar of our democracy and you would think that of all the issues that we debate on this hallowed floor, this is the one. This is the one that brings everybody together, the pillar of our democracy, one citizen, one vote. Everybody is on the same team.
Mr. Speaker, you would be wrong. It is amazing that you would be wrong because there are people in this room that think women are incapable of getting an ID. I think that is an insult to women.
Mr. Speaker, let me remind you why we are here. We are here because this previous administration, the Biden administration, imported 10 to 15 million illegal aliens who have come here and we have evidence that they are participating in our elections.
The next thing you will say is: Did they get Social Security numbers? Mr. Speaker, they did. The DOGE team just announced millions of illegals now have Social Security numbers. It is happening, and it ends today when we vote on the SAVE Act.
I have just heard my colleagues say it is already against the law. We don't need this act, but let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, it is already against the law for a minor to buy beer, but yet the clerk checks the ID before the purchase is made.
We need the SAVE Act. We need security. We need to come together. I invite our colleagues to come together. There is still time to agree that the pillar of our democracy is one citizen, one vote. The right answer on the SAVE Act is a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman's comments lead me to the question: Do Republicans believe that every attestation under Federal law is rife for subversion? Americans must attest under penalty of perjury that their tax returns contain correct information. Do Republicans want to end this honor system by requiring Americans to provide even more documentation to the Internal Revenue Service?
It is a Federal crime to lie on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms Form 4473, the firearms transaction record. That form is filled out under the same honor system that governs voter registrations. Are you telling me that Republicans are open to strengthening gun licensing laws in the United States and no longer accept attestation?
Each of us must submit records to the FEC, attesting under penalty of perjury that our campaign committee reports are accurate. Do Republicans now want to provide the American people greater transparency around political spending because if they do, I have a bill they can support, the Freedom to Vote Act.
I will also suggest to the gentleman, Representative Bean, that an estimated 170,000 women in his district have a different last name on their birth certificate than is on their current photo ID and roughly 397,000 residents of Florida's Fourth District do not have a passport. It would cost them $51.7 million to secure one.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Conaway).
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the SAVE Act. While everyday Americans are struggling from the fallout of Trump's disastrous tariff policies, Republicans are pushing through a bill that strips Americans' constitutional right to vote, a vote that was hard won and for which many died.
They claim the SAVE Act is intended to prevent undocumented immigrants from voting, but it is already illegal for them to vote, and it is extremely rare.
In reality, the SAVE Act makes it harder for Americans, especially women and people of color, to participate in our elections. We have seen these tactics before, creating barriers to the ballot box to suppress the vote, and yet Republicans continue to find ways to undermine democracy.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves: Do you want to stand on the side of voter suppression or do you want to stand on the side of democracy? I choose democracy and will vote ``no'' on this dangerous anti-American bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am hearing from the other side that it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote. That is true. It is also illegal to evade Border Patrol and cross the border illegally into the United States of America, but enforcement matters.
We can look at what happens when you don't enforce the law under the Biden administration and what happens when you do enforce the law under the Trump administration.
I think back to when I went home to my hometown in Janesville, Wisconsin, the other day and I went to buy a six-pack of beer. I walked in and the gentlewoman at the desk said: Bryan, good to see you. I went back, grabbed a six-pack of beer, came up, and she said: Bryan, I need to see your ID. I pulled out my ID and handed it to her. She reviewed it. She allowed me to purchase a six-pack of beer.
Am I the only one here that thinks it is absolutely absurd that we protect our beer more than we protect our ballots? This law allows us to make sure that only U.S. citizens are voting in U.S. elections. Mr. Speaker, it is about enforcement of the law. I ask my colleagues across the aisle: How many noncitizen votes should be okay?
The answer to me and my colleagues on this side of the aisle is zero because every noncitizen that votes in a Federal election in the United States of America cancels out the vote of a U.S. citizen. As we know in this Chamber, very often House races are close. One of our Representatives in this Chamber was elected by simply six votes. One noncitizen voting in a Federal election in the United States is too many, and the arguments I am hearing from my colleagues on the left is that they are okay with noncitizens voting.
It is essential that not only do we have the law but that we enforce the law, and the SAVE Act does just that.
This is my good friend, Chip Roy, from the State of Texas, the author of the bill, who I have been working with to do just that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy) to speak on the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his strong work and commitment to election integrity and to working with us on this bill, in particular, the SAVE Act. He has done an extraordinary job, and I am proud to work with him and work with the rest of my colleagues on it.
I am also proud to work with my friend, Cleta Mitchell, who had a significant hand in what we are doing here. I am quite certain that she is pretty well aware of protecting the right of females to be able to vote, along with my friends Stephanie Bice, Mary Miller, Laurel Lee, Lauren Boebert, and Kat Cammack, all of whom came down to the floor in full support of this legislation because they know the truth.
They know the truth that the American people know, which is that, as much as my colleagues on the other side of the aisle want to bring up the DMV, the American people know that the DMV is very good at giving driver's licenses to illegal aliens because we know it to be true. We know that there are people who have been indicted for voting illegally. We know that there are voter rolls with massive numbers of people who are illegally present in the United States. We know that the previous administration let in millions of people into the United States, wrongfully and illegally under parole and asylum, blatantly abusing the law to put people in the United States that have no basis for being here, many of whom carried out dangerous acts against American people, killed American citizens, but importantly, have been registering to vote. That is what has been happening.
What we understand is, the American people have spoken very clearly that they believe only American citizens should vote in American elections. There is nothing controversial about that. There is nothing controversial about saying that you should be able to ensure that only citizens vote.
Let's be very clear: Federal law has currently been interpreted to prohibit States from being able to check citizenship. That is the truth. That is why the State of Arizona, for example, has two systems-- one for State and local, one for Federal.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
The good people of Arizona have two systems in place: They check for citizenship for State and local elections, and they are unable to check for citizenship in Federal elections. The point of this bill is to ensure that we guarantee only citizens vote by allowing those States to be able to check, by having systems, Federal systems be open to the States to be able to check, and to require proof of citizenship when you register.
There is nothing complex about that. There is nothing more sacred under the Constitution than ensuring that the people are able to have the voice in the election of the people that represent them in Washington and throughout the country.
Mr. Speaker, once that is undermined, then people lose faith in the very institutions upon which this is built. This legislation is designed to restore that faith, to save our elections, and to save election integrity.
I am proud to have worked on this bill with my friend, the chairman, and with my colleagues on this side of the aisle. I would note that five of my Democratic colleagues joined us last summer to vote for this bill, hardly a partisan exercise to say that we should protect the elections of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, to restore confidence and faith in our elections, and to take a step forward in ensuring the people know that citizens will be in control of this Republic as the Founders intended.
Mr. Speaker, all of my colleagues today are speaking about this bill, and it is personal to me because I represent Alabama. I represent the birthplace of the civil rights movement.
I would be remiss not to mention that election integrity was not an issue that my colleagues had been pushing until Donald Trump told them that they should be pushing this issue.
Americans have confidence in elections. For me, it is about too many people doing too many things too courageously for me to be able to stand here today. There are names like James Reeb, Jimmie Lee Jackson, Viola Liuzzo, Andrew Goodman, James Chaney, and Michael Schwerner. These are people who died for me to be here today. Congressman John Lewis, who most of you served with, died for me to be here today.
This bill would make it tougher than it has ever been in American history to register to vote at a time when we have the technological ability to be able to verify election eligibility, but we don't want to do that. We want to make it tougher for people to actually get registered to vote, and that is not what we should be doing. We should be making it easier for people to vote.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today as a cosponsor of the SAVE Act to advance the radical proposition that only American citizens should vote in American elections.
Of course, this isn't radical at all. It is common sense. I think the vast majority of Americans would be shocked to learn that it elicits any opposition at all.
In many States in this country, foremost my own State of California, the administration of our elections is completely out of touch with the rest of the developed world, falling well short of the standards that ought to exist in a modern democratic society.
This measure requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote is a needed corrective. I believe, in my State, it will complement other initiatives that we are advancing now to require voter ID and to have a timely vote-counting process in order to restore public confidence in our election process.
What is at stake is not only election integrity and election security but democratic legitimacy, ensuring that our people have the ability to express themselves fully in our own identity as a State in the country through the democratic process.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Morelle for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this so-called SAVE Act, a bill that is a modern-day poll tax targeting American women and low- income Americans.
This bill bans voter ID. It bans using driver's licenses as a voter ID unless they are backed by additional proof of citizenship, a requirement that excludes nearly all driver's licenses and REAL IDs issued today.
For women who have changed their names, often through marriage, this means showing a passport or a birth certificate that may not match their legal name. That would have meant that my grandmother, who had long since lost her birth certificate, would have been ineligible to vote under this bill.
In California alone, that would include more than 7 million women. This would force those women to pay $130 just to get the passport they need to vote. With nearly a third of Californians lacking passports, this bill would cost them more than $1.25 billion statewide.
If you have to pay to vote, that is called a poll tax, plain and simple. It is also unnecessary red tape for people just trying to cast a ballot.
This is a bill in search of a problem. We have enough trouble getting American citizens to vote.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Morelle for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, the American people in my district and in my State have spoken clearly. This bill is voter suppression, pure and simple.
It is brought to us under the guise of stopping illegal voting. When we analyze voting in Westchester County, where I was the county executive for a million people, we found no appreciable illegal voting.
This is an opportunity for this majority to try to impose their will on the States that they don't already control.
They want to end mail voter registration in my home State to satisfy other States' regressive laws.
They want to require people who have voted legally for years to prove their citizenship if they not only change their name but if they move. A simple move requires them to drive to a county board of elections and prove that they are an American citizen when they have proven that over the course of 20 years or more of voting.
This bill subjects local officials to hefty criminal fines if they register someone outside of these rules. This is an expensive unfunded mandate in Westchester, New York City, and all the States involved.
Mr. Speaker, I was remiss earlier. I want to remind my colleague, Mr. Roy, that an estimated 150,000 women in his district have a different name on their birth certificate than on their photo ID, and 336,000 residents of Texas' 2lst District lack a passport, a cost of $43.7 million to those who would need to get a passport should they choose that.
Also, I would like to remind my colleague, Representative Kiley, an estimated 135,000 women in his district have a different name, and roughly 268,000 residents of California's Third District do not have a passport. The cost to them for getting one is $34.8 million.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson), my friend.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the Republicans' voter suppression act.
I want to give Republicans one chance to actually fulfill the rhetoric that they are spouting to the American people, which is actually giving people the right to vote.
I appreciate efforts to ensure that our elections are safe and free from foreign interference and that only U.S. citizens can vote. However, one of my concerns with this bill is, as it is written, it does not allow for mail or online voter registration.
This bill, let me be perfectly clear, requires hardworking American people who go to work at 8 in the morning and who don't get off until 5 p.m. to go in person to a voter registration office, to take off work to go in person to register to vote.
That is why I have offered an amendment to have online voter registration. There are millions of servicemembers and their families serving our country overseas, individuals with disabilities, and seniors who are unable to vote in person. Why are we keeping these barriers for eligible citizens when the world is evolving around us?
We live in modern times, and so many of our lives happen online for daily activities. We can pay our bills and we can pay our taxes online. You can apply for college, a car, a home, and everything else online.
For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit
My amendment would ensure Americans could still register to vote and prove their citizenship online or by mail. This is a simple, commonsense amendment, and it would make certain that we can care for the people who can't get out of their homes and that this Congress is not depriving any eligible citizens of their right to vote.
Republicans have refused this amendment. Republicans are refusing your ability to go and make it easy for citizens to register to vote in this country. Republicans can now vote to pass this amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The SAVE Act is, to put it nicely, the most severe voter suppression bill ever considered at the Federal level.
Coupled with President Trump's recent antivoter executive order, the SAVE Act would end the voter registration process for all Americans as they know it.
Republicans have repeatedly failed to present any evidence that noncitizen voting at the Federal level has ever affected the outcome of any election.
The SAVE Act will make it harder for American citizens to vote--for married women to vote, for servicemembers, students, rural Americans, senior citizens, Native voters, survivors of natural disasters, and survivors of domestic abuse to vote. It will make voting more expensive, in fact forcing American families to pay billions of dollars just to register to vote.
Democrats want a country where every American citizen can vote. That is why we champion bills like the Freedom to Vote Act, the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, and the Native American Voting Rights Act, not the SAVE Act.
I fiercely oppose this anti-American bill. I urge every one of my colleagues, Republicans and Democrats alike, to defeat this extremist, antivoter SAVE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The SAVE Act is clear. Only U.S. citizens should vote in U.S. elections.
Let's summarize the arguments here. My colleagues on this side of the aisle believe that only U.S. citizens should vote in U.S. elections, and we should keep it that way.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle just moments ago said that there is no appreciable illegal voting. Well, how much illegal voting should be allowed in the United States of America? In my opinion, no noncitizens should vote in U.S. elections.
We can go down and look at the data. Illinois had to remove 600 noncitizens from their voter rolls. Pennsylvania had to remove 10,000 noncitizens from their voter rolls. In Georgia, 1,600 noncitizens attempted to register. In our Nation's Capital, where they allow noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, this past November, 388 noncitizens voted here in our Nation's Capital in municipal elections.
You will hear the argument from my colleagues across the aisle that it is already illegal to vote if you are a noncitizen in a Federal election. I tell them, as I said earlier, it is already illegal to evade Border Patrol and to come into this country, but Joe Biden was happy not to enforce the law. Millions of illegal immigrants have come into the United States of America.
The National Voter Registration Act, as drafted by this body, if you broke it, you have to fix it. We have to fix the voting laws.
The National Voter Registration Act requires States to give voter registration materials when an individual comes to get a driver's license. In States that give driver's licenses to illegal aliens, like the State of Illinois, just to the south of my home State of Wisconsin, they are handed voter registration materials.
Mr. Speaker, I view that as insane. We should be making sure that only U.S. citizens are voting in U.S. elections. You will hear arguments about it is burdensome.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is absurd that we are protecting beer more than we are protecting ballots. You have to show a photo ID when you go in to buy a six-pack of beer. You should have to go in and show that you are a U.S. citizen when you register to vote. It is just that simple.
I remind my colleagues that we had this debate in this Chamber last Congress. Five Democrats joined us in voting for this bill. In a few moments, we will be voting, Mr. Speaker. It will be darn interesting to see how many Democrats have the courage to come across the line and say ``yes'' to only U.S. citizens should vote in U.S. elections. My colleagues should support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 294, the previous question is ordered on the bill.
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.
Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2025
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 1(c) of rule XIX, further consideration of the motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 14) establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2025 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2026 through 2034 will now resume.
The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will redesignate the Senate amendment and redesignate the motion to concur.
The clerk redesignated the Senate amendment and redesignated the motion to concur.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Arrington).
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to recommit on the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes, offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Johnson), on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk will redesignate the motion.
The Clerk redesignated the motion.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 211, nays 215, not voting 7, as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. There are 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. RASKIN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, due to a personal family matter, I was not able to make the voting series today. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 100, NAY on Roll Call No. 101, and YEA on Roll Call No. 102.
Mr. Speaker, I was not present today to vote due to the death of an immediate family member. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 100, NAY on Roll Call No. 101, and YEA on Roll Call No. 102.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a remarkable constituent and community leader Allan Seebach, Sr., of Tappan, New York.
Allan is a lifelong resident of Tappan and a U.S. Navy veteran who served our Nation during the Korean war. His service didn't stop when he returned home. In fact, it was just getting started.
He joined the Volunteer Fire Association of Tappan in 1950, and for nearly 75 years, he has been a cornerstone of the department. Allan served as chief of the Tappan Fire Department from 1965 to 1968 and again from 1972 to 1974. He later became fire commissioner, a role he held for 27 years, 13 of them as chairman of the district.
Allan's leadership, mentorship, and tireless dedication to the safety and well-being of his neighbors have left a lasting mark, not only on the department, but on the entire Tappan community. As one local fire leader put it, Allan Seebach is the Tappan Fire Department.
I thank Allan for everything he has done for the people of Tappan, of Rockland County, and of New York's 17th District. His legacy of service is the best of who we are, and I am proud to call him a friend.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the 10- year anniversary of Beyond Legal Aid, a vital community-driven legal advocacy organization that has spent the last decade advancing justice from the ground up. They have successfully built a grassroots network of lawyers and advocates to address critical legal needs to close the equity gap in justice.
Their work is grounded in a fundamental truth, that an injustice to one member of our community is an injustice to all of us. Beyond Legal Aid places impacted communities at the center of their advocacy, reshaping what legal support can and should look like.
Beyond Legal Aid in Chicago has worked for 10 years to inspire and enact change across my district and has represented over 5,000 clients in immigration and housing cases.
As an ardent supporter of community-driven grassroots activism, I commend Beyond Legal Aid for 10 years of fighting against systemic inequities. I sincerely appreciate their dedication and look forward to supporting Beyond Legal Aid in building toward a world where justice is not a privilege but a birthright.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the life of Harry Lynn, of Scottsbluff, Nebraska, a family man, beloved community member, and World War II veteran. Sadly, Harry passed away last week at the age of 102.
Despite an initial draft deferment due to significant visual impairment, Harry enlisted in the U.S. Army, where he became recognized as one of the Army's top three Morse code operators. He became a Morse code instructor and rose to the rank of staff sergeant.
This year, we celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Allied victory because of the sacrifices of heroes like Harry. His determination to do his duty despite personal adversity displayed the true Nebraskan spirit to answer the call of service in one of the most challenging times in our Nation's history.
Harry and each of America's World War II veterans deserve our deepest gratitude and most sincere thanks.
On April 2, Harry and his daughter, Sherri, were tragically killed in a car accident. I extend my condolences to the family members and celebrate the life of this American patriot.
Harry's memory and example of service will live on in our hearts.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate my Florida Gators, the University of Florida men's basketball team, for winning the 2025 National Championship. It is their third title and the first since back-to-back Gator wins in 2007.
In a heart-stopping final, mostly my heart, they erased a 12-point, second-half deficit to defeat the amazing Houston Cougars with a score of 65-63.
Under Coach Golden, they showed the resilience, discipline, and heart that epitomize Gator athletics.
Walter Clayton, Jr., the tournament MVP, led that charge, proving time and again that he and his teammates rise to the occasion when it matters most.
Yet, this championship is more than just a trophy. It is a symbol of U.S. excellence both on and off the court. It reflects the strength of our State's public universities and the pride we all share as Floridians.
The Gator Nation is still humming. As a proud alum, along with my dad, brother, husband, and all three of my kids, I will say it is great to be a Florida Gator.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate all the players and coaches and all the students and alumni who cheered them on. Our Gator boys stayed hot and brought a title home.
Mr. Speaker, in America, you can't drive a car, board a plane, or buy fireworks without an ID proving that you are who you say you are. Why are folks allowed to vote, to decide the future of this country, without proving that they are citizens first?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in honor of the House passing the SAVE Act just moments ago. It is common sense that only American citizens should be able to vote in American elections.
Congressman Chip Roy's SAVE Act will close election loopholes by ensuring that every State requires voters to provide proof of citizenship before registering to vote.
When noncitizens go to the ballot box, the electoral system is compromised and American votes are diluted.
The American people have the right to determine the future of our country, and we refuse to be disenfranchised by illegal votes. I was proud to support the SAVE Act when it passed the House today.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize the remarkable achievement of a teacher from Wilson, North Carolina.
Mr. Jonas Almerino, a high school science teacher at Sallie B. Howard School, has been awarded the Burroughs Wellcome Fund's 2025 Career Award for STEM Teachers. The award honors outstanding educators who are committed to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
The grant will be used to set up science equipment and living labs in the school's new high school building and provide essential supplies. The award includes $175,000 over 5 years.
STEM will play a crucial role in the future of education, and Mr. Almerino is proving that North Carolina is leading the way.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Sallie B. Howard School.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Ryan Griffin, a devoted father, community leader, and accomplished professional who left an indelible mark on lower Mississippi and beyond.
Ryan was a man of service, whether through his career in journalism or communications, his leadership in civic organizations like Kiwanis and the United Way, or his unwavering dedication to his hometown.
From the football field at West Jones High School to the halls of the University of Southern Mississippi, Ryan exemplified leadership, integrity, and a passion for bringing people together.
Above all, Ryan's love for his family, his faith, and his community defined his life. His impact will be felt for generations to come.
My prayers are with his children, his loved ones, and all who had the privilege of calling him a friend.
Mr. Speaker, may we honor his legacy and continue his commitment to service and kindness.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to remember my beloved friend and Montgomery County legend, Jack Fitzgerald, who passed away this week at the age of 89. He will be sharply missed by friends, family, and customers of the Fitzgerald Auto Malls up and down the East Coast.
Jack's life embodied the restless, adventuresome spirit of America and entrepreneurial business at their very best. Over the course of his extraordinary life, he built Bethesda Auto from a single storefront in the early 1950s into a massive success, with dealerships across Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Florida.
An old-fashioned businessman devoted to the community, he was an eloquent champion of customer safety, consumer protection, and employee well-being. He pioneered the installation of child safety seats before it became an industry standard.
Jack was friends not just with CEOs of auto companies but with Ralph Nader.
Remarkably, Jack transferred his company to employee stock ownership over the last year before his death. His legacy now lives on in his employees and in everybody in Montgomery County, Maryland, who loved him.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in saluting the life of Jack Fitzgerald, who was a pillar of our community and a local hero. May his memory be a blessing.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Lori Frazier Bearden, a resident of Savannah, Georgia, who will serve as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Employment and Training Administration, ETA, at the United States Department of Labor.
Ms. Bearden earned her bachelor's degree in political science from Columbus State University in Georgia and her master's degree in public administration from Auburn University.
In this role, Ms. Bearden will assist Labor Secretary Lori Chavez- DeRemer in executing President Donald Trump's mission of prioritizing American workers, veterans, and retirees.
She will work to advance the ETA's mission of contributing to the more efficient functioning of the U.S. labor market by providing high- quality job training, employment, labor market information, and income maintenance services, primarily through State and local workforce development programs.
Ms. Bearden's dedication to public service and expertise in navigating complex policy landscapes make her an asset to the Trump administration.
I congratulate Ms. Bearden on this exciting achievement. We all look forward to watching her succeed and wish her the best in her new role.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor U.S. Coast Guard Admiral Linda Fagan, a trailblazer. Her decades of service have strengthened our Nation and brought pride to the people of Ohio.
Throughout her distinguished 40-year career, Admiral Fagan broke barriers. She led with strength of purpose. As the first woman to serve as Commandant of the United States Coast Guard and the first woman to lead a branch of our Armed Forces, she made history with integrity and fortitude.
Admiral Fagan's service spanned all seven continents. From the icy waters of the poles to ports around the world, she safeguarded our Nation's interests with professionalism and resolve. Her deep expertise in marine safety is unmatched, and she holds the title of Gold Ancient Trident, the first of that honor and a symbol of enduring leadership in one of the Coast Guard's most critical missions.
Yet, patriots must acknowledge with concern the abrupt dismissal of Admiral Fagan just 1 day after a Presidential inauguration, with only 3 hours' notice.
Actions that politicize our armed services undermine the trust and stability of these institutions. Admiral Fagan's legacy is not one of partisanship but patriotism.
Let us honor and thank her for her service. Our military remains above political winds, guided, as she was, by our Constitution, principle, high professionalism, and a deep love of country.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the Girl Scouts of Western Ohio. These hardworking and dedicated Scouts are agents for positive change in their communities and work every day to create a better world.
In 2024, 44 Senior and Ambassador Girl Scouts from the Girl Scouts of Western Ohio earned the prestigious Gold Award.
In pursuit of this distinction, each Scout identified a specific issue close to their hearts and utilized teamwork and collaboration to effect positive change in their community, leaving a lasting impact.
Carolyn Koch, a graduate of Blanchester High School, created a Build Community Through Theater program to engage youth and help them develop confidence. Promoting drama education in her community, Carolyn invested her time and energy in creating a middle school drama camp, free of charge, for fifth to eighth grade students in the Blanchester Local School District.
The Girl Scouts Promise reads: ``On my honor, I will try to serve God and my country, to help people at all times, and to live by the Girl Scout Law.'' Carolyn and each of the other recipients of the Girl Scout Gold Award are the embodiment of this promise.
I also recognize the parents and Scout leaders who supported each Girl Scout on their path to this milestone. Their support made all the difference.
I congratulate the Girl Scouts, especially Carolyn. Her investment in our community is appreciated, and Ohio can't wait to see what is in store for her next.
Mr. Speaker, it is an honor to serve as the ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Today, I rise to recognize one veteran in particular, my great uncle, Manzo Takahashi.
Uncle Mon served in the legendary 442nd Infantry Battalion and gave his life in service to our Nation on this very day 80 years ago. He gave the last full measure of devotion while his family, my grandparents and parents, were incarcerated in camps simply because they were Japanese Americans.
Uncle Mon's story is just one of nearly 18,000 Japanese-American soldiers who embodied the motto Go for Broke. They risked everything for a country that had denied them so much because they believed in the promise of America.
Yet, that promise is fragile. The Trump administration erased the story of the 442nd from the Army's website and now seeks to gut the care that our veterans have earned.
We cannot let that happen. To truly honor our veterans, we must defend their legacy, protect their stories, and uphold the Nation that they fought to build.
Mr. Speaker, this morning, all 216 of my GOP colleagues, along with just four out of 212 Democrats, passed the SAVE Act, which is a bill that mandates proof of citizenship for those registering to vote.
I think most people think that is already required and mandated. Guess what. Even though it is in the Constitution and Federal law mandates that only citizens can vote, there are States that have systems in place that allow noncitizens to register. Guess what. They vote.
To address this problem, the SAVE Act also requires States to establish a program to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls. Just last month, even though Iowa did what it could to correct this problem, 277 noncitizens were on the voter rolls and 35 of them voted. That may not sound consequential, but there are races that are decided by less than that.
The votes against the SAVE Act today were nothing more than to allow noncitizens to vote in the United States of America. I think that falls into the category of the 80/20 position. All I know, Mr. Speaker, is a vote against the SAVE Act today was a vote against American citizens' voting rights.
Mr. Speaker, today, I am so proud to honor Isaac Samuelson, a young leader from Long Island and a member of Boy Scout Troop 613 based in West Hempstead.
Isaac spearheaded a project to preserve over 20 years' worth of religious texts, prayer books, and educational materials that had just been stashed away somewhere in his synagogue.
He, along with his family, friends, and Troop 613 members, spent hours organizing materials, ensuring that important religious materials could be preserved and used by future generations.
Isaac exemplifies the values of Boy Scouts and civic responsibility. He is a role model not just for young people in our community but for all of us.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Isaac for his leadership in our community. I am so proud to be his Representative.
Mr. Speaker, today marks 46 years since the Taiwan Relations Act became law.
This landmark bill has strengthened the partnership with Taiwan and shaped America's foreign policy in the Indo-Pacific region.
I will recognize that Taiwan is a trusted leader in freedom, democracy, and trade, and is also a needed partner in security against shared threats.
As chairwoman of the East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee, I have worked on bipartisan bills to give Taiwan a rightful seat at the table in international organizations, such as WHO and IMF. I led the charge to track and ensure efficient delivery of weapons that Taiwan has purchased from the United States.
This year, I introduced a bipartisan, bicameral bill to enhance U.S.- Taiwan economic and trade ties. Our partnership with Taiwan is more important than ever.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the President posted on social media: ``This is a great time to buy.'' Then, shortly after that, he paused his tariff plan, the very one that sent markets into a tailspin.
The market bounced back, although it is down again, and the President celebrated in the Oval Office with top financial executives. They celebrated at whose expense? The parents who watched their kids' college savings accounts get depleted, the retirees who rely on their investments to carry them through their remaining years, and the small business owners, including many in my district, who don't know how to plan and don't know how to keep the lights on at this point.
This wreaked havoc on millions of Americans, and those Americans also deserve to know about what happened and who profited off of it.
Did the financial executives know about what was going to happen? Did the President's donors know? Who knew and who profited from this ``great time to buy'' tweet and everything that was leading up to it?
We need a full investigation into what happened and who profited from it. The American people deserve better.
Mr. Speaker, today, I somberly rise to recognize the tremendous life and career of the Honorable Judge Michael J. Kramer from Ligonier, Indiana.
Judge Kramer was a well-recognized titan of the judicial branch in the State and beyond. Prior to his sudden passing last month, he achieved the legendary feat of becoming the longest serving judge in Noble County history.
His many accomplishments include being named Distinguished Hoosier by former Governor Frank O'Bannon, being named Volunteer of the Year by Drug-Free Indiana, and becoming Advocate of the Year for the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America.
Michael was serving as the chair of Drug-Free Noble County and was a member and former president of the Noble County Bar Association at the time of his passing.
Noble County was lucky to have lived under the unbiased and truth- seeking gavel of Judge Kramer. He will be sorely missed by his surviving family and the community he loved so much.
Mr. Speaker, despite his unexpected passing, the institutions he helped form and the community he made safer will continue to honor his memory and legacy. The world can use more men like Judge Michael Kramer.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with a heavy heart to honor the lives of Christopher Cramp and his beloved sons, David and Thomas, of Bristol Borough, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, a father and two sons bound by an unshakable love, and now mourned in the wake of an unfathomable tragedy.
Mr. Speaker, Chris Cramp was a man who chose compassion not as an occasional act but as a daily calling. Across every corner of our community, he was known not only for what he did but for how he did it.
With an unwavering commitment to lifting up those most in need, he was, in every sense of the word, a guardian of the vulnerable. To the homeless, to those struggling with mental health challenges, Chris was a lifeline. He met people in their lowest moments and helped them chart a path back to hope and dignity.
Even in his final moments as Thomas struggled, Chris and his son, David, did what they have always done: They responded with love.
In their courageous attempt to save him, they gave their own lives, a sacrifice that speaks to the very core of who they are as human beings.
Mr. Speaker, the magnitude of this loss has reverberated throughout Bristol Borough and our entire Bucks County community and far beyond. May we remember Chris for how he lived with open hands, an open heart, and a tireless devotion to the forgotten and to the unseen.
Today, Mr. Speaker, let us lift up the Cramp family in our prayers and let us commit to carrying forward Chris' legacy: to serve with compassion, to love without condition, and to never turn away from those who need us most.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Anne Evans, who was called home on February 12.
There are some people so important and central to a city and a community that their lives become intertwined. Anne Evans' life and the life of San Diego for the last 60 years were magnificently intertwined.
Anne was America's finest lady, and she made San Diego America's Finest City. Every major advancement in the last 60 years that made San Diego great, from developing our beloved Mission Bay to redeveloping our urban core, you could find Anne right in the middle of it.
Anne was a doer. She was fearless, brilliant, and a trailblazer, always anxious to make things better for everyone. This is why she became a leading philanthropist and gave back generously to the city she loved and taught her children to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, the city of San Diego's heart is broken with the passing of Anne. We would have never become America's Finest City without her. I pray for her family, her greatest legacy to our city, and I thank God for the life of Anne Evans, the guardian of San Diego.
Mr. Speaker, it is my honor today to wish the happiest of birthdays to my dear friend and brother in Christ Richard Lockamy.
I have known Richard for as long as I can remember. With age, I admire, respect, and appreciate the man Richard is, and that admiration is growing with every day.
Briefly, Richard grew up in Benson, North Carolina, the oldest of four. He attended Shaw University, followed by North Carolina State University, where he received a graduate degree in mathematics.
He married Lena Lockamy, with whom he shared 48 wonderful years of marriage before Lena passed into her eternal heavenly home nearly 5 years ago.
Richard and Lena had one son, Marcus, who, in his own right, is now a wonderful man.
Professionally, Richard has worked at some of the world's leading companies, and for decades he has taught at the high school and collegiate level.
Despite his many professional accomplishments, what truly sets Richard apart in my life and in the lives of many others is his faithful service to his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. With each day and every encounter, Richard's witness is as apparent as it is infectious. I saw this personally in the Raleigh men's class of Bible Study Fellowship where for nearly 40 years Richard met with dozens of men each week.
Mr. Speaker, today, House Republicans betrayed their mothers, their sisters, their daughters, and every woman in their life.
The so-called SAVE Act is an antiwoman, antidemocracy, voter suppression bill cloaked in lies about election integrity.
With this vote, House Republicans have jeopardized access to the ballot box for nearly 70 million American women. That isn't just a number; it is personal. It is the working mom in Sandy who can't afford to take time off work to go get paperwork. It is the woman in Portland whose name no longer matches her birth certificate and doesn't have $160 for a passport.
In the year 2025, I cannot believe I have to come to the House floor to argue for a woman's right to vote, but I will fight this Republican effort to disempower women today and every single day if I need to.
As a mother, I will not allow this country to continue to strip our daughters of their rights. We cannot force them to grow up in a world where they have fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers. I call on my Senate colleagues to show courage and defeat this despicable bill.
Mr. Speaker, during a committee hearing I attended yesterday, immigration was a topic that was brought up and it seemed apparent to me that the party on the other side of the aisle didn't understand why we have immigration laws.
First of all, it is a complete insult to the over 800,000 people who are sworn in as new citizens in this country annually. Secondly, we have to make sure the next generation of Americans here think like Americans and fit in our culture, which means they are law-abiding.
Just in general, the idea of having a million people breaking the law to come here, saying they need asylum when they don't, means they are not going to fit in with our culture.
Finally, I will share a word from Mark Reihl, back from my State legislative days, of the carpenters union. Again and again, he would come into my office saying that his guys, his union carpenters, were being undercut by people coming here illegally, and he demanded that we crack down on that. Illegal immigration drives down wages of Americans who are already here.
We heard that yesterday as the Democrats were claiming that if you kicked out the illegals the cost of things will go up, as they will.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in firm opposition to the Republican passage of the so-called SAVE Act, an act of legislative voter suppression that will make it much harder for most people to vote, the cornerstone of our democracy.
This bill, which just passed the Republican House, is designed to combat a nonexistent problem. Noncitizens are already not allowed to vote under Federal law. Instances of fraudulent, noncitizen voting are exceedingly rare. You are literally more likely to get struck by lightning than encounter noncitizen voting.
To address this made-up problem, Republicans have passed a draconian bill that would make it extremely difficult and costly for servicemembers, married women, and disadvantaged Americans to register to vote.
In most cases it requires a person to present their birth certificate matching a current ID. There are no exceptions for the 70 million American women who changed their married name.
This bill also mandates in-person visits to register to vote, disenfranchising potentially tens of thousands of deployed servicemembers, as well as Native Americans in rural areas like northern Arizona. This is a shocking act of voter suppression.
Mr. Speaker, House Republicans just passed their budget plan, President Trump's big, beautiful bill, again. The first version didn't cut enough from critical programs like Medicaid and SNAP. This budget is a direct attack on the working and middle classes, all while handing more than $7 trillion in tax breaks to billionaires.
Over 196,000 residents in my district are at risk of losing Medicaid coverage, including 73,000 children and 27,000 seniors in one district.
Approximately 74,000 people who count on SNAP may not be able to put food on the table.
People who are covered through the Affordable Care Act will see premiums rise by an average of almost $3,000 a year.
This is what President Trump called beautiful? It is anything but. This budget won't lower costs. These cuts, coupled with the President's thoughtless tariff policies, will make life more expensive for our neighbors. We are making a beeline to a MAGA recession and perhaps a MAGA depression.
This is reverse Robin Hood. Stealing from the lower and middle classes to benefit the wealthiest is un-American.
Mr. Speaker, I will take a moment today to share a story of why we are fighting and who we are fighting for.
Every day this administration claims they are trying to make America healthy again, and yet everything they are doing seems to indicate that they are trying to make us sicker again. They have fired 10,000 HHS health professionals. On this floor this week, the GOP passed a reconciliation package that would cut Medicaid by billions of dollars.
Every day my constituents ask how can this cruel agenda continue? Yesterday, I met with Rochelle Tittmann, a mom of four, who was diagnosed with cancer when she was 29 weeks pregnant 8 years ago. By the grace of God, her family, and the medical advancements made possible by the HHS, by the National Institutes of Health, by the CDC, she is here today, and her youngest daughter, Rae, is in the second grade.
These are the people we are fighting for. This is why we are fighting back, and this is why we oppose this cruel agenda.
Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, and I rise today to initially extend greetings to all, especially those who are traveling over this season of resurrection.
In my church--I am a Christian--we commemorate and celebrate Easter. I want to let everyone know that I appreciate those who do, and to those who do not, I understand.
I also give a special expression of gratitude and thanks to the thousands of persons who have literally called my office, sent cards, greeted me along life's way, to give me a pep talk, or to simply say to me: We appreciate what you are doing.
It means a lot to me to have people that I do not know, many of whom I will never meet and greet, to simply say to me: We want you to continue to do what you are doing.
As you know, Mr. Speaker, I have been censured. I have been censured. I was censured but not silenced. I was censured but not silenced. I am here today because I was censured but not silenced.
Today, as a person who still speaks truth to power, I also speak truth about power. Speaking truth to power is not as difficult as it is to speak truth about power. To speak truth to power, you but only have to go to power and say: There is a problem, and you and I can solve it. That is speaking truth to power.
When you speak truth about power, you go to power and say: There is a problem, and you are it.
I speak truth about power and to power. Today, I am going to speak truth to power as it relates to the President's tariffs.
One has to ponder why the President of the United States of America would put so much emphasis on these tariffs, emphasizing the tariffs for many years, as I am told, but put emphasis on the tariffs to the extent that he nearly drove the economy into a ditch, a colloquial way of saying driving the economy into an area wherein it would suffer greatly.
The President put a lot of emphasis on this. He was just obsessed with the tariffs. We have to ask ourselves why was he obsessed with the tariffs. I am going to answer this question, and I am going to answer this question as it relates to the President's obsession and how it will impact you. It is important for you to understand how this obsession would impact you, how it would impact billionaires, how it would impact your life. I will answer the question how it will impact you.
It is important for me to call to your attention that the President has a book that you are familiar with. It is styled ``The Art of the Deal.''
Well, I introduce you to the President's art of the steal. A steal can be an underhanded way of acquiring something. This is how the art of the steal works. The President, with his tariffs,
This tariff is collected at the point of entry into the United States of goods that an importer desires to purvey in this country. He wants to sell it, she wants to sell it, or they want to sell it. They want to sell these goods, so they have to pay this tariff. This tariff has to be paid that the President would add to the goods. Let's say you have something that costs $40,000 coming into the country, a tariff of 10 percent, so that is going to give you an additional $4,000. This additional $4,000 is collected at the point of entry, and the person importing has to pay the tariff.
This is the Trump tariff tax at this point. When that tariff is paid, that money goes into the Treasury of the United States of America, the same place that your tax dollars will go, into the Treasury of the United States of America. The tariff is collected at the port of entry. Let's say $4,000 on a $40,000 item--it is a 10 percent tariff--and when it is collected, it goes again, important to remember, into the Treasury.
Now, that person who imports and has this additional tax now to deal with will do what you will see when you buy something and you are in a State that has a sales tax. You will see that the item costs X amount of dollars. If it is something that costs $40,000 and there is a 10 percent sales tax, then you will see that there is a tax on there, a sales tax of 10 percent, or $4,000.
Well, here is where the stealth comes in. Here is where the art of the steal begins. When the person sells that $40,000 item and has to add that additional $4,000 to it, that person becomes somewhat of a tax collector for the Trump tariff-tax steal. That person who purchased this item, brought it into the country, paid $40,000 for it, and then had to pay $4,000 more, making it $44,000, adds that $4,000 to the product when you buy it. That $4,000 is added.
The unfortunate thing is that it is not done the way a sales tax is done. It is not noted that you are paying it. You pay it because it is a part of buying the product, but there is nothing that will say this is the Trump tariff-tax steal. It won't be there. It is a very stealthy way of doing business.
Most people don't realize that they are paying this tariff, this tax, this steal, if you will. They do, but, again, we really haven't gotten to the essence of what is important here. That money, that $4,000 that was paid at the point of entry, is now collected from you because the person who is selling, purveying, does not want to pay that because they are operating possibly on a thin profit margin. They already have an overhead that they have to consider, so you pay it.
Now it goes into the Treasury, and here is where it gets really stealthy. The steal gets stealthy because at some point, the President is desiring to say that he gave you a tax break, that you got a tax break from the President.
Well, here is the truth. That tax break that you think you are getting or may get and the billionaires will get, that is the money that came out of your pocket.
The President was desiring to get this huge tariff because that would be more money in the coffer coming out of your pocket so that it could then be--some of it--you don't get back dollar for dollar--you might get some of it back. You may not get any depending on your tax circumstance. The billionaires will get plenty. You may not get any.
This is a stealthy way of doing business. It is a steal. This is why it is the art of the steal that has been developed by this President, so that he can take money out of your pocket, put it into the Treasury, and then say later on: You now have a tax break.
I think that people who understand this will understand why tariffs are not always a great benefit to you. They can be a benefit in some circumstances, but remember, the President was putting a tariff on some 90-plus countries. He was putting a tariff on any and every country that he could find a means by which he could tax with a tariff.
Some places didn't have people to actually tax with a tariff, just animal life, but he was desperate because he wants to get money into the coffer, the Treasury of the United States of America, so that he can then say to you: You have now a tax break.
Some of you may--billionaires will--have a tax break, but it is really money out of your pocket that is being returned to you in a diminished fashion. This is the art of the steal as is being perfected by our President.
Our President understands also that there are other ways to get money into the coffer, the Treasury. You can get money into the Treasury by simply having Medicare or Medicaid--have some cuts into these two programs, these two healthcare programs.
This can be done because there has been an indication in this House that some $880 billion will be cut or should be cut or attempted to be cut--I am going to fight it--from the committee that has jurisdiction over Medicaid and Medicare.
You can't cut $880 billion out of the appropriations that will emanate from that committee without cutting into Medicaid or Medicare. You have to do it.
Well, when that is done, that money goes into the Treasury. Now, you add the stealth tax, which was a tariff, and you add the money that you are saving now by putting people who need healthcare in harm's way as it relates to their healthcare, put that money in.
When I say people who need it, I am talking about people who have long-term illnesses and seniors, dual-eligible persons who may qualify for Medicaid and Medicare, so they need these long-term hospitalization programs available to them. That can be cut.
We are talking about the approximately 40 percent of children in this country who benefit from Medicaid at some point in their lives. That can be cut.
These cuts that would impact children and seniors would then go into the coffer. Again, add this to the stealth tariff tax, and you have more money that you can now pass back to people who are going to get a break and say here is what the government is sending you by way of cutting taxes and giving you additional money.
Friends, I conclude that this is a very stealthy way of doing business when people don't always understand. I believe that if people truly understand how the President is amassing this tax break for billionaires, I think they are going to be exceedingly upset.
There are many ways to express how upset you are. You can do this always peacefully. Many are going to protest. Others will do it at the polls. A good many of my colleagues who are participating as persons who are aiding and abetting, if you will, many of them will find, as they are finding out currently, that they are going to be received in less than a very warm way when they find themselves having townhall meetings. They are already experiencing this. That is why many of them are not having their townhall meetings.
They are going to experience it also when we have an election because people aren't going to forget this. They are not going to forget how the President desperately tried to tax them so that he could then return money, some to them if they were qualified but much to billionaires who would qualify.
This is, in my opinion, a shameful and disgraceful way for the President to tell people that they are going to get a tax break when it is really their money that is being returned to them by way of this tariff.
I would also remind people that as we move forward, I have indicated that the filing of Articles of Impeachment is imminent. We are currently in a countdown to impeachment.
Now, those who know me know that I wouldn't say this if I were not going to move on with it, and I am. We will have Articles of Impeachment filed.
I cannot tell you what the vote will be. There are some who would say you shouldn't file the Articles of Impeachment if you can't win. No, you need to know where people stand. You really do. We need to know. I heard a Member just yesterday indicate that we need to have a certain thing brought before the House to understand where people are. It is not unusual for us to have votes to find out where people are on certain issues, and this is no exception.
The first Articles of Impeachment may not succeed, and the second may
I also know that should Democrats reclaim the House and the Senate by margins that are sufficient to not only impeach but to convict, I believe that the President can be removed from office.
He talks of having another term. Well, Mr. President, you are not going to have another term. That is not going to happen. I know that you have incited persons to come to the Capitol, the citadel of democracy, and engage in an insurrection. I don't know what you have up your sleeve, but I do know that we will prevent you from having a third term, and the best way to do it is to not have you finish this term. The best way to do this is to have you impeached and convicted and removed from office. It can be done. I am telling you, it can be done.
The law says it can be done. We but only have to have the will to do it. The way is before us. The will is what is necessary to implement the way to an impeachment and a removal of Donald John Trump as President of the United States of America. It would be the appropriate thing because he is unfit to be President, unfit to enforce the laws of the land in such a way as to bring honor to the process--unfit.
When you consistently, repeatedly flout the laws, flout the notion of due process, when you have agents of the State approach a female and approach her with persons who would surround her, and then pull up a mask, and then take her away, all in plainclothes, masks, I don't believe that the American people want to see that kind of episode take place in this country. It looks like we have secret police.
America is not a country with secret police that come and take you away, away from your home to some distant State where you are not known, where you don't have resources, and they don't give you any due process. This is not America.
The President is destroying the lawful, judicious processes that we have enjoyed. He is chipping away at them. If the President can do it for a person who is here for whatever reasons, the President can do it to any one of us, especially when the President believes that you don't have to allow a person to say: ``Hey, you have the wrong person. I didn't do that.'' It doesn't matter because the President believes that he has the sole authority, by and through his agents, to determine who can stay and who must leave. Unfortunately, someone who should be here is not here as a result of the President's behavior.
The President is harmful to the processes that we have enjoyed in this country. He is unfit to be President. He is also unfit because he disrespects the judiciary. When he loses a case, it is always the judge's fault.
What is amazing to me is that I have colleagues who are buying into that, that it is the judge's fault. Let's impeach the judge because it is the judge's fault. It is always the judge. It is never his fault. It is always the judge.
When we start this process of having the person who holds the highest office in the land continually say that judges are not fair when they are dealing with him and things that he would have done, when we allow that, we are now sending a signal to the rest of society that the judges are the reason why we are not succeeding, the reason why we can't have whatever it is that we want and can't acquire, and we have to take it to court. It is always the judges.
At some point, people will have a disrespect for the law and the process that will cause others to disrespect the country. People invest in this country because they know that we have a good judiciary, that it is a process that has been in place and that will be honored. They invest in this country also because they know that your money is safe here. You invest in our bills, our bonds. It is safe.
We have stability except when you do as the President has just done, and that is tariff some 90 countries and do it in such a way as to cause people to start to equivocate when it comes to our bonds, our notes.
When that happens, you can see how the President backs off. He understood finally, at last, that he was making a terrible mistake, and he backed off. He has extended what he calls a 90-day pause, but I don't think he is going to go back to where he was. I don't think he will. Even he understands that he was making a serious mistake.
Here is the problem with that mistake: He has hurt the brand, the American brand. He has hurt the image of the country. He has put the country in a position such that people may no longer think that this is the safest place for their investment dollars. They may not want to buy our bonds as readily. If they don't buy them readily, that would then make it difficult for us to sell them to pay bills.
The President is hurting the image of the United States of America. We are now seen as a country that doesn't honor its word. The President negotiated a trade deal with Canada and Mexico; he breaks the trade deal. The President says that he wants Canada to be the 51st State; Canada is not about to become the 51st State.
I will be quite candid with you, I admire the way the Canadians have made it perfectly clear to the President that this won't happen. Someone has to stand up to him.
He wants to take Greenland. He wants to make Gaza a resort. The President has to understand that he is not a king. He is not the emperor. He is not a dictator. He has awesome power, but he doesn't have the power to just go around people and take what he wants. He doesn't have that kind of power, and we can't let him have that kind of power.
Mr. Speaker, it is important for us to move to impeachment because impeachment is the means by which a reckless, ruthless President can be brought into check. This is the balance that we have. When all else fails, when the Congress majority refuses to act, and when he disregards the orders of the court, impeachment is still available.
Mr. Speaker, I intend to bring Articles of Impeachment. I don't know what the vote would be. My guess is that you are not going to get the vote required, but you will get the opportunity to see who believes in what we have said.
We said that the President was a detriment to democracy. We talked about how he would harm the country if he got back into office. Let's find out if we meant that. One of the ways we will find out is with Articles of Impeachment.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to serve my country. I am proud to be an American. It means something to me. I want to protect what this country stands for in a positive way, the positive image that our country has had. I am trying to change the negative image to a positive, but I want to protect that. It means something to me to be an American.
Mr. Speaker, I want this country to be the one that people look up to, as opposed to frowned upon. Many do now because of the way our President behaves.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to say that I am censured but not silent, and I yield back 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 today to highlight ten ways in which the State of California is currently under Federal investigation. In particular, the Newsom administration is under Federal investigation.
The New York Times recently ran a story on this topic with the headline, ``Trump Takes Aim at California Six Times in 24 Hours.''
The question was asked: Why is the administration targeting California? They call it a multipronged assault on California that has begun in earnest. That is actually the wrong question. Why the administration is targeting California is the wrong question. The appropriate question is: Why is California so flagrantly violating Federal law in so many different ways?
In the article, the junior Senator in our State, Adam Schiff, is quoted as
Of course, that is not it at all. Protecting the civil rights of Californians is not weaponizing the Federal Government. It what is the Federal Government is supposed to do and what it is required to do under established law.
What Senator Schiff and others are so upset about is that they are used to one-party rule in California being absolutely unchecked. They are used to radicalism and having absolutely no counterweight. They are used to Governor Newsom. His only motivation is his own political self- promotion. He has a supermajority legislature and other statewide- elected officials that simply go along with whatever he says or does, regardless of how much damage it does to our State and regardless of how clearly it violates Federal law.
When The New York Times asked my opinion for this article, I said: ``Extreme policies and unchecked one-party rule have lowered the quality of life across our State. All Californians will benefit from greater accountability. We need balance and common sense.''
Mr. Speaker, I will discuss today the ten ways in which Federal investigations are restoring that sense of balance and common sense and assuring compliance with the law.
Number one is on the issue of men in women's sports. The State has continued to be defiant. Recently, the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights announced a direct investigation into the California Interscholastic Federation because of its refusal to follow antidiscrimination laws related to girls and women's sports. This includes the possibility of allowing male athletes to compete in women's sports and use women's intimate facilities.
Governor Newsom has received a letter from U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. The letter warns the Governor that California could lose Federal funds if the State continues allowing transgender athletes to play in girls' and women's sports.
Secretary of Education McMahon wrote: ``I am officially asking you to inform this Department whether you will remind schools in California to comply with Federal law by protecting sex-separated spaces and activities.''
She also wrote: ``Allowing participation in sex-separated activities based on `gender identity' places schools at risk of Title IX violations and loss of Federal funding. As Governor, you have a duty to inform California school districts of this risk.''
Interestingly enough, Governor Newsom actually recently stated that he believes it is unfair for the State to allow men to compete in women's sports. Yet, he has taken absolutely no action to stop this unlawful practice.
Mr. Speaker, the second ongoing investigation relates to California's policy of forcing school districts and schools to keep secrets from parents about their own children. The U.S. Department of Education's Student Privacy Policy Office has launched an investigation into the California Department of Education for alleged violations of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, FERPA, which gives parents the right to access their children's educational data.
It is alleged the California Department of Education has abdicated the responsibilities FERPA imposes because of a new California State law that prohibits school personnel from disclosing a child's gender identity to that child's parents.
What happened in California is there are a number of school districts that have said that they are simply going to hide this information from parents. They will not tell parents if their child changes their name or pronouns or anything like that.
There are other districts that say that this is not right. We actually want to make sure we are being open and transparent with parents. They passed their own policy, saying, no, our policy is that we believe that parents have a right to know this.
What the State then did is they started suing these districts. They tried to get legal judgments against them, saying they were required under law to lie to parents about their children. Fortunately, those lawsuits are being rejected.
The State legislature then followed up with a statewide law, saying that it is now the policy of the State that they are not allowed to communicate this information with parents. The school districts are not allowed to have any policy that allows them to communicate this information with parents.
Mr. Speaker, think about the absurdity of this. In California, teachers are forced to use one name and one set of pronouns with a student in class. Then their parents come in for a conference, and they are supposed to switch names and switch pronouns and doctor their assignments and the names written on them. This has actually been done in documented cases in California.
Thankfully, this Federal law of protecting the privacy right of students and the right of parents to know this information is on the books. Accordingly, the Department of Education has launched a Federal investigation.
Mr. Speaker, the third ongoing investigation relates to the issue of racial discrimination in California higher education. The Department of Justice under Attorney General Bondi is investigating several California universities to assess compliance with the 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that ended affirmative action in college admissions. This is notable because not only is this now the supreme law of the land, per the recent Supreme Court decision, that there must be equal access but it is also overwhelmingly the expressed will of California voters.
Just a few years ago, in 2020, the supermajority legislature tried to repeal an existing State constitutional provision that forbade racial discrimination in college admissions. They put it directly on the ballot. By a supermajority, they passed a measure to put it on the ballot. The people of California said no.
Despite the fact the campaign for this initiative had a massive 10-1 spending advantage, the people of California voted 57 percent to 43 percent to say, no, we want equality under law to continue to be the policy of our State. This investigation by Attorney General Bondi is not only about assuring compliance with Federal law but it is also going to protect the clearly expressed will of the people of California.
Mr. Speaker, the fourth investigation relates to the crisis of anti-Semitism at our universities. The Federal Task Force to Combat Anti-Semitism has announced that the Department of Justice has opened a civil pattern or practice investigation into the University of California under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The investigation will assess whether the University of California has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination based on race, religion, and national origin against its professors, staff, and other employees by allowing an anti-Semitic hostile work environment to exist on its campuses.
Attorney General Bondi said: ``This Department of Justice will always defend Jewish Americans, protect civil rights, and leverage our resources to eradicate institutional anti-Semitism in our Nation's universities.''
We have seen over the last 1\1/2\ years or so absolutely abhorrent, outright anti-Semitism at many universities throughout the country, including at California universities, which our Committee on Education and the Workforce did a lot of work to expose through a number of hearings.
While there have been some positive reforms that have occurred on some campuses, there are still many ongoing and very severe problems. These issues are aided and abetted in a lot of cases by university faculty and administrations. This is an investigation into the full gambit of that activity.
Then there is a related set of investigations that are looking at the extent to which students who are here, international students, are actually working to advance not only anti-Semitic but pro-Hamas activity.
Related to all of these anti-Semitic incidents on university campuses, we saw illegal activity with encampments that violated the law, violated university policies, and violated the civil rights of other students. We saw buildings being taken over, and we have seen connections between these activities and the agenda of Hamas and groups affiliated with Hamas.
Recently, the administration has revoked about 100 student visas at universities across California, including the University of California, Berkeley, which is part of a broader assessment of individuals who are involved in activities deemed contrary to U.S. interests.
This is actually a small number--100 out of 140,000 international students--that are in California. We do know that there are people who are here and not from this country. They have participated in these illegal activities because, as the President's order cites, Federal law bars noncitizens from being in the U.S. if they support terrorism.
Any connection with pro-Hamas activity falls under the purview of those statutes. Indeed, the executive order from the White House quotes the President as saying that his intention is to deport Hamas sympathizers and revoke student visas.
In a similar vein, UCLA been sued in Federal court in a case alleging that it enabled protesters at an encampment to block Jewish students from accessing certain campus pathways. To the extent that folks who are here on a visa were involved in that sort of illegal, pro-terrorist activity, the administration is doing an assessment to take appropriate action.
Mr. Speaker, the sixth investigation against some of the insane and potentially illegal policies in California relates to high-speed rail which is the biggest public infrastructure failure in United States history.
I was at Union Station in L.A. a couple of weeks ago. We were with Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy. He announced this investigation specifically into the Federal money that has gone into high-speed rail.
The review that we launched on that day will help determine whether roughly $4 billion in taxpayer money should remain committed to the project to build high-speed rail in the California Central Valley between Merced and Bakersfield.
I have also requested an investigation by the FBI into how exactly it is that California has so far spent some $17 billion on this project, which was approved in 2008. We are talking over 15 years, and it has yet to lay any track. At this point, even The New York Times has said that the project isn't going to be completed this century at the current pace.
The overall cost has ballooned over $130 billion. That is more than $100 billion more than it was supposed to have been. The whole thing was supposed to be completed by now, per the initial projections, but at this point, even the first segment from Bakersfield to Merced, a very modest segment, they are saying isn't even going to be completed by 2033. Indeed, just last week, there was a report from the nonpartisan legislative analyst that there is another $9 billion funding gap, and they are continuing to rely on Federal funding.
This is an investigation that is ongoing, and I fully expect it will result in those funds being clawed back and hopefully then used on infrastructure projects in California that will actually serve to move people and goods, create jobs that have positive economic value, and actually be helpful in improving the quality of life for folks in our State.
The seventh ongoing investigation relates to California's cap-and- trade program. An executive order from the President has directed Attorney General Bondi to identify State and local acts that may be unconstitutional or preempted by Federal law. It singles out California's cap-and-trade program, which sets limits on greenhouse gas emissions and then has companies buy and sell credits.
As the order says, California punishes carbon use by adopting impossible caps on the amount of carbon that businesses may use, all but forcing businesses to pay large sums to trade carbon credit to meet California's radical requirements.
What is the result of this? Even as we have seen gas prices that have gotten much lower across the entire country, Californians continue to pay astronomical prices when they fill up their cars. Indeed, California is now some $1.60 above the national average. We have the highest gas prices in the country, higher than even Hawaii.
The major cause of that is the State's taxes and regulations and other requirements, foremost among them being this cap-and-trade program, which adds substantially to the price of each gallon of gas.
The eighth ongoing investigation relates to the homelessness crisis in California. California is the national leader in homelessness. It is not even close. We have roughly one-half of the unsheltered homeless in the entire country, despite spending absolutely staggering amounts of money. Indeed, over the course of the last 5 years, we have seen $24 billion spent on homelessness, and homelessness has continued to go up significantly.
A recent audit actually found that the State has lost track of the money and can't even tell us where it went or what outcomes it has produced. Now, the new United States Attorney for the Central District of California, Bill Essayli, has announced the formation of a homelessness, fraud, and corruption task force, which will investigate fraud, waste, abuse, and corruption involving funds allocated toward the eradication of homelessness within the seven-county jurisdiction of the Central District of California.
The task force will be comprised of Federal prosecutors from the major fraud section, the public corruption and civil rights section, and the civil division's civil fraud section of the U.S. Attorney's Office. It will specifically look into what is going on in Los Angeles, where recently a court-ordered audit found that homelessness services provided by the city and county were ``disjointed'' and contained ``poor data quality and integration.''
There is a lot of Federal money at stake and at issue, by the way. During COVID, the Federal Government sent $100 million in emergency aid to L.A. County to address homelessness, and last month, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded more than $200 million to address homelessness in L.A. Now, there is a Federal investigation ongoing led by the U.S. Attorney's Office into exactly what has happened to all of this money.
The ninth ongoing investigation relates to concealed carry. As part of a broader review of restrictive firearms-related laws in California and other States, the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division has announced an investigation into the L.A. County Sheriff's Department to determine whether it is engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving ordinary, law-abiding Californians of their Second Amendment rights.
The release from the Attorney General's Office notes that a recent Federal court decision found that the law and facts were clearly in favor of two private plaintiffs who challenged the lengthy, 18-month delays that the L.A. County Sheriff's Department had imposed when processing their concealed handgun license applications and that the Civil Rights Division has reason to believe that those two plaintiffs are not the only ones in this county of some 8 million people experiencing long delays that are unduly burdening or effectively denying the Second Amendment rights of the people of Los Angeles.
The release from the Attorney General goes on to note the ways in which the Second Amendment rights of Californians have been unduly burdened in countless ways. They call California a particularly egregious offender. In response to recent Supreme Court caselaw, California enacted new legislation to further restrict the ability of ordinary, law-abiding Californians to keep and bear arms.
Many California localities appear to be imposing additional burdens beyond those required by California State law, including by subjecting ordinary, law-abiding Californians to expensive fees
Now, there will be some counterweight to these measures that are restricting the rights of Californians. In fact, there was even a recent proposal in the legislature that went to the very core of the Second Amendment that would have said that you are no longer allowed to defend yourself against an intruder who breaks into your own home. Luckily, that bill was defeated, Mr. Speaker, but it just shows you how far California has gone from what is protected by the Constitution.
Finally, of course, there is ongoing Federal action, this being the 10th Federal action related to California, when it comes to sanctuary jurisdictions. The Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, pursuant to an executive order from the President, are, to the maximum extent possible under Federal law, evaluating and undertaking any lawful actions to ensure that so-called sanctuary jurisdictions which seek to interfere with the lawful exercise of Federal law enforcement operations do not receive access to Federal funds.
Further, the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, per the terms of the order, are evaluating and undertaking any other lawful actions, criminal or civil, that they deem warranted based on any such jurisdiction's practices that interfere with the enforcement of Federal law.
When it comes to sanctuary policies, California has been the very worst offender in the country. The State has a sanctuary State policy that was passed in 2017 and is responsible for many tragedies that have been documented throughout our State. We even have jurisdictions like Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco that were already sanctuary jurisdictions on top of being within a sanctuary State but are now even going further. One of them is even passing what they are calling a super sanctuary jurisdiction ordinance.
Those of us who represent districts in California that are not sanctuary jurisdictions have also asked the administration to be sure to recognize those counties and jurisdictions that are, in good faith, trying to comply with Federal law, very much unlike jurisdictions like Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco.
These are 10 ways in which we see, finally, something of a check on the runaway lawlessness of the Newsom administration and a number of jurisdictions in California.
In Congress, we are very much a partner in those efforts. Indeed, I am working on a number of measures here in Congress in the House of Representatives that are seeking to push back on the radical, harmful policies of the Newsom administration.
For example, we recently introduced legislation to overturn Newsom's ban on gas-powered vehicles.
I have introduced legislation called the No Medicaid for Illegal Immigrants Act, which will seek to preserve Medi-Cal benefits for American citizens at a time when the policy of expanding those benefits to everyone in the State illegally is literally bankrupting the system.
In addition to Secretary Duffy's investigation into high-speed rail's staggering failures, I have introduced legislation to ensure that the high-speed rail project will be ineligible for any Federal funding going forward.
California has a long way to go toward restoring sanity, but these actions are very important steps, and I look forward to following these investigations as they protect the civil rights of Californians and protect our citizens against truly radical and failed policies.
Mr. Speaker, today, I am excited to announce new legislation that I am introducing, along with Representative Claudia Tenney, called the High-Quality Charter Schools Act, which is going to be among the most significant pieces of legislation for school choice that we have had in this country in a very long time.
What it will do is create a new tax credit for charitable contributions to nonprofit charter school organizations. Specifically, it will establish a 75 percent Federal tax credit for qualified charitable contributions made to nonprofit charter school organizations with a proven record of success, incentivizing donations to support the development of more high-quality charter schools.
This could be truly significant, allowing perhaps millions more kids in this country to gain access to charter schools. That is because the reality that we see right now is that we have very successful charter schools that get tremendous results for students.
For example, Success Academy in New York is the number one school system in the entire State, but there are a limited number of seats and it costs a lot of money to start a new school. A lot of times, especially in States like California or New York, you are disadvantaged under State law. We have politicians like Gavin Newsom or the supermajority in California who do everything possible to try to stop us from helping our students succeed.
There are all of these obstacles that exist, often under State law, as well as the inherent obstacles that exist to starting up an enterprise as complicated and complex as a school, and the Federal charter school grant program has actually been critical to helping a number of charter schools start.
What this legislation seeks to do is to help those that have proven to be successful to expand and replicate their model. That is because the ones that are really successful often have very long waiting lists. We can have thousands of kids on a waiting list for a school.
By the way, charter schools are required to conduct lotteries. They can't show any sort of favoritism in their admissions or anything like that. They have to be open to all, so they have a lottery. If a student doesn't win the lottery, unfortunately, then he or she can't go to the school. If their local neighborhood school is not a good one, then the child misses out on the opportunity to go to a high-quality school and has to end up going to a low-quality school.
The best and most effective way to expand educational opportunity and excellence in America today is to facilitate the expansion and replication of charter schools that have proven to be successful.
That is precisely what this legislation does, and I am hopeful we will get it passed into law, perhaps even as part of the reconciliation process as a way to start to turn around this sharp decline in education outcomes that, unfortunately, is posing such a risk to our country's future.
I look forward to hopefully getting bipartisan support, seeing it passed into law, and seeing what it will do for so many kids across this country.
Mr. Speaker, this week, I introduced, along with my colleague Jay Obernolte, as well as Representatives Calvert, Fong, Valadao, and Issa, the Election Results Accountability Act, which will restore some measure of public trust in our elections.
The problem in California, one of many problems with our elections in California, is that they take forever. Not only do voters have about a month to cast their votes, but it then takes about a month to actually count the votes, with updates being made periodically throughout what is called a monthlong canvassing period. You see results that flip. Someone is ahead on election night, but somehow, 3 weeks later, they are behind. If you are in a tight race, Mr. Speaker, you are just living and dying with each update: Am I going to be the next city council or school board member?
It limits your ability to plan, Mr. Speaker, because you don't know if you are going to be coming into office or you need to find some other job or if you will be planning to run again, whatever the case may be. The voters don't know who is going to be their Representative when they should.
It also just fosters a sense of distrust in the process, and it is, frankly, embarrassing to our State. Every other State manages to get its act together. Most of them can give us the results on election night. That is kind of the way it is supposed to work, Mr. Speaker. You go to the voting booth, cast your vote, and find out who won that night.
Mr. Speaker, you don't find out a month later and have it change several times in the process. This is beyond embarrassing for California, and it is time we brought some accountability.
We introduced this legislation, the Election Results Accountability Act, which will require all States to count and publicly report no less than 90 percent of ballots cast in Federal elections within 72 hours of polls closing.
Additionally, it mandates that States complete the ballot count and certify the final results within 2 weeks of election day.
These are not onerous requirements. Ninety percent of the votes within 3 days need to be counted, and we need to have the results within 2 weeks. Our State should be more than capable of complying with this.
By the way, even though we are requiring it in Federal elections, that likely will mean we will get the results up and down the ballot, as well. This, along with measures that we passed today, the SAVE Act to require proof of citizenship in order to vote, as well as an initiative that I think is likely to be presented to California voters in the near future to require voter ID, will go a long way toward ensuring election security, election integrity, and the sense of democratic legitimacy on which our State and country's political identity depends.
Mr. Speaker, this last week, I introduced legislation in the House to reverse California's ban on gas-powered vehicles. This is a special resolution under the Congressional Review Act that provides a fast-track procedure not subject to a Senate filibuster to overturn an agency action.
In this case, it is the action of the Biden administration that gave Gavin Newsome special permission to ban gas cars in California.
This is a measure that will affect almost everyone in our State. It is set to go into effect in 2035. It is utterly unrealistic, and yet, it has not been subject to a vote of the people, a vote of the State legislature, or a vote of the United States Congress.
That will change soon.
This measure, I believe, will pass hopefully with bipartisan support, and it will restore the ability of Californians to select the vehicle of their choice. It will also prevent massive increases in costs for Californians who are already burdened with the highest cost of living, the highest gas prices, the highest energy prices, and much more of any State in the country.
I think this is a pretty commonsense measure. Unfortunately, California has dragged a lot of other States along with it with this measure, so it is truly an issue of national concern, as well.
I look forward to seeing this passed to reverse the Biden administration's waiver under the Clean Air Act for California, and I think this will go a long way toward restoring some sanity to our State.
Mr. Speaker, this last week as chair of the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education that covers K-12 education, I held a very important hearing on the topic of artificial intelligence in education.
Now, we are in the midst of a truly unprecedented period in which AI is advancing at a mind-boggling rate in terms of its capabilities, and there is truly no end to this progress in sight. We see all of the leading labs introducing new models it seems like every day that demonstrate increasingly astonishing capabilities.
There are a lot of risks and concerns that tend to come to mind when people see this progress and a lot of, I think, legitimate fears as it relates to AI and its impact on society. It is very important that we are attentive to these concerns in taking whatever measures we can to make sure we get these questions right.
I think that it is equally important that we make sure that the benefits of this technology as it exists now and as it is likely to exist in the future are understood, as well.
I think that there is, frankly, far less dialogue and conversation on a national level than there should be about the absolutely enormous changes that could well be ahead of us.
I wanted to use this hearing to examine one particular domain where AI holds the potential to dramatically expand opportunity and benefit our country and bring unprecedented opportunities to American kids across the country.
I am a former high school teacher, and we have in this country truly shameful achievement gaps when it comes to the educational opportunities that are available to kids depending on their ZIP codes. In my view, much of that is as a result of failed policies, none more so than in California, which has just about the widest achievement gaps of any State in the country.
We absolutely need to have policy reforms that bring accountability, that empowers parents, that expands school of choice, and that supports teachers among many other policy reforms.
The correct use of artificial intelligence could go a long way in itself toward bridging these achievement gaps. Not only that, I believe that it will very soon be possible for any child in our country to receive a richer educational experience than any child did just a few years ago. This is because of the absolutely incredible capabilities that are now accessible to anyone for free or at very little cost on a computer or smartphone.
We saw during our hearing examples of how these possibilities are already being realized in many classrooms across America. You could have, for example, a personalized tutor who knows just about everything there is to know, who knows everything about your own strengths and weaknesses, your own interests, and who engages with you directly to learn any topic.
Now, this is no small matter because studies show that having access to a high-quality tutor is one of the most important interventions that improves educational outcomes by a significant degree, potentially moving you a half standard deviation or so or giving you more than a years' worth of additional learning in any given year if you have access to a high-quality tutor.
Well, with AI tools, any child will have that access at a level that has never been known before in a more personalized way than has ever been known before. What is more, these tools allow for learning across different modalities through text, through images, through voice, and can engage with different students in different ways.
Just to give you another example, they can take on the form of different characters. When you are learning history, you could actually have a conversation with an animated version of a historical figure. If you are reading a book, you can actually have a conversation with a character in the book. If you are learning physics, maybe you can learn physics from a reanimated version of Einstein himself.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
When you look at the technologies that are advancing when it comes to augmented reality, when it comes to VR, we are already seeing ways in which AI is being deployed for sort of career training-type learning, whether it is welding or other types of careers or trades where these environments can be simulated in very realistic ways to help students learn regardless of whether they go to a school or you can get hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of expensive machinery.
I think that we are still just scratching the surface of what is possible here. One of the suggestions at our hearing is that we need to continue to facilitate ways of sharing best practices; importantly, as well, when it comes to how these tools can be used by teachers because a teacher's role is as important as ever, potentially more important, in the sense that having access to AI tools that can assist students in individual ways actually frees teachers in many ways to provide the sort of mentorship and instruction and teaching that only a caring human can.
We saw examples in our hearing of how AI tools have been used to assist with lesson planning, have been used to help grade papers, or to provide direct immediate feedback to students to help with the assessment process and many other ways, as well.
For those who think that the AI tool is somehow going to change the role of the teacher, these tools can change the role of the teacher but I think in very positive ways, as well.
Of course there are risks in this domain, as well, when it comes to academic dishonesty, when it comes to the potential of further absorbing students into digital worlds and thereby exacerbating some of the harms we have seen in excessive use of smart phones. All of those things we need to be very mindful of, as well, which is why following
This is one area where I think there truly is unbounded potential, and I am looking forward to working with our subcommittee to try to assist districts across the country and unlocking that potential.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to mourn the passing of Bob Phelan of Modesto, a valued and beloved member of my congressional staff for these past 3 years. His was a remarkable life and one that should inspire every American to realize the opportunities that freedom provides.
When Bob's father died, he was forced to drop out of high school to work odd jobs to support their family. For nearly 10 years, he worked as a crab cracker at Alioto's restaurant on Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco.
Searching for a better life, he came to Modesto where his outgoing personality made him an ideal salesman and a manager for such well- known companies as Keebler cookies and Earl Scheib.
There in Modesto, he met his wife of 31 years, Alta, and raised their family.
When his son joined the Navy in the Gulf war, Bob's attention turned to politics. He became a devotee of Rush Limbaugh and began working for local candidates. He ended up starting his own political consulting firm. Ultimately, he served as a trusted adviser to state assemblymen and then-State senator and also county supervisor Tom Berryhill for nearly 15 years.
When reapportionment brought my district into Stanislaus County, I was fortunate to bring him into my congressional office where he served ably as my district representative.
His work ethic, his love for people, his sunny disposition, and his simple decency made him an exemplary figure in our community.
He was always the picture of fitness and health until he was diagnosed last year with cancer. He never let that slow him down, and until the very end he continued to attend to his duties.
He was an exemplary father, husband, grandfather, citizen, and human being, the kind of person who holds a community together even through trying times, and he will be particularly missed.
Mr. Speaker, it was a great loss for our community, a great loss for our office, but most of all, a great loss for his family. We mourn his passing today.
Mr. Speaker, on May 17, the College of the Canyons Foundation will honor Marlee Lauffer with the 2025 Silver Spur Community Service Award in recognition of her longtime philanthropic work.
I first met Marlee as a high school student leader in Tustin, and she was my first and only choice as chief of staff when I was elected to the California State Assembly in 1982.
Somehow, she was able to clean up every mess I made in those years. She continued in that capacity until Newhall Land and Farming Company, the largest land developer in California, recognized her talents and offered her a senior position in their company when she was still in her twenties.
Well, four decades later, she is still in her twenties, and her energy and devotion to the community has never been stronger. I am deeply gratified to see her honored by her community and to join in their accolades of her work.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today out of deep concern for the manufacturing workers and families of northern Ohio, from Toledo Jeep to our numerous parts suppliers and union shops across the Great Lakes in both the United States and Canada. The Trump administration's reckless and arbitrary tariff policy is putting their jobs and livelihoods at risk.
These billboards just started to go up in our region. Trump's tariffs are a tax. They are a tax on everything.
While yesterday President Trump claimed to pause all tariffs, he left in place a 10 percent across-the-board tariff on all global trade entering the United States, even in places like our region where we have a very wonderful relationship with companies in Canada. We are an integrated economy. We don't need any tariffs, not at our end of the country.
Let me be clear. Tariffs are not a strategy. They are a tax on working Americans and the firms that employ them. If not wisely applied, jobs hang in the balance on both sides of our border between the United States and Canada.
A part in a car or truck, in a steel mill, all of this that happens in our area can cross over the border six times. Is it going to be a 10 percent tariff put on every time it crosses the border? This is crazy.
Tariffs threaten good-paying jobs. They raise prices at the checkout line. They disrupt deeply integrated supply chains, like ours, especially with Canada, Ohio's largest fair trade partner that keeps our auto industry strong and globally competitive.
We don't need any more problems. We have been fighting global competition now for half a century, and it is rough. Instead of a blunt Trump instrument, we need a targeted approach that brings real investment to American manufacturing and in the communities hollowed out by decades of bad and broken trade deals and outsourcing.
I call on this administration. We do share in common a deep worry about the trade deficit, but work with us. Work with Congress to craft smart, strategic reciprocity agreements with each country. Ensure that workers, like United Auto Workers, have a seat at the table, a voice, and real power to negotiate on all sides of all borders.
For too long, what has been happening is billionaire companies and corporate executives have been taking our production and outsourcing it to penny-wage nations. It is slave labor, really, where people make hardly anything, if $1 an hour, maybe $2 an hour, competing against a First World economy like ours.
As the proud daughter of union workers, I know that the road to rebuilding American manufacturing runs straight through our heartland, through the working class, the people who work hard, the spine of America's industrial economy in our Great Lakes region and the Midwest.
America's enemies around the world today are applauding the self- inflicted tariff chaos that has been exacted on our people. They are also plotting as they watch the U.S. stock market plummet, and then bounce back a little bit, and then go down again, endangering and impacting markets around the globe. Reckless and cavalier economic policy could lead us into a Trump recession.
A record of trillions of dollars in U.S. wealth was just lost this past week due to chaotic moves on tariffs arbitrarily imposed by the Trump administration. This week, the hole was being dug deeper as markets continued to free-fall. There was a partial rollback. Where will the roller coaster head next week? Nobody really knows.
None of the tariffs that the President has proposed and implemented have ever had a single vote in this Congress. This is unconstitutional, and it has caused a loss in the 401(k) retirement accounts of tens of millions of Americans. Those took a nosedive. They have been yo-yoing up and down. We are talking about $10 trillion of market losses these past few days. That is unprecedented.
Where is Speaker Johnson? Is he asleep at the wheel? Where is the Republican Committee on Ways and Means? Is it on vacation?
The Trump administration's dangerous overreach is totally damaging to our economy and unnerving to our
President Trump thought his so-called liberation day was a huge success. If the goal was liberating Americans from their hard-earned money and making them pay more for everything, whether it is their car--thousands of dollars more are going to be placed on top of the purchase of a car--the price of energy they pay, the price of gas, and the price of food. Take your pick. Lumber and housing are outpriced for most people now.
Meanwhile, when asked about car prices going up, the President gave a rare, troubling response. He said: ``I couldn't care less.'' That is what he said about automotive prices.
President Trump, come to Ohio. Come to us. Visit us with Canada. Let us show you what we have done without your help for decades, trying to rebuild the industrial spine of America.
I will fight for the American auto industry without tanking our economy because, clearly, there are some people in charge who don't know what they are doing and are raising prices on every single citizen in this country.
Retirement plans should be sacred. What just happened on Wall Street made a whole lot of people nervous.
We got so many phone calls in our office. Not only are jobs at risk but retirement savings are put at risk. Investments are put at risk.
I spent too much of my time in this House and in this Chamber trying to repair the economic damage to our economy from trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA, China PNTR. They said USMCA was going to fix everything.
Guess what? The trade deficit is getting worse every year. That means our jobs are being hollowed out to someplace else, and they need to be returned to this country. We need to negotiate that. It won't just happen because we want it to happen.
As a private businessman and billionaire, Donald Trump never lifted a finger to help us. He didn't stop the outsourcing of jobs during his first term. They got worse. Jobs were outsourced.
We had family farm after family farm collapse across this country through consolidation. He didn't do anything.
You need a partnership between the legislative branch and the executive branch working with our companies. This is complicated. It doesn't just happen.
As a result, we have these gigantic trade deficits. We haven't had a balanced trade account in this country in over half a century. There is a cost to that. It comes in jobs, wages, and the ability to pay your way forward in your own family. It is happening in manufacturing, agriculture, and energy, and there must be reforms in trade policy. We all agree on that. It is not a question of whether but how.
Huge trade deficits translate into growing U.S. debt. We hear a lot on the other side of the aisle about the debt. There would be a lot more economic strength if we hadn't outsourced so many jobs. With Canada, our largest fair trade partner, the books look pretty good.
The Great Lakes folks get along on both sides of the border, so why disrupt something that is working? That is absolutely insane.
Tariffs can be a tool to create jobs and wealth, as well as bring back jobs to our country, and we ought to head in that direction. Yet, the President's efforts seem to be adding more trade deficits, not balancing our trade accounts.
America can't import its way to jobs and wealth. It must export products. We must grow things, make things here, and export them. Thus, fair trade with nations that play by the fair trade rules must be our objective.
Let's start there. Let's work with our friends and then open up other markets and retool other markets where that isn't working in our interests. You can't just do it with a broad brush stroke.
Working with Canada is very different than working with China, believe me. At the same time, we must carefully ensure that we grow jobs here through our trade policies and prevent price gouging by adversaries that benefit from protection in the marketplace.
Here is what China does: It manufactures four times as much steel as the world consumes, and then it strategically dumps to wipe out production.
Come with me to Lorain, Ohio. It is deeply in my heart. I represented it for 10 years until they gerrymandered our State again and took it away. What happened to the workers in Lorain, Ohio, should happen to no worker in this country. They deserve better for the hard work that they do.
Mr. Speaker, let's stop the chaos of trade wars, arbitrary pauses, crazy tariffs, and threats. The American people sent us here for solutions. They don't need more tariffs that are really taxes on their cost of living.
America's trade accounts need balancing. We don't need to keep hemorrhaging. That will be the real test. The accounts will be the real test at the end of this year, but they are already not looking good.
Yet, you don't make it better by killing the patient, the American worker, with higher prices on everything that they buy and by jerking away millions of dollars, the cumulative wealth of their retirement accounts.
America must achieve free trade among free people, not more tariff chaos.
Mr. Speaker, I wanted to put in a word. In our office, as all of this has been going on, I thought a lot about my own faith and how to help the American people who are so worried about what is going on.
I did some reflection on the faith community in which I was baptized and still belong. Next Sunday, for us, is the most profound holy day. We commemorate Easter, and it holds profound meaning.
This coming Saturday, in Judaism, Jews around our globe and throughout our Nation will sit down for a Passover Seder.
For both religions, this weekend is one of the most significant religious holidays in the calendar year, with expression and remembrance on the importance of treasuring our heritage and endowment.
For 2,000 years or more, these days have expressed faith that can move the human conscience. Faith motivates people's behavior to think about the difference between daily life and the divine and what life could be.
Christians are encouraged to be a sacrificial people and, importantly, a resurrection people. Jews think of how hard it was for their ancestors escaping Egypt and are thankful for all the joys that they have in modern life.
With Easter and Passover in mind, I wish to place on the record today reflections as a result of the Trump administration's recent actions that are causing anxiety among the people who I represent. These holy days seem to be a proper time to pray for them, to remember them, and to seriously ask ourselves what we can do together to heal them, our Nation, and our people.
Days ago, I was approached by a kind nurse who had endured a hard day. She shared with me that a patient of hers in a local healthcare center had immigrated to our country legally to work as a common laborer. She had fled a troubled Latin American country where thugs controlled the streets.
Leaving all behind, the worker had journeyed here from a place where there was no hope for a better future. Then, last week here in America, very sadly, she attempted to take her own life with a fentanyl overdose because she feared being arrested by Trump administration immigration officials.
She could not imagine going back to the hell from which she had come. Here with no help to understand the law that she came here by, that she could work in America, she was frozen with fear because of what she saw on TV.
I immediately thought of the last words uttered by Jesus as he was put to death by those who could not accept his religious teachings. He asked: ``Father, Father, why have You forsaken me?''
This also parallels the story of Passover with the Jewish people fleeing Egypt in search of a better life, where they could live free from bondage and fear.
Are we not to care for strangers in a strange land, to treat our neighbors as we would want to be treated? Do we leave them to wander the desert or return to horror? Do we offer a hand out and up to ensure that they can live in safety and security? I think this is a weekend for examining our own conscience.
My office has heard an influx of others fleeing horror, seeking shelter, scared that they will be sent back somewhere. Haitians who were here legally and working were scared in Ohio that they would be sent back to the streets of Port-au-Prince that are controlled by warlord gangsters and roving bandits. Who would want to go back to that? These are people who are working, and every company I know is looking for workers right now.
Local churches, synagogues, and mosques help to resettle Ukrainians here legally who are fleeing war-torn regions in their homeland. Those Ukrainians all received an erroneous email last week.
Imagine, when their relatives are fighting and dying in another country, and they are here trying to hold their family together in some minimal way, them receiving a letter saying that they would be able to self-deport before it was claimed to be sent in error. In other words, some person in some agency sent out the wrong letter, which causes even more anxiety and fear in families who are already suffering.
What kind of a country are we becoming?
This week, our district staff took a call from a senior citizen who has ordered her prescription drugs from Canada for many years. She receives them by mail because she can't walk. She is deeply worried that, with the new 10 percent Trump tariffs across the board, the price of her medicine will go up beyond her ability to afford it.
There are a lot of people in charge of things here in Washington who can't think in front of their own noses. They have never faced these situations.
I asked myself: What would Jesus do? The Jewish people, who leave the door open and a seat for Elijah, what would they do?
Our President has even threatened higher tariffs on all imported medicine. Boy, that is a hard sock to the gut. This isn't something someone who cares about people and their health and well-being would do or should do.
If I were his mother, I would scold him.
Our office is receiving numerous inquiries from retirees, working people who worked hard and are deeply concerned about the drop in value of their 401(k) retirement plans that they worked for.
Those just lost enormous value in the financial markets as the Trump tariffs traded away the value of their earnings. Meanwhile, the cost of everything keeps rising. Where I live, the price of gas rose 75 cents more a gallon than I paid a week before.
I have heard from mothers worried their daughters and granddaughters will lose their Medicaid coverage for mental health care and treatment. God bless every American family that has a child with mental illness or a relative with mental illness. You are saints caring for them.
A wife called worried her husband going through chemo for cancer treatment would lose his Medicaid because of the cuts that are being proposed here just 3 years before he becomes Medicare eligible.
If families are denied access to Medicaid without the finances to cover care, what will happen to them? If your family is lucky and you have never had an ill relative, you are lucky because there are millions of people across this country that are suffering as I deliver these remarks tonight. Walk in their shoes.
People on Medicare are about to lose access to telehealth. This is terrible. Many seniors can't walk. I have neighbors. One lady fell out of her bed. She couldn't get off the floor. She had one of those things on her neck that she pushes and then the ambulances came from the local fire department.
There are a lot of people living at the edge. We have to be concerned about them. We can't cut their benefits. These are just some of the countless stories and fears we hear. There are hundreds and thousands more reaching out to Members of Congress in fear for themselves, their families, their loved ones, and treasured members of their community.
America does not live in fear. That isn't why our country was founded. We have been a refuge for our entire history, and we need to continue to be a refuge for those seeking a better life. Who will speak up for these people while they are painted as worthless or not worthy of a place in our country by those who just want to slash and burn and tax and deport and destroy?
Jesus' last words were uttered in the Aramaic language, and he breathed his last breath asking why he had been forsaken. We can ask this for people we know and we can do something to help. Some of us must ask during Passover and Easter week who is being forsaken in this wild rush to endow the billionaire class with more, more vast infusions of money taken out of the hides and hearts of the American people?
What would Jesus do? What would Moses do? Why won't we as a country and a people ask ourselves the question of how we can help, not hurt? How can we help and not hurt?
Let us recommit to that objective in the greatest Nation in the world that needs caring leadership and those that truly are capable of loving one another and other people.
