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.
07Deletion of Sponsors From Public Bills and Resolutions
08Discharge Petitions: Additions and Withdrawals
Daily Digest
Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced
27 public bills, H.R. 8131- 8157; and 6 resolutions, H. Con. Res. 82-83; and H. Res. 1143-1146 were introduced.
Pages H2789-90
Report Filed
A report was filed today as follows: H. Res. 1142, providing for disposition of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 7147) making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-575).
Page H2789
Guest Chaplain
The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Rev. Roger Reece, Associated Churches of Fort Wayne and Allen County, Fort Wayne, Indiana.
Page H2781
Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026
The House passed H.R. 7084, to amend title 46, United States Code, with respect to the types of vessels that may enter or operate in navigable waters of the United States or transfer cargo in any port or place under the jurisdiction of the United States, by a yea-and-nay vote of 247 yeas to 164 nays, Roll No. 105.
Pages H2782-87
Pursuant to the Rule, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. H. Res. 1131, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 8029), the resolution (H. Res. 1128) and the bills (H.R. 5103) and (H.R. 7084) was agreed to Wednesday, March 25th.
Page H2783
Recess
The House recessed at 10:28 a.m. and reconvened at 8 p.m.
Page H2788
Meeting Hour
Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 9:30 p.m. today.
Page H2788
Senate Referrals
S. 858 was held at the desk. S. 1142 was held at the desk.
Page H2781
Senate Message
Message received from the Senate appears on page H2781. Quorum Calls--Votes: Two yea-and-nay votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H2787 and H2788. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and at 8:26 p.m. agreed to the Foxx motion to adjourn by a yea-and-nay vote of 208 yeas to 97 nays, Roll No. 106.
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: 78 of 124 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Welcoming Reverend Roger Reece
The SPEAKER. Without objection, Mr. Stutzman of Indiana is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to welcome today's guest chaplain, my friend Roger Reece.
Roger is a faith-driven leader, an Army veteran, and a longtime nonprofit executive.
Roger has faithfully served as executive director of the Associated Churches of Fort Wayne and Allen County for over 16 years. He has guided the organization through significant growth and expanded its impact across our community. He is equipped with a strong theological foundation from both Purdue University and the Methodist Theological School of Ohio.
Roger has served in a variety of roles, including parish pastor, city manager, and Army chaplain, with distinguished service in the 82nd Airborne Division.
Through his leadership, Roger has fostered collaboration across congregations, nonprofits, and civic institutions to better serve the most vulnerable in northeast Indiana.
I thank Roger for today's opening prayer and wish him continued blessings in his work serving others across the Hoosier State.
Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today to recognize and celebrate the historic 125th anniversary of Sweet Briar College in Amherst County of Virginia's Fifth Congressional District.
Founded in 1901 by Indiana Fletcher Williams, Sweet Briar has spent more than a century preparing women to lead with integrity, resilience, and purpose in critical roles throughout America's workforce.
Sweet Briar's many notable alumnae, including Mary Pope Hutson, the current president of the college, hold true to the mission of guiding and inspiring the next generation of female leaders.
For 125 years, Sweet Briar has stood as a testament to academic excellence and preparing women for lifelong leadership. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating this extraordinary institution.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a woman who changed St. Louis and, in doing so, changed America. Her name is Frankie Muse Freeman.
In 1954, segregation was still the law of the land. Despite that, Frankie Muse Freeman walked into a St. Louis courtroom with her law degree. The result: the end of legal racial discrimination in public housing in Missouri. She was the lead attorney. She was a Black woman. She won.
She didn't wait for permission anywhere in her life. When law firms wouldn't write her back, she opened her own practice.
Mr. Speaker, during Women's History Month, when I think about what this administration is doing--gutting programs that Black women built careers and communities around, eliminating the pathways to economic stability--I think about what Frankie Muse Freeman would say.
I think she would say: Get back to work and, most importantly, win.
Mr. Speaker, this body needs to vote on Thomas Massie's and my resolution to end the war in Iran.
The President has sent 2,000 more soldiers from the Army's 82nd Airborne Division to Iran. This is on top of the 4,500 marines we already have there.
We cannot afford to put ground troops in Iran. This body needs to say no to the $200 billion request and vote to end a war that is causing gas to skyrocket. Gas is up to nearly $4 a gallon, up 34 percent, and we have already lost 13 American servicemembers.
Let's end the war. Let's bring the troops home. Let's make sure we are putting Americans first.
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to believe, but it has been 3 years now since my hometown of Louisville, Kentucky, was forever changed by the mass shooting at Old National Bank on the Monday morning after Easter.
It has been 3 years since we lost Josh Barrick; Deana Eckert; Juliana Farmer; Jim Tutt; and my good friend Tommy Elliott.
Mr. Speaker, 3 years have passed, and it is still shocking. It still hurts. We are still grieving.
I still haven't found the words to heal those wounds, but I want to read what Tommy's wife, Maryanne, courageously shared after this tragedy:
``May I continue to receive the gifts of grief to help heal my heart.
``May it offer me clarity, help me realize what matters and what doesn't, and then let the rest go.
``May I honor the unsolved questions and mysteries of life, the cracks; and look for the light that shines through them.''
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of my very good friend, Minard Duncan, a devoted educator and public servant whose impact on our community will be felt for generations.
Before dedicating his life to education, Mr. Duncan proudly served our country in the U.S. Army during the Korean war from 1952 to 1954.
Later, he served at the Fullerton Unified School District for more than 40 years as an educator and principal, during which time he helped developed programs that strengthen student literacy and success.
After retirement, he wasn't over. He went on to work at Cal State Fullerton in the area of education. Then he was elected to the Fullerton School District Board of Trustees for 8 years.
Beyond his profession, he was a man who cherished his family, friendships, and life's simple joys. He is survived today by his children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren who will carry on his legacy.
Mr. Speaker, please join me in celebrating the life of Minard Duncan, a man who served his country, his community, his family, all with distinction.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today during Women's History Month with both reverence and sorrow to honor the life and legacy of Bettye Jean Mason Odom, a trailblazer whose recent passing marks the loss of a visionary leader and beloved pillar of the Chicago community.
In 1978, after studying in Paris, France, Mrs. Odom returned home with an idea: the concept of total skin care for the African-American community. She founded Bettye O, Incorporated, which has since become Chicago's premier and most imitated day spa. For more than four decades, her Hyde Park institution provided world-class wellness services, skin care, and affirmed the beauty and dignity of people of color through her groundbreaking Skins of Colour products.
Mrs. Odom's life is a remarkable tapestry of service and achievement. A graduate of Fisk University and Meharry Medical College, she served our Nation as a First Lieutenant in the United States Army Nurse Corps.
She is also an accomplished actress, model, television host, author, entrepreneur, and educator inspiring generations of young people through her lectures on confidence, purpose, and professional ambition.
Even into her later years, Mrs. Odom's light never dimmed. We celebrate her extraordinary life. We mourn her passing and give thanks for the profound and lasting impacts of Mrs. Bettye Odom.
Mrs. Odom is survived by her daughter, Lori Odom.
Mr. Speaker, may her memory continue to inspire all of us.
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1131, I call up the bill (H.R. 7084) to amend title 46, United States Code, with respect to the types of vessels that may enter or operate in navigable waters of the United States or transfer cargo in any port or place under the jurisdiction of the
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1131, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure printed in the bill is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Ezell) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen) each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Ezell).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 7084.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026.
This bill provides the President with the authority to effectively address an unlawful taking of a United States citizen-owned port, harbor, or marine terminal by another government in the Western Hemisphere.
United States companies operate maritime facilities throughout North and South America. Their investments must be protected.
It is essential that the United States President be able to act quickly and decisively in response to another government expropriating or nationalizing a United States citizen-owned port, harbor, or marine terminal.
This bill establishes a new, narrowly constructed authority for a President to impose a consequence on a foreign government that illegally takes a maritime facility.
Sanctions are an accepted tool used in diplomacy and economic statecraft. The authorities that H.R. 7084 establishes are completely complementary to similar authorities that Congress has already granted the President.
Nothing in this bill precludes or preempts any other option for dispute resolution. It simply gives the President another meaningful, targeted tool that can encourage negotiations and resolution.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act builds on sanctions, legislation previously passed over the past six decades, and provides the President with one or more options in a continuum for protecting overseas American investments.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in opposition to H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026.
As we have seen with recent vessel boardings and border operations, the Coast Guard has broad authority to enforce American laws on the water.
The Coast Guard routinely interdicts drugs and migrants, enforces fisheries laws, and ensures the safety of property and life at sea.
In fiscal year 2025, the Coast Guard set record breaking numbers. The service seized over 510,000 pounds of cocaine in the maritime domain, over triple its yearly average.
Even more impressively, the Coast Guard saved over 2,200 lives and over $40 million of property by running over 6,700 search and rescue cases. They do all this while protecting global fish stocks and by enforcing domestic and international fisheries laws.
H.R. 7084 does not help the Coast Guard address violations of the law at sea. Instead, the bill inserts the Coast Guard into what is a property dispute between a U.S. company and the Mexican Government that, if anything, will only add to the Coast Guard's burden.
The Coast Guard is already strained in its ability to effectively conduct its missions.
Just last week, the Vice Commandant testified before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure that the Coast Guard is a $20 billion organization operating on a $13 billion budget.
H.R. 7084 prohibits vessels, commercial shipping or cruise vessels, from entering or operating in U.S. waters if that vessel made a port of call at a port that was nationalized or expropriated by another company from a U.S. citizen or company.
Now, requiring the service to identify and prohibit vessels from entering U.S. waters due to an international property dispute further strains the service's resources.
This legislation is meant to only apply to one port in Mexico, but it is written so broadly it could encompass disputes in other countries and with other companies both today and in the future.
Now, Congress has many pressing issues that we should be considering today. The President himself has promised less war and lower prices. Instead, the American public is getting more war and higher prices.
I wish we were taking time today to discuss those lower costs for my constituents.
I wish we were taking time today to discuss those lower costs for my constituents. Instead, we are interjecting Congress into an international land dispute.
Now, I want to be really clear. I am sympathetic to the plight of this particular U.S. company involved in this dispute. This legislation doesn't solve their problem. That solution can be found, and opportunities are available through diplomacy and even trade agreements but not really legislation.
For those reasons I will be voting ``no'' on this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act. I thank Chairman Graves for his support.
Let's be clear, American companies operating abroad should not have to fear arbitrary government actions that undermine their property rights, but right now, that is exactly what is happening. When countries violate trade agreements and illegally seize assets from U.S. companies, it puts American job security, economic security, and, quite frankly, our national security at risk.
H.R. 7084 ensures there are enforceable consequences for those actions. Specifically, it strengthens U.S. maritime security law to address these unlawful seizures. Through existing Coast Guard authorities, it also authorizes the President to deny entry into U.S. ports for vessels that operate through expropriated American-owned port infrastructure in Western Hemisphere countries with U.S. free trade agreements.
We know this is not just a hypothetical example. For years, the Mexican Government has targeted the U.S.-based Vulcan Materials Company.
In 1986, Vulcan Materials Company built the only deepwater port in Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, and for decades this operation supplied crushed limestone to critical infrastructure projects across the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts, roads, bridges, housing, and energy facilities in States represented by Members on both sides of the aisle.
But starting in May of 2022, the Mexican Government launched an endless pressure campaign against Vulcan Materials and sent the military to forcibly shut down its operations.
In 2023, they invaded and occupied the property again just to hand it to a private Mexican competitor.
In 2024, they declared the port and a quarry adjacent to it a ``naturally protected area'' to complete the expropriation, and now Mexico is weaponizing its tax authority, pursuing billions in retroactive dollars in claims to seize what remains.
Meanwhile, Mexico has allowed a dozen unpermitted quarries in the same exact region for Mexican companies to operate freely. Let me say that again. Mexico used its military to forcibly shut down an American company and created false environmental claims to do so. That is a direct violation of the USMCA.
We did not resort to legislation as a first option. In fact, for 4 years, the United States has pursued every available diplomatic tool, congressional letters, administration engagement, and bilateral pressure, and none of that worked.
This represents a coordinated multifront campaign by Mexico against an American company that undermines our diplomatic progress and threatens all U.S. investment in Mexico.
Now, my colleagues may ask: Why is this bill the right response? First, it is surgical. It targets expropriated port infrastructure only. It will not disrupt current, legitimate shipping operations. Second, it includes clear off-ramps. If the foreign government returns the property, provides fair compensation, and resolves the dispute, then the restrictions are lifted. Lastly, it includes exceptions for emergencies and maritime safety.
I am proud to have worked in a bipartisan way with Representatives Carbajal and Sewell and Chairman Graves' committee staff on this legislation.
This isn't just about one company. We cannot allow a foreign government to steal American property and face zero consequences.
This is an opportunity for us to protect American investment abroad, to protect American companies, and to protect our own communities. If you are an American company operating abroad, we have vowed to protect you, and this legislation does just that.
I urge colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 7084.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding. I thank Representative Pfluger for his leadership today.
I rise in support of the Defending American Property Abroad Act. This is a commonsense and targeted bill that gives the United States a real tool to respond when foreign governments unfairly seize property owned by Americans without due process.
The bill would look to identify foreign ports, harbors, and marine terminals where American-owned property has been expropriated or taken without due process.
Once identified, goods loaded at those facilities and passenger vessels serving them may be restricted from entering or operating in United States ports.
Let me be clear about what this means.
It means that if you take American property, you don't get to do business as usual with the United States. We can identify those ports and terminals and restrict the ships that use them from entering our ports.
That is real consequences, not just words.
It is a targeted solution to support American innovation. This legislation focuses on one bad actor.
In recent years, an American company, Vulcan Materials, invested in port and terminal infrastructure in Mexico in good faith under the expectation that its property rights and contracts would be respected.
Instead, the Mexican Government took action that resulted in the seizure of that port facility, despite longstanding agreements.
What makes this even more frustrating is the justification that was offered. Mexican officials pointed to environmental and permitting concerns, but the same government that is accusing this company of environmental harm awarded six Clean Industry awards from PROFEPA, which is their environmental enforcement agency, for the company's environmental stewardship.
You can't speak out of both sides of your mouth.
And at the same time, the Government of Mexico has allowed for the use of Vulcan's deepwater port by another company.
That is not what good faith partnerships look like, especially from our largest trading partner.
Trade should not be a race to the bottom. It should support good- paying jobs, protect the environment and labor standards, and strengthen local communities.
And it should be grounded in mutual respect, where countries that benefit from access to U.S. markets also respect the rights of workers, investors, and communities tied to that trade.
This bill reinforces that principle.
Just like I have been willing to call out unfair practices by foreign governments, I have also spoken out when our own government does something similar, including under President Trump, who has imposed blanket tariffs without rhyme or reason, an equally reckless action.
This bill is a targeted solution. I urge my colleagues to also support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, what we have seen happen to Alabama's own Vulcan Materials Company should concern every Member of this body.
A foreign government shut down an American company's operations, moved to seize its property, and ignored the rule of law. If it can happen to one American company, it can happen to any of them.
We must protect American jobs and American investments and stand on the principles that the United States will stand for its people and its companies wherever they operate.
The Government of Mexico's actions, shutting down operations, expropriating a deepwater port and quarry, and hiding behind environmental designations set a dangerous precedent that weakens trade relationships and threatens our national security.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 makes it clear. If you target American businesses, there will be consequences.
It strengthens our trade enforcement rules, expands section 301 authority, and allows the United States to take real action against those who seize or interfere with American property.
We will not allow foreign governments to benefit from the access of our markets while violating the rights of American companies.
I urge my colleagues to stand with the American workers, stand with the rule of law, and support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to this bill.
First of all, this bill and the substance of the bill, this dispute, is undergoing consideration by the international bodies established by the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. We really should wait until a decision is arrived at with respect to that mechanism, but there are other considerations.
First, let's consider other far-reaching implications. The bill gives the President the authority to prohibit vessels that travel through certain Western Hemisphere ports, which he designates, from entering U.S. waters. While supporters say that the bill is narrowly written to target a specific project in a specific country, the reality is that the President will be given broad authority that could be applied to other countries in the future.
Let's not forget who we are talking about here. This is the same President who used military force in Venezuela to force regime change, the same President who is now engaging in an illegal war with Iran without even consulting Congress.
Mr. Speaker, do we really want to entrust the President with this new authority granted under this bill?
Equally damaging, the bill ignores the objections of local people fighting for their right to safe drinking water in a surrounding environment free of contamination. That is what is in the dispute resolution matter being addressed now.
I have spoken to local community leaders who have suffered from the environmental damage caused by these mining operations. This bill limits the ability of foreign governments to adopt measures that protect their communities and their environment, essentially coercing those foreign governments to prioritize the interests of U.S. corporations over their people.
We should not be legislating to hinder a foreign government's ability to protect its citizens from environmental harm. We should not be granting the President a new authority that could have broad foreign policy implications.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join with me and to vote ``no'' on this proposal.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026.
I am a proud cosponsor of this vital piece of legislation, and I thank my colleague, Chairman Pfluger from Texas, for his leadership on this matter.
In 2022, the Mexican Government unlawfully took over and shut down a limestone quarry in Mexico operated by a U.S.-based company. This seizure violated the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, undermined American property values, and threatened U.S. economic growth and national security.
It is of the utmost importance that we protect American businesses and vessels from being unfairly targeted or having their assets unlawfully seized while operating around the world.
I am proud to support H.R. 7084, which ensures that there are real consequences when American property is seized abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill and show the world that America stands firmly behind its workers, businesses, and investments at home and abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Defending American Property Abroad Act because it is the right thing to do.
We have talked here today about this being a U.S.-based company. It is a little bit more personal than that to me, my colleague Congresswoman Sewell, and a few of my other colleagues from the State of Alabama.
This is an Alabama-based company, and it is the right thing to do because, Mr. Speaker, when you have a company that is operating on land lawfully acquired nearly four decades ago that is performing lawful operations, paying taxes lawfully, and exporting the goods lawfully-- many of which come through my hometown, the Port of Mobile, which is now the deepest port in the Gulf, which they are doing lawfully--then they should be treated lawfully.
What we have here is not really complicated. It is not complex in terms of what the Mexican Government did here. They came in and just took it and said: We are not abiding by a process. We are not abiding by any contractual terms or any other terms. We are just taking it, and by the way, we are not going to pay you for it.
When a foreign entity uses the full force of its military and government to take away property rights from an Alabama-based company, I am going to stand up for them.
We also have an obligation to make sure we are using the full force of our government in response to it. That is what this legislation does. I urge my colleagues to support it for that reason.
Not only that, we are here because it is an Alabama company today, but tomorrow it could be a Mississippi company or a Washington company or Oregon, Indiana, Illinois, or any other State. We cannot sit by quietly and not respond, and not respond proportionately, to what the Mexican Government has done.
I don't have anything against the Mexican Government personally, and I don't have anything, certainly, against the Mexican people. What I do have a problem with is that when we see a government, even our own government, mistreating businesses and people, we have an obligation to speak out and to stand up for that. For that reason, I stand in support of this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. Speaker, the question is: Do we support President Trump with this authority? Absolutely, we do.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026.
This legislation makes it clear: The United States will not stand for unlawful harassment campaigns against American companies and American workers.
For over 35 years, Vulcan Materials Company, based in Alabama, has lawfully owned and operated a limestone quarry in Mexico. Yet, since 2018, the Mexican Government has unlawfully restricted Vulcan's operations and wrongfully targeted them through coercion and intimidation.
In 2022, the Mexican President attempted to seize the property. When Vulcan refused to surrender, Mexico retaliated by issuing shutdown orders.
No American company should be pressured into accepting a fire-sale takeover or punished for standing up for its lawful rights. Vulcan followed the law, held up its end of the deal, and operated transparently. What they received in return was their property stolen and seized by the Mexican Government.
These actions have essentially left the only deepwater port on the Yucatan Peninsula--owned, constructed, and operated for years by Vulcan--and the surrounding land open for sale to our adversaries. This is unbelievable.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act gives the United States the tools to push back against foreign countries and trading partners when our companies are unlawfully targeted and harassed.
America owes Mexico nothing. This is about fairness and accountability. The United States will no longer sit by and allow foreign nations to profit from stolen American property.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 7084. I thank Congressman Pfluger for his leadership in advancing this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the Defending American Property Abroad Act. This narrowly tailored bill will target vessels that attempt to enter the U.S. after moving through a seized American-owned port.
Vulcan Materials Company is proudly headquartered in my Alabama district, so I have been following this dispute closely since 2018.
The facts of the case are clear. The Government of Mexico used its military force to illegally occupy Vulcan's property, and, in 2022, President Obrador illegally shut down Vulcan's operations.
Mexico's justifications for the seizure are fabricated, and it is clear that the government wants to take Vulcan's port because it is the only deepwater port in the region.
Mr. Speaker, Vulcan has attempted to use all existing legal and diplomatic options to resolve this situation. Since 2018, they have used the USMCA arbitration policies and processes, and multiple U.S. Ambassadors to Mexico under the Biden and Trump administrations have attempted to find an amicable resolution.
I have met directly with President Obrador about this issue. While previous Ambassadors have been sympathetic to our concerns, President Obrador and now President Sheinbaum have overruled their own diplomats and staff.
It is time for Congress to act. I was told by the President that we had to have an act of Congress in order for the port to be returned. So, today, I say proudly: We are doing something. Congress is doing something.
This is just not about an Alabama company. It is about American property abroad.
Mr. Speaker, I urge Congress to vote in favor of this bill, and I support this legislation wholeheartedly.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026.
This legislation codifies the commonsense principle that foreign nations should not profit from properties stolen from Americans. This bill is needed because for years the Mexican Government has engaged in a deliberate campaign against an American company, Vulcan Materials, headquartered in my district.
In 2022, Mexican authorities used military force to shut down Vulcan's lawful operations. Then, in 2024, they took the dramatic step of declaring Vulcan's private property a protected natural area. The move was not designed to conserve land but to justify taking it.
However, this is about more than one company. Mexico's actions sent a dangerous signal to every American business operating abroad that their investments, their assets, their rights could be stripped away at any moment by the corrupt Mexican Government.
When I and other members of the Alabama delegation, in a bipartisan manner, met with the Ambassador from Mexico, he described his government's actions as a civil dispute. I pointed out to the Ambassador that in America we don't send in our military to resolve civil disputes.
The port at the center of the dispute is not just any asset. As has been pointed out by other speakers, it is the only deepwater port on the Yucatan Peninsula, built by American investments and critical to supplying construction materials for infrastructure across the United States.
Mexico's actions undermine not only property rights but also our supply chains. The illegal action is more like an action by a cartel than it is a trustworthy government, and it raises serious questions about entering into any agreements with Mexico.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act ensures that foreign governments cannot seize American-owned infrastructure and then benefit from the infrastructure. It authorizes the United States to deny entry to vessels operating out of or that have visited ports unlawfully expropriated from American companies.
Mr. Speaker, this is about protecting American businesses and, fundamentally, the rule of law. If we fail to act here, then we invite more of this behavior not just from Mexico, but from any nation watching to see how the United States responds.
I thank Representative Pfluger for his work on this important issue, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 7084.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Again, I just reiterate, the bill before us today does not resolve this dispute between the Mexican Government and an American company. There are tools available and that continue to be available to resolve that. It gives the Coast Guard more work on top of all the work our U.S. Coast Guard is already doing.
I had an amendment in the Rules Committee. They rejected an amendment that would have required the President to consider potential costs before exercising the authorities granted in this bill. That Rules Committee amendment was rejected.
Arbitration, treaties, trade agreements, these mechanisms exist to solve international disputes. These are appropriate venues for this dispute and not legislation. For those reasons, I will be voting ``no.''
In conclusion, I do want to note something. These 13 to 14 bills that came before this body earlier this week from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee--those were on suspension. This one was not. But it needs to be said that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee works extremely well. We see ourselves as an island of partnership in a sea of partisanship in the U.S. Congress.
Even though this bill may not fit that bill, the Committee works that way because of one person, and that one person is Representative Sam Graves.
This morning, it was announced that Sam will not be running for reelection.
I wanted to take this brief moment as part of my time in closing to just note that we are going to be losing a fierce advocate for infrastructure investment and for transportation safety with his announcement that he will not run again.
Sam and I have served together nearly 26 years. We came in together. In recent years, we have developed a partnership that overrode the partisanship in Congress. This body has dealt with the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization, a Coast Guard reauthorization, a Water Resources Development Act reauthorization, and a lot of other things. We have passed a FEMA act that reforms FEMA. We have yet to get that to the floor. We certainly want to see that get to the floor.
Importantly, we are working right now on a bill to reauthorize the surface transportation authorization to fix roads, bridges, highways, transit, rail, and some other things. We are working on that right now. That work continues to progress, all because of the work of Representative Sam Graves.
Although the House is losing Sam, his home is regaining him back in Tarkio, Missouri, at some point at the end of this year. His family is getting him back. I have always said that Sam likes three things in life: his grandkids, vintage aircraft, and Congress, and in that order.
I thank Sam Graves for his friendship and his partnership and helping us to continue to do the work of this Committee to bring bills to the floor that we can debate in a manner that is respectful of the body that we all get to serve in.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
In closing, passage of H.R. 7084 gives the President the authority to effectively address the illegal taking of a United States citizen-owned port, harbor, or marine terminal throughout the Western Hemisphere.
American companies are the source of more investments in the Western Hemisphere nations than investors from any other country.
Infrastructure projects in the Americas, especially port infrastructure projects, represent significant potential business opportunities for American companies.
Protecting overseas U.S. investments is an important policy objective. This bill creates an appropriate cost and consequence for stealing property from an American-owned business.
The Defending American Property Abroad Act of 2026 is consistent with other authorities Congress has given the President to act against the illegal taking of American businesses and investments.
Mr. Speaker, I am a former sheriff from Mississippi. Where I come from, when you take something that doesn't belong to you, that is stealing, and you have broken the law. If you break the law, there are consequences.
This bill ensures there are consequences for foreign countries that steal from our companies. Simply put, this legislation is common sense.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, today, the U.S. House of Representatives is acting in response to a situation in which a foreign government shut down an American company's operations, seized its property, and ignored the rule of law.
When an American business is targeted in this way, it is not just an attack on one company, it is an attack on American workers, American jobs, and American interests.
Vulcan Materials, an Alabama company, has lawfully operated for 35 years in Mexico. Yet the Mexican government illegally seized its assets. If this can happen to an Alabama company today, it can happen to any American business tomorrow.
That is why this legislation, H.R. 7084, the Defending American Property Abroad Act is so important. It allows the United States to take real action against foreign entities that seize American property.
This is about fairness and accountability. It is about ensuring that American companies and workers are not punished for following the rules while foreign governments face no consequences for breaking them. With this, we are ensuring protection for American companies that operate in the Western Hemisphere.
The protection of American property rights overseas is essential not only for economic growth but also for our national and economic security. When we stand up for our businesses, we stand up for the workers and communities who depend on them.
I am proud to support H.R. 7084 because it defends American property owners from wrongful seizure and sends a clear message: the United States will stand beside its companies, its workers, and its values.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1131, the previous question is ordered on the bill, as amended.
The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, we are here tonight to debate the rule providing for consideration of the Senate amendment for H.R. 7147, the Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act of 2026.
The rule provides that the House shall be considered to have taken from the Speaker's table H.R. 7147, with the Senate amendment thereto, and to
Simply put, a vote for this rule is a vote to fund the entire Department of Homeland Security through May 22, 2026.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today because the American people are tired of half measures when it comes to their safety.
Last night, the Senate passed a funding deal that can only be described as an attempt to put a dead bolt on the front door while leaving the backdoor wide-open.
They want us to believe they are securing our homeland, yet their proposal dedicates exactly zero dollars toward our Border Patrol operations. In a world of evolving threats, my colleagues across the aisle believe that we can protect this Nation by halves, but the message from House Republicans is clear: We will not and cannot fund only half of our Homeland Security.
Security is not a buffet where you get to pick and choose which threats you acknowledge. House Republicans are aligned with the President on this. We will not accept a funding bill that does not support our homeland defenders, our ICE agents, and our Border Patrol.
If it is important to stop tragedies from happening at our airports and everyone can agree on that, then it is equally important to stop these events from happening at our borders and in our communities.
This week, the country felt the weight of Sheridan Gorman's death, a tragedy that is compounded by the bitter reality that it was entirely preventable and the result of Democrat policies that allow violent criminals to walk our streets.
This loss is a grim reminder that when policies prioritize a radical agenda and the protection of violent illegal aliens over the protection of American citizens, it is innocent families that pay the ultimate price.
We need to protect our citizens, and House Republicans will not vote for an even slightly open border. We will not leave portions of our homeland vulnerable while pretending the job is done. We know what happens when the border is treated as an afterthought.
Under the Biden administration, America faced a national security risk. More than 20 million illegal immigrants entered the United States, straining our communities to the breaking point. Customs and Border Patrol recorded more than 2 million illegal immigrants were able to cross into the Nation without any record of who they were. That is nearly double what they tracked during the prior decade.
Between fiscal year 2021 and fiscal year 2024, more than 388 illegal aliens on the terrorist watch list attempted to cross the border and, most alarming, at least 99 illegal aliens on that same watch list were allowed into our country. We saw members from one of the most notorious gangs in the world, MS-13, infiltrate our cities, leading to takeovers like we saw in Aurora, Colorado.
That is the result of Democrat hope-based border vulnerability strategies, but we do not operate on hope or whims. We operate on facts and action.
Under the Trump administration, we have seen what happens when we prioritize enforcement. In the last 10 months, zero illegal aliens have been released into the United States. We have proven that when the law is followed and the border is secured, our communities are safer and Americans are protected.
The transformation of Homeland Security is further proof that the U.S. Coast Guard seized nearly 510,000 pounds of cocaine in fiscal year 2025, a 200 percent increase compared to the annual average in previous years, and yet, despite this clear progress, Democrats are choosing to block DHS funding leading to this shutdown.
They would rather see the entire Department shuttered than to see our borders secure. This is a simple, commonsense, 60-day, 8-week clean CR so we can properly pay our homeland defenders and continue the discussions.
It secures the border by fully funding the paychecks and resources that we need. It protects our airports. It supports the President's decisive leadership in allocating TSA funds. It keeps FEMA ready to ensure our disaster response is not a casualty of the Democrat shutdown, and it guarantees the men and women on the front lines are paid for the critical work they do.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate bill is a nonstarter because it treats national security as an optional expense. House Republicans will not fund a half-baked idea that leaves our borders open and our communities at risk.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the other side of the rotunda to stop holding our security hostage. Join me in supporting this commonsense, 8-week CR and funding critical needs.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota for yielding me the customary 30 minutes, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the American people: If you woke up this morning not knowing who to blame for this shutdown, you will go to bed tonight with no doubt. It is House Republicans and Speaker Johnson. I mean, what the hell are you guys doing? This is nuts.
This is not complicated, Mr. Speaker. There is a bill right now, passed unanimously by the Republican-controlled Senate, to end this shutdown. It is a bill to fund FEMA, TSA, the Coast Guard, and other lawful agencies in DHS. That bill was unanimously passed and was orchestrated by Republicans who control the United States Congress. You control the House, you control the Senate, and you control the White House. You control everything.
Republican Leader John Thune was the one who wrote it, scheduled it, offered it. The Republican was presiding over the Senate floor when the bill came up. Not a single Senator, including not a single Republican Senator, objected to moving this bill forward--not a single one.
That bill was sent to us today. What did Speaker Mike Johnson do? He said no. He said let's keep those airport lines long. He said let's not pay TSA or FEMA or the Coast Guard or CISA. Why? Because he would rather bow down to a handful of batshit crazy, rightwing lunatics who don't care about who they hurt. They are demanding even more money for ICE, an agency that already has a $75 billion slush fund--$75 billion. My God, that is more money than almost every nation on Earth spends on their entire military budget per year.
In what world does ICE need more money? Why would we give more money to an agency that a Federal judge says has violated more judicial orders this year than ``some Federal agencies have violated in their entire existence''?
We have seen ICE and CBP agents break into homes without warrants. I thought you guys cared about civil liberties. We have seen them arresting and detaining American citizens and publicly executing people on the street. None of you are moved by that?
Why the hell would we give them more money without real reforms? All we are saying is that we should fund agencies that actually protect the public and keep this country running.
The Senate passed a bill that does just that. It is ready for House floor action. We could end this shutdown for good tonight if Speaker Johnson would just put it on the floor. There is no question that it would pass with massive, sweeping bipartisan support. I have talked to so many of you who told me you support what the Republican Senate did.
Speaker Johnson refuses to do that. I swear, he is actually doing everything, and I mean everything, in his power to prevent reopening DHS tonight.
Republican leadership has even gone so far as to change the very definition of ``time'' itself. They had to rig the rules to pretend today is tomorrow so they could jam this garbage CR through faster and then get out of town.
This CR, Mr. Speaker, is a nonstarter. It is dead on arrival in the Senate. Even some House Republicans have already acknowledged that this plan, to quote them, is stupid. You know it is dead on arrival in the Senate.
Speaker Johnson needs to grow a freaking spine, and we need some adult leadership in this House.
Mr. Speaker, put the Senate bill on the floor. Let us pass it with a large majority of House votes. Let us end this Republican shutdown now.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to respectfully avoid from using profanity on the floor.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from the other side of the aisle can yell and swear all he wants. The reality is this CR is a commonsense solution to fund critical needs and to continue the discussion.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Austin Scott), my Rules Committee colleague.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell you what is true about what Mr. McGovern said. It is true that last night, after midnight, the Republican majority leader introduced a piece of legislation on the floor of the Senate. It is true that no Republican Senator objected to that. I can tell you, I am very disappointed in the Republican leader and in the Republican Party over there for not objecting to it.
I want to read, for the American citizens, what is written in the bill because I want you to understand why we cannot accept, and it is not in your best interest as American citizens for us to accept, the language that the Senate sent over here. While this is boring, I do think the words on the sheet of paper matter, and you need to understand the consequences of accepting the language.
Section 4, Explanatory Statement: ``The explanatory statement regarding this act, printed in the House section of the Congressional Record on or about January 22, 2026, and submitted by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations of the House, shall have the same effect with respect to the allocation of funds and implementation of this act as if it were a joint explanatory statement of a committee of conference, except that all contents printed under the headings `U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement' ''--that is what they want you to think it is about, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement--``and `Border Security Operations' under the heading `U.S. Customs and Border Protection' shall have no force or effect for purpose of this act, and amounts specified in the `Final Bill' column under the subheading `Border Security Operations' ''--not just ICE, but border security operations--``and under the heading `U.S. Customs and Border Protection' and under the heading `U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement' in the `Department of Homeland Security Act, 2026' table shall all be $0.''
That is what you are demanding, that we zero out Customs and Border Protection so that the border can be open the way you want it to be open, the way you did it under Joe Biden.
Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed in the Republican leader, and I am disappointed in the Republicans in the Senate for not objecting to this madness.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let us just restate for the record that ICE and CBP have billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars, years of funding. You can't bring yourself to help feed hungry children or make childcare more affordable or healthcare more affordable, but you have no problem with giving ICE, an agency that cannot follow the law, billions and billions of dollars. Shame on you. Your priorities are all screwed up.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Menefee).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members on both sides of the aisle are reminded to direct their comments to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I am here today representing the people of Houston, Texas, asking House Republicans to take up, to put for a vote, the deal that was agreed to in the Senate that would fully fund FEMA, the Coast Guard, as well as TSA.
Houston has a unique impact in all of this. We are home to Bush Intercontinental Airport, right in my district, which has seen some of the longest wait times in the entire Nation and has had some of the highest TSA callout rates in the entire Nation.
We are also home to a U.S. Coast Guard base. Sector Houston-Galveston has more than 1,500 personnel, folks who are not going to be receiving paychecks if we don't agree to this deal.
We are also one of the most disaster-prone places in the entire country. We have had 500-year storm after storm, flood after flood, where people have lost their property, their dignity, and, in many instances, their lives.
We rely on FEMA. We rely on FEMA workers. We need this deal to happen, and the deal is already right here for the taking.
We have already seen that Senate Republicans and Senate Democrats have agreed on a clean funding bill that would fully fund these agencies and would benefit all the American people, particularly the folks in Houston, Texas.
I am calling on my colleagues in the House of Representatives, my Republican colleagues, and Speaker Johnson: Put this deal forward for a vote. Give the American people what they want, and that is a fully funded TSA, Coast Guard, and FEMA.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Department of Homeland Security continuing resolution that pays all of our brave homeland defenders and fully funds all of DHS, including ICE and CBP. For over 40 days, my Democratic colleagues have held our national security hostage to force their reckless, open-border, and pro-illegal alien agenda on the American people.
Honestly, no one is surprised by this reckless stunt because, just a few short weeks ago in this very Chamber, these radical Democrats refused to stand for President Trump's simple statement that the first duty of the American Government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens. They showed their true colors then, and they are continuing to show them right now.
Upholding immigration laws, securing our borders, and deporting illegal aliens is exactly what the American people voted for. We wanted to prevent more avoidable tragedies, like the horrific murders of Laken Riley and Sheridan Gorman.
Democrats want to protect these monsters who are committing these crimes. It is as simple as that. You are either with the American citizens whom you swore an oath to serve, or you are with the illegal aliens who shouldn't be here in the first place.
That is why the Senate bill was dead on arrival, passed in the dead of night by a voice vote. The Senate's DHS funding bill would defund ICE and the Border Patrol, further undermining the very agencies tasked with protecting our homeland.
House Republicans rejected this terrible precedent, as we will not allow the radical Democrats' un-American, open-border, illegal foreigner-first agenda to destroy our country or dictate the appropriations process.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to put the American people first by supporting this DHS 60-day continuing resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
First, Mr. Speaker, this bill does not defund ICE. There is like a gazillion dollars in the big, ugly bill, so that is just a lie.
The gentleman talked about what happened in this Chamber. I will tell you something that happened in this Chamber. The President of the United States sent an angry mob here to attack our democracy, and that gentleman said that it was a normal tourist visit. I won't ever forget that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries), the Democratic leader, a real leader.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my distinguished colleague, the top Democrat on the Rules Committee, Jim McGovern, for yielding and for his leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to this partisan political stunt that Republicans have brought to the floor masquerading as legitimate legislation.
There is a bipartisan bill that, if brought to the floor today, can end the 42-day Trump-Republican shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security,
Why is this happening? It is because Republicans have chosen to continue to authorize spending billions of taxpayer dollars to brutalize or kill American citizens, like Renee Nicole Good or Alex Pretti, or to violently target law-abiding immigrant families.
Mr. Speaker, we believe that immigration enforcement in this country should be fair, just, and humane. That is not what is happening right now. ICE is out of control. The American people know it, which is why changes need to be made that are bold, meaningful, dramatic, transformational, and common sense at the same period of time.
Instead, Republicans have chosen to double and triple down on their extremism, on their brutality, and on their violence that has been unleashed on everyday Americans all across the country.
There is a bipartisan bill sent over from the Senate. Every single Senate Democrat and every single Senate Republican supported that legislation. It would reopen the TSA, reopen FEMA, reopen the Coast Guard, and reopen the ability for our cybersecurity professionals to do their job while at the same time allowing for discussions, tough negotiations, to continue.
On one side of those negotiations are my Republican colleagues who want to continue to spend taxpayer dollars to brutalize and kill American citizens; unleashing masked, untrained ICE agents, in some cases storming homes of everyday Americans, ripping them out of their beds in the middle of the night, ripping children away from their families, detaining people in inhumane conditions, and refusing to allow State and local authorities to investigate ICE's violence and brutality in ways that will be designed to bring about accountability.
This debate, at the end of the day, is really all about: Do you want to compel ICE to conduct themselves like every other cop, police officer, or law enforcement agency in the country, or do you want to continue to spend billions of taxpayer dollars to violently target American citizens and law-abiding immigrant families?
We choose the American way: fair, just, and humane.
Mr. Speaker, many of my Republican colleagues have come to the floor to suggest that this legislation is about defunding ICE. That is a stone-cold lie because we know that the Republican one big, ugly bill ripped away Medicaid from 14 million Americans, the largest cut--almost $1 trillion--to Medicaid in American history. At the same period of time, extremist Republicans in their one big, ugly bill enacted a $186 billion cut to nutritional assistance, literally ripped food from the mouths of hungry children, seniors, and veterans.
Why did Republicans do that in their one big, ugly bill? In part, it was to provide their billionaire donors with massive tax breaks that they did not need and did not deserve and, at the same period of time, gave the Department of Homeland Security $191 billion--watch this--$75 billion in a slush fund to ICE.
Is that defunding? No. The one big, ugly bill defunded Medicaid. It defunded nutritional assistance for everyday Americans. It defunded some affordable housing programs. It defunded the ability for everyday Americans who are struggling under Republican policies to actually afford their utility bills. That was the defunding that has taken place in this Chamber during this Congress.
Defunding ICE--how do you stand up here as Republicans and say that to the American people with a straight face when you gave ICE a $75 billion slush fund and then turned around and gave CBP a $65 billion slush fund in the same one big, ugly bill?
The reality is that we can end this shutdown--this 42-day, extreme Trump-Republican shutdown--today. If Republicans had the courage and the patriotism to actually bring a bipartisan Senate-passed bill to the floor, it would pass this Chamber with Democratic and Republican votes. Maybe not the extremists, but it would pass with Democratic and Republican votes.
Mike Johnson has chosen to say ``no'' to a bipartisan bill so that he can say ``yes'' to continuing to force TSA agents to work without pay.
Mike Johnson has said ``no'' to a bipartisan bill so that he could say ``yes'' to continuing to inconvenience millions of the American people across the country.
Mike Johnson has said ``no'' to a bipartisan bill so that House Republicans could say ``yes'' to chaos at airports all across the country.
Mike Johnson has said ``no'' to a bipartisan bill so that House Republicans could continue to say ``yes'' to ICE brutality.
Mike Johnson has said no to a bipartisan Senate-passed bill so House Republicans could continue to say yes to ICE violence.
Mike Johnson has said no to a bipartisan Senate-passed bill so House Republicans could continue to say yes to the corruption that we have seen at the Department of Homeland Security.
Mike Johnson has said no to a bipartisan Senate-passed bill that would reopen the Department of Homeland Security so House Republicans could say yes to the Freedom Caucus, which is clearly driving the train here.
It was amazing to me that at the Rules Committee, you had some Republican Members trying to lecture America about Article I and separate and coequal branches of government. Really, you want to talk about the House and the Senate? I am not interested in that debate.
Let's talk about the difference between Article I and Article II, because the Framers of this Constitution designed the Article I branch, the Congress, to be the first amongst equals.
That is not how House Republicans have been acting from the very beginning of this Congress. Instead, House Republicans are running around this town acting like nothing more than a reckless rubberstamp to Donald Trump's extreme agenda. That is what is happening right now. What House Republicans want to do is to continue to fund Donald Trump's violent, extreme, mass deportation machine that has resulted in the death of at least three American citizens.
Lecture us about Article I and Article II, you have got to be kidding.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to continue to speak truth to power on this floor as a duly-elected Member, and the more you stand, the longer I will speak.
So our view is very clear. We can reopen this government today if you bring to the House floor a bipartisan, Senate-passed bill. As Democrats, we believe that immigration enforcement in this country should be fair, it should be just, and it should be humane.
Donald Trump promised to target violent felons who are here illegally. That is what Republicans promised.
You have broken your word. It is American citizens and law-abiding immigrant families who are being targeted violently by untrained and masked ICE agents.
Our position is pretty clear: Let's pay TSA. Let's fund FEMA. Let's fund the Coast Guard. Let's fund our cybersecurity professionals. Stop holding the American people hostage to an extreme rightwing agenda.
Taxpayer dollars should be spent to make life more affordable for the American people. That is what Democrats will continue to focus on, in an environment where life has become more expensive under the extreme policies that President Trump and House Republicans continue to jam down the throats of the American people: the Trump tariffs, increasing costs on everyday Americans by millions of dollars in totality, thousands of dollars per year for everyday Americans as a family.
House Republicans have refused, Senate Republicans have refused, and Donald Trump has refused to do anything to make life more affordable. Housing costs are out of control. Healthcare costs are out of control. Grocery bills are out of control. Gas prices are out of control because Republicans have decided to get us into a reckless war of choice in the Middle East, spending billions of dollars to drop bombs in Iran.
Mr. Speaker, we are here dealing with a partisan spending bill that the Senate has already indicated is dead on arrival. Republicans have taken the decision to own this shutdown decisively. There is no doubt. As Ranking Member Jim McGovern stated earlier, there is no doubt as to why we are still facing
I rise in strong opposition to this so-called spending bill that is dead on arrival, that will do nothing, accomplish nothing, other than continuing the shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security and the chaos that Republicans have unleashed in airports all across America.
House Democrats are going to continue to fight for what is right. We are going to continue to fight to lower the high cost of living, fix our broken healthcare system, clean up corruption, stop this reckless war of choice in the Middle East, get ICE under control, pay TSA, end the chaos at these airports, and end this national nightmare that Donald Trump and Republicans are inflicting upon the American people.
Vote ``no'' against this partisan political stunt.
Let's say ``yes'' instead to a bipartisan bill that would reopen the Department of Homeland Security, end the chaos at airports, and stop the inconvenience of the American people.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Just to clarify to the gentleman, I was not standing to shorten your speech. I understand you can speak as long as you would like to. The House was not in order, and I was simply trying to bring it back into order for you.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, our colleague who says they want us to bring down the high cost of living is like the arsonist who sets the fire and then comes out to help put it out.
Mr. Speaker, the Senate's funding proposal is not worth the paper it is printed on. Frankly, it would be better used as kindling in a fireplace.
I said it in the Rules Committee, and I will say it again here on the floor: We will be darned if we go down the road of undercutting the progress that our Republican majorities and President Trump have made in securing the border: a record low of encounters of illegal aliens, a dramatic reduction in fentanyl trafficking, and a return to law and order that was robbed from the American people for 4 years under the previous administration. Those are the things that would be sacrificed if we passed the Senate's proposal that is nowhere near being up to scratch.
The people's House will not bend itself into submission by acquiescing.
Let me make one other point very clear, Mr. Speaker. Our Democrat colleagues love to dust off the same withered line that Republicans are the ones responsible for DHS being shut down because we control the House, the Senate, and the Presidency. If we had a dollar for every time they trotted out that line, DHS could be funded multiple times over.
What Democrats never acknowledge is that the Senate operates under an entirely different set of procedural and vote thresholds than the House, but the American people aren't fooled. They are far smarter than the Democrats believe they are.
As time goes on, Mr. Speaker, one thing becomes clearer and clearer: Democrats are the carnival barkers for narratives that the American people aren't interested in buying.
But that is their prerogative. Republicans, meanwhile, are the ones who are governing and will continue to do so by passing this rule and the underlying continuing resolution.
Our 8-week CR will afford us the time to deliberate, build consensus, and advance a solution that is far greater than the Senate's jerry- built proposal, all while ensuring the 100,000-plus DHS employees get paid.
Mr. Speaker, I urge support for the rule and the underlying measure, and I yield back.
Mr. Speaker, I just would like to respond by saying the American people know what is going on with the Republicans, and I trust their wisdom. That is why Republicans are the most unpopular party in the country, and the President's popularity has never been lower. They can't afford you. You don't know how to govern.
In fact, if the American people could, they would sue the Republicans for malpractice.
Everything is going up. Gas prices are up. Housing is up. Groceries are up. Everything is up. They can't afford you.
Enough of this. Enough of this.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark), our Democratic whip.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Speaker Mike Johnson said that November will be a choice between common sense and crazy, and today he has proven himself right. This is a battle between common sense and crazy.
On the one side, we have a bipartisan bill to reopen TSA, reopen the Coast Guard while we are at war, reopen FEMA ahead of hurricane season, reopen our cybersecurity agency before the FBI gets hacked again, and reopen all the agencies that actually keep people safe. That is common sense. That is what Democrats are advocating for.
Crazy is wanting to keep all that shut down, all of it, so that masked ICE agents can keep kicking down doors without warrants, so they can keep committing acts of terror in our communities.
House Republicans have the easiest possible path to put people first. Vote for a bill that every Senate Republican voted for this morning. All they had to do was get out of the way, and they couldn't even bring themselves to do it. This is a battle between common sense and crazy, and the American people know which side the Republicans are on, and it is not the side of the people of this country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Minnesota for yielding and all the applause coming from the other side.
Look, Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this important bill to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security. You know, we have done this time and time again at least in the House. This will mark tonight the fourth time that the House has voted to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security.
I know there has been a lot of back and forth in the Senate, and then at 3 in the morning Senators just decided, well, throw in the towel and maybe see what they can cobble together to get out of town.
But, Mr. Speaker, we have got a job to do. Our job is to protect the American people to do our job to keep them safe, and that is why we created this Department, not some of the Department, not just pieces of the Department, but the entire Department of Homeland Security.
I know the other side over and over again has wanted to go back to open borders. We are not going to go back to open borders. The American people don't want us to go back to open borders. They have seen the peril of that.
We also, Mr. Speaker, cannot go back to a September 10 mentality, a pre-September 11 mentality where you just ignore the signs of the bad things that are happening in this country. We changed that after September 11, and we vowed: ``Never forget,'' never let it happen again, yet here we are.
Some Members want to get in the time machine, and they want to go back to another day where maybe America didn't have any attacks. Well, how about we go back in a time machine and listen to the Democrat leader Hakeem Jeffries. I will read a quote from Hakeem Jeffries. ``We are here today to do a single job, and that should be to fund fully the Department of Homeland Security. Anything else is an abdication of our responsibility. Anything else is an act of legislative malpractice. We are playing political games at a time when the safety and the security of the American people is being threatened.'' That was said in 2015 by Hakeem Jeffries.
Now, what has happened between now and then? Well, let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, this is not your father's Democratic Party anymore. You have seen how far the radical crazy elements of the party have taken over and tried to bring it to this socialist mentality, this open borders mentality, this defund the police mentality. And, yes, this bill absolutely defunds the police.
You have got under this bill that came over from the Senate, even when
The American people rejected the defund the police movement. Just because it happened in the Senate at 3 in the morning doesn't mean nobody heard it. We did. We didn't just hear it, we read the bill, and we said, no, Mr. Speaker, that is not the responsible thing to do for this country.
This country is counting on us. And by the way, it is at a time when we are at a heightened level of threats. If you are wondering what that heightened level is--I know there are some people that just want to go after police all the time. Why don't we just read a couple of the names that the other side doesn't want to read.
Richard Williams, Mr. Speaker, was an 83-year-old U.S. Air Force veteran who was randomly shoved into the subway tracks by an illegal alien from Honduras. He just died this week.
We have all heard of Sheridan Gorman. Maybe not enough people, Mr. Speaker, have heard of Sheridan Gorman, but we are going to say her name again. She was a beautiful 18-year-old young girl from Loyola University in Chicago, a student who had the world before her. She was shot to death by, yes, an illegal alien from Venezuela who came over here under President Biden's open borders that the other side wants to take us back to. We are not going to do that. That surely is not the responsible thing to do.
Stephanie Minter, a 41-year-old mother from Virginia, was randomly stabbed to death by an illegal, yes, with a lengthy rap sheet with more than 30 prior charges.
How many more of these do we have to have before some people will say, okay, maybe we need to fund this Department? I don't think there is an endless list before--they just don't want to offend their radical base, Mr. Speaker. That is really who they are afraid of.
Obviously, if they were concerned about all these Americans--over and over and over again. This is just in the last month who has been killed by people here illegally, and they are going to go and defund almost 7,000 people at the Department? That is insane.
And, oh, by the way, have we talked about the multiple terrorist attacks that have happened, yes, here on our homeland, not on foreign soil, here on our homeland just in the last month, and they want to partially defund this agency with this bill and the working families tax cut. Still over 10 percent of the whole agency will be defunded at a time when we are at a heightened terrorist threat.
Could you imagine if you had a terrorist outside of your house, and somebody said, well, we will let you lock the front door, but we don't have time to lock the back door? You would think that was crazy. You would lock the front door, the back door, the windows, and everything else, and you would go get your shotgun.
But yet, they want to defund this agency and make our country vulnerable, make Americans less safe? I am not going to have anything to do with that, Mr. Speaker. I want to fund the whole Department. That is what this bill does. It pays everybody. It pays the TSA agents as they should be, as Democrats have voted time and time again to not pay. We pay them. And it is not long-term. I wish it was. We have sent them a long-term bill. This is for a few months. We at least have time to keep negotiating our differences.
These are big differences, but these are dangerous times in America. This is not the time to defund the police, to defund the Department of Homeland Security at any level. Mr. Speaker, I would urge everybody to vote for this bill. Let's do our job. We are here doing the right thing to keep America safe. I urge adoption.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say I disagree with the true leader of the Republican Party, who I thought was Mike Johnson, but apparently, the gentlewoman corrected us; it is not. But let me just say the issue for us--first of all, let me say: ICE is being funded. Stop the BS. Stop the misinformation that somehow ICE is not being funded. Mr. Speaker, $85 billion, that is what they have.
That is what they have. The normal budget is $10 billion a year. It is $85 billion. Only Republicans would say that somehow that is not enough and that they are being defunded.
I will tell you the reason why we have concerns and are demanding reforms. It is because ICE is terrorizing communities and attacking people, including U.S. citizens. You should care about that.
A U.S. citizen went on his lunch break, and masked Federal agents detained him in a choke hold. Federal agents ripped a woman from her car as she screamed that she was a U.S. citizen. ICE agents in Minnesota ate lunch in a small-town Mexican restaurant. When they were done enjoying the meal, they detained the workers who served them.
In California, a U.S. citizen on his way to work at a food bank pulled over to warn Federal agents that they should wrap up their stop of another individual before school-age children gathered for the bus. Moments later, an ICE officer shot him in the back. You said nothing about that.
In Chicago, ICE agents stormed an apartment complex by helicopters as families slept and deployed chemical agents near a public school-- nothing from your side.
In Minnesota, ICE agents shot and killed Renee Good, a U.S. citizen, after she complied with agents' orders to move her vehicle away from the protest.
In Minnesota, two ICE agents shot and killed Alex Pretti, a U.S. citizen and a nurse, as he was exercising his constitutional rights.
Mr. Speaker, ICE is wreaking havoc on people all across this country, trampling over their constitutional rights. There was a time when you cared about the Constitution. U.S. citizens across this country are carrying their passports out of fear of being detained without cause. There are reports of Native Americans who are U.S. citizens being detained by ICE.
Thirty-two people died in ICE custody in 2025. It was ICE's deadliest year in two decades. In just the first 9 months of Trump's second term, over 170 U.S. citizens--U.S. citizens--were detained by ICE. Nearly 20 were children. Two dozen were held without being able to call a lawyer or their families.
Citizens are being dragged, tackled, beaten, and tased.
I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members from both sides of the aisle are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, it is all by design. It is all planned. For 4 years, it was a wide-open border, and 8 million to 10 million people entered this country.
Then, when they got here, leftwing politicians all across the country said: We are going to provide sanctuary for these 8 million to 10 million people who illegally came into the country. Eighteen cities, 11 States, three counties, and the District of Columbia, representing almost one-third of the population of this Nation, said: We will give sanctuary. We are going to tell local law enforcement not to work with Federal law enforcement when it comes to the enforcement of Federal law.
What does that mean in practice? An illegal migrant commits another crime and is in jail in a detention center. ICE sends a detainer there and says: Will you let us know if you are going to let this guy out?
Mr. Speaker, 17,864 times last year, they said: No. We won't work with you. Go get them on the streets.
What happens then? ICE goes out on the street to get them, and the leftwing agitators on the street spit on them, dox them, track them, harass them, and swear at them.
Now, what do the Democrats want to do? They don't want to pay them.
It is all by design. That is their plan for the country. The real question is: Why would a political party do that to this Nation?
I don't know, but they don't want a border, and they don't want enforcement of our Federal immigration law.
After what they put these ICE agents through on the street, after letting 8 million to 10 million people into the country, and after providing a sanctuary jurisdiction for the bad guys who did what this leader just said in Chicago to this college student, that is what these guys want.
That is what the country needs to understand, and that is what this election is about this fall.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote for this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, 237 years ago, one of our Founding Fathers, John Adams, laid bare his greatest fear for our country, which is that in every assembly, Congresses like this one, Members would gain influence not by sense, but by noise; not by greatness, but by meanness; not by learning, but by ignorance.
Why am I quoting John Adams at 10:30 p.m. on a Friday night? It is because this debate, the Judiciary chairman's remarks, are emblematic of the reality, the cold, hard truth that John Adams' fears proved prescient. All we hear is noise from the other side.
It is the kind of noise that expects the American people to believe that a bill that passed unanimously in the United States Senate somehow defunds the police. It is the kind of noise that expects the American people to believe that every conservative Republican U.S. Senator passed a bill last night that defunds the police. That is their argument.
The bill that the Senate passed, every conservative Senator and every liberal one came to a consensus that the stalemate needed to end, that TSA agents needed to be paid, and that FEMA needed to be funded. They passed that bill on a unanimous basis.
The only reason we are not considering it is because our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been captured by the far-right wing of their party. It is shameful.
We have an opportunity tonight to perhaps rise to the occasion and prove John Adams wrong.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
If a handful of Republicans--I am not talking about 30 or 20 or 10--if three vote to defeat the previous question, then we can take up the Senate bill tonight, and TSA agents will be paid. It is simple.
It is time for our Republican colleagues to do the right thing and defeat this bill.
Mr. Speaker, reality sometimes hurts. The fact is that the Democrat leadership, over a 4-year period, let millions and millions and millions of illegal aliens and illegal persons into our country and, along with it, tons of drugs and all kinds of human trafficking.
Now, they are arguing against deportations and are doing their very best to create chaos and hope the American people allow them to blame it on President Trump and Republicans.
After the House passed a bipartisan DHS funding bill, along with concessions from the White House and good faith efforts from both Chambers, Chuck Schumer still refused to take yes for an answer.
The bill we received does not fund DHS. It sets border security operations and CBP at zero quite intentionally. Zero dollars means that day-to-day operations at Customs and Border Protection are not funded. That is explicitly attempting to open our southern border.
Homeland Security Investigations, which stopped sex and child trafficking, is left out as well. Was that deliberate? Apparently so.
For the second time within a year, TSA agents are working without pay. That is terrible for them, for their families, and, of course, as we see, for the traveling public.
President Trump took action today, thankfully, to find a way to pay our TSA agents and allow our airports to run more smoothly. Now, we have to do our job.
The short-term CR that we have presented is far from perfect, but it keeps DHS running and our airports moving during Easter and Passover, heavy travel times. We have time now to work out a better long-term plan and agreement, as well.
Look, let's do what is right for once. Let's do what is right tonight for the American people and try to stop the politics. Let's fund Homeland Security and end this quite deliberately created chaos.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, after listening to the gentleman, I didn't know that Senate Republicans voted to open the southern border. I mean, Ted Cruz voted to open the southern border? Boy, that is something. I don't know.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to urge that we defeat the previous question. If we do, I will offer an amendment to the rule to adopt the Senate amendment to H.R. 7147, the bipartisan compromise bill that the Senate unanimously passed this morning to fund all law-abiding agencies under the Department of Homeland Security.
This bipartisan--I know that is a tough word for some of you--but this bipartisan solution would make sure that TSA employees are paid, FEMA employees are paid, cybersecurity employees are paid, and our Coast Guard is paid.
If Speaker Johnson would just put the damn bill on the floor of the House for an up-or-down vote, we all know it would pass. That is what this motion does. It simply allows for a vote to adopt the compromise bill that just passed unanimously through the Republican-led Senate instead of a vote on this Republican, partisan, 2-month, crappy CR bill that we know will not become law.
Now is the time to stand up against far-right extremism and take the deal. Let's have a vote on the Senate bill.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record along with any extraneous material immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro), ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, to discuss our proposal.
Mr. Speaker, the bill we are debating tonight will never become law. It is dead on arrival, doomed. The Senate has gone home. They did their job. They worked together in a bipartisan way to negotiate, deliberate, and strike an agreement that passed unanimously out of the Senate Chamber.
Imagine, Democrats and Republicans said ``yes.'' How often does this happen?
House Republican leadership refuses to bring it up for a vote because they know if they did, it would pass overwhelmingly. By blocking the Senate's agreement from receiving a vote, Republican leadership extends the shutdown, and that means another missed paycheck for Federal workers.
What is the Republican leadership position? Let us continue to withhold paychecks from TSA agents. Let us continue to force them to sleep in their cars, to continue to have to sell their plasma, to stay frightened to death of evictions.
Republican leadership is doing this because they do not want to enact even the most fundamental constraints on ICE, a rogue, lawless, and reckless agency. They want to allow them to continue harassing, beating up, and, yes, even killing American citizens.
They would rather prolong this shutdown, continue withholding paychecks from TSA workers, and keep extending the lines at airport security than enact a requirement that Federal officers obtain a warrant from a judge before they kick in your front door or they pick you up on the street.
They do not want to require independent investigations into egregious misconduct by ICE officers. They want
They side with out-of-control Federal agencies over the responsible, dedicated workers who keep air travel safe.
Only yesterday, President Trump decided that he has the ability to pay these workers. If the White House believes they have the authority and the funds to pay these workers, then they have had this authority all along for the past 42 days. However, what they chose to do was withhold the paychecks from TSA workers for political gain. It is shameful.
ICE is funded. Don't listen to them. They have $75 billion plus another $10 billion in a slush fund, and they can do whatever they want with it. Customs and Border Protection have $65 billion and another $11 billion in the Senate bill. Spare us the lies.
The American people know exactly who is responsible for prolonging this shutdown. The TSA workers, putting in yet another shift with no pay, will know when they see Republican Members hightailing it home to enjoy their spring break.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, we have an opportunity to end this shutdown. If we defeat the previous question, I will offer an amendment to the rule to bring up the bipartisan bill passed unanimously by the United States Senate.
If the House passed the bipartisan Senate agreement, I sincerely doubt, my friends, that the President of the United States would veto it. We can stop the madness tonight. Instead, Republican leadership is choosing to continue it for politics and political gain. It is shameful.
Mr. Speaker, I keep hearing about the need for bipartisanship, but I would just remind my colleagues across the aisle that just yesterday we voted for the fourth time to open the Department of Homeland Security. That was a bipartisan vote where some of their colleagues decided to join us. This is the second government shutdown that these Democrats have caused on the American people, this one for 42 days. That is how long the Democrats have dragged out their second government shutdown.
They have done this while refusing to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Once again, they are showing the American people that their loyalties lie with criminal, illegal aliens and not hardworking Americans.
Democrats are gambling with the safety of our country, all to appease their woke, radical base.
The American people were loud and clear, Mr. Speaker. They wanted secure borders. They wanted to deport criminal, illegal aliens, and they wanted a government that prioritized their safety.
Democrats are telling us exactly what they will do if they ever get the chance. They will reopen our borders. They will reopen the pipeline of deadly fentanyl at our southern border.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, I would just say to the gentleman from North Carolina, his two Republican Senators, Messrs. Tillis and Budd, didn't seem to have a problem. Maybe he should call them.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Stanton).
Mr. Speaker, we should have voted today, we should have voted yesterday, last week, last month to fund every department in Homeland Security, but not more money for ICE without changes.
That is what House Democrats are fighting for, and this morning, the Senate passed a bill unanimously to do just that, every single Senator, Democrat and Republican. Speaker Johnson called that Senate bill a joke.
Let me tell you what is not a joke: Cybersecurity experts going without pay on the same day Iran hacked the Director of the FBI, FEMA being dismantled in real time, or TSA agents launching GoFundMe accounts to pay for gas and groceries.
Instead of taking up the Senate bill, House Republicans are choosing to give even more money to Trump's mass deportation machine beyond the $75 billion slush fund they gave ICE last summer. There is no accountability, no oversight, no limits.
Let's be clear about what is happening. DHS is shut down because Republicans are refusing to listen to the vast majority of the American people who want to see changes to ICE. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
Mr. Speaker, I am listening to the other side of the aisle right now, and I want you to know what you are hearing right now is desperation.
It is desperation because they are this close to their ultimate objective, which is defunding ICE, CBP, and HSI, which, by the way, they are going after the 300,000 unaccompanied minors you all let into this country that no one can find. That is what is going on here right now.
This bill that the Senate has passed, I am going to call it Hakeem's dream. That is what this bill is. It is Hakeem's dream, but it is America's nightmare. That is what this bill is.
This Chamber here on this side of the aisle, we are not only saying no to that, we are saying hell no. We are not going to pass this.
The Speaker of the House of Representatives has stood up and said we are not going to take this anymore. We are going to fund ICE, CBP, and HSI, and we are going to put a stop to the madness that has been going on in this country for far too long. It is time to make America safe again.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I want everybody to know the gentleman from West Virginia was saying ``hell no'' to paying TSA workers, FEMA workers, Coast Guard workers, and CISA workers. Shame on you.
By the way, if you have some complaints about this bill, the gentleman from West Virginia should write his two Senators, Justice and Capito, because they voted for this.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Torres).
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. House of Representatives is being used as a front for Republican-sponsored lawlessness.
The Senate handed us a bipartisan deal to keep this country safe, but Speaker Johnson, shackled by his own extremism, called it a joke.
They want to talk about a joke, Mr. Speaker? It is a joke that we are being asked to hand a blank check to an agency that has turned into a regime secret police.
This is not border security. It is extortion. Republicans are holding the paychecks of hardworking TSA officers hostage to bankroll an agency that kidnaps U.S. children and dumps them across the borders, terrorizes our neighborhoods with zero accountability, and executes American citizens in cold blood.
My constituents don't want stopgap cowardice. They want a government that doesn't terrorize them.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
We are not just debating a budget. We are debating whether this House has the backbone to stand up to an administration that is addicted to cruelty.
If Members want to fund violence, do it on your own time. Do not do it with the blood and the tax dollars of hardworking American people. Bring the bipartisan Senate bill to the floor. Stop
Mr. Speaker, let's be clear about why we are here. Our Democrat colleagues created a national crisis by purposely allowing millions of people into the United States in violation of our laws, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans.
People like Jocelyn Nungaray whose mom I talked to today, who is watching what is happening here in realtime. It is people like Laken Riley, Rachel Morin, and tens of thousands of our children who died from fentanyl poisoning, all created by purposeful, political decisions by the previous administration and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
Now, we sit here today and my colleagues falsely claim that CBP and ICE are funded. The fact is, first, line staff are being mostly funded by virtue of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, but it leaves out civilian and support staff. That is the truth, factual truth.
Today, we had a quote from one of them. It says: The Senate bill paid TSA, but thousands of CBP and ICE professional staff will not be paid. The last paid workday for me was February 13. Now Senate on paid vacation until April 13. That is a guarantee for 2 months no pay. Very likely we won't be paid until May if Speaker Johnson lets this bill pass.
That is existing staff, watching what we are doing in realtime.
Second, not one, not one of my Democratic colleagues voted for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act they are hiding behind right now saying that the staff is paid. Not one.
Last night, yes, there was a voice vote in the middle of the night. This comment that somehow there was massive votes in support of this bill is simply not true.
There was a voice vote. The only, and I mean the only, barrier to getting funding for our law enforcement personnel and Border Patrol and ICE who are standing on the line to defend our country are five to seven Democrats in the Senate who refused to let the bill move through while allowing it to be filibustered at a 60-vote threshold.
Sheridan Gorman is dead, a student at Loyola, who was killed by Jose Medina, who was illegally present in the United States, who came in in 2023, and this just happened. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not want ICE doing their job, do not want Border Patrol doing their job, and are right here today refusing to do the job of funding this fully.
Mr. Speaker, I stand with Speaker Johnson. I stand with my colleagues. We should stand with Border Patrol. We should stand with ICE, and we should defend the United States of America.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I know the gentleman has a tough primary, but let me say, for the record, that none of us are hiding behind the big, ugly bill. We would not vote for a bill that cut Medicaid by a trillion dollars or cut SNAP by $200 billion. We certainly wouldn't vote for a bill that would provide multiyear funding for ICE.
That is just the reality. You did that, and so there is funding for ICE. I will just say to the gentleman that if he has a problem with this bill, he should check with Senator Cornyn, who is in the Republican leadership, and Senator Cruz who, by the way, I think you worked for.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Green).
Mr. Speaker, and still I rise, Mr. Speaker, and I rise tonight in the name of the TSA worker that made an appeal. I rise in the name of justice for the TSA workers. This worker said to me as I made my way through the airport, help us. We have families to feed. Help us. Fight for us.
This bill does not help those workers. It is dead on arrival. The bill that can help the workers is the compromised bill that came out of the Senate. This bill is dead. The Senate bill lives, and it will help those workers. They have families to feed. They must put food on the table. This bill doesn't do it. It is the Senate bill. It is the compromised bill. You don't want compromise. You want capitulation. Democrats will not capitulate.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, this debate has not changed the basic facts one bit. There is a bill that can pass the House. There is a bill that can become law. There is a bill that can end this shutdown. Speaker Johnson is refusing to bring it to the floor. That is the whole story.
Republicans can dress this up however they want. They can hold all the conference calls they want. They can play all the procedural games that they want. None of it changes the truth. This shutdown is continuing because the Republican Speaker of the House is too weak to stand up to the extremists running his conference.
While Republicans can't seem to face reality in Washington, people all over the country are living with the consequences: The TSA agent worried about rent; the Coast Guard spouse trying to stretch a paycheck that is not coming; the FEMA worker left hanging; the family stuck in chaos at the airport because this Republican Congress cannot do its job.
Now, let me be clear that those people are not pawns in some power struggle. They are not leverage. They are the people that we are supposed to serve, and, still, Republicans are failing them.
This CR isn't some serious answer. It is not. It is a joke. It is a joke. It is a plan to provide cover for a Speaker who knows exactly what needs to be done but does not have the guts to do it.
We all know the Senate bill is the exit ramp. So take it. Take it. Bring it up, pass it, and end this mess. That is what responsible people would do. That is what a real Speaker would do. That is what leadership is all about.
Tonight, if this shutdown continues, the American people should remember this moment. They should remember that the solution was sitting right here, ready to go, ready for a vote, and ready to pass. One man, Speaker Mike Johnson, said no.
Republicans, you own this. You own every delayed flight, every missed paycheck, every family under stress, and every hour of avoidable pain. This is a Republican shutdown. How dare you do this to the American people. People are tired of being jerked around. People are tired of being screwed over by your policies that favor the Epstein class at the expense of working people. Here we have a chance to help pay Federal workers, to keep our government running and Homeland Security, and you say no. You say no.
In the Senate it was a unanimous vote. Every Republican Senator went along with it. Not a single one of them objected. Even the most conservative right wing Senator did not object to it. Yet, that is not enough for you. That is not enough for you. Shame on you. Shame on this institution for not rising to the moment.
Mr. Speaker, I urge defeat of the previous question, and I urge a defeat of this rule. This is a lousy process. Shame on Republicans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to close this debate with a clear and unwavering message to my colleagues across the aisle and across the rotunda: you cannot fund only half of our Homeland Security.
There has been a lot of loud voices from the other side of the aisle. I think they believe the louder they speak the more the American people will believe them. The American people do understand that this CR makes sense. It funds everything, people get paid, and it allows more time to continue the discussion. This is the commonsense thing to do.
The proposal sent to us by the Senate in the dead of the night is not a solution. It is a Swiss cheese funding bill defined by its holes and deficiencies. While we all agree on the importance of protecting our airports, the Senate plan operates on the hope that we can secure our borders by using supplemental funds meant for construction and technology to cover basic operational needs.
The current bill does not just ignore the border. It actively harms our border security infrastructure. It keeps our cybersecurity experts at CISA furloughed while adversaries target our networks. It leaves FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund depleted and keeps our Coast Guard crews from the training they need to operate in hazardous conditions.
Our 60-day CR ensures that over 100,000 DHS employees receive paychecks. It ensures that investigations into drug trafficking, human smuggling, and child exploitation can commence.
It ensures that our BioWatch systems remain active in over 30 major cities to warn us of bioterrorism attacks.
The American people are tired of games. They do not want half- security or partial funding. They want a government that protects them at the airport, at the hospital, and at the border.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to stop holding our homeland defenders hostage to push a radical open-border agenda. Support this rule, support this CR, and let's get back to the business of securing the entire United States.
The material previously referred to by Mr. McGovern is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on the question of adoption of the resolution.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 209, nays 206, not voting 17, as follows:
Ms. RANDALL, Mr. SORENSEN, and Ms. PEREZ changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Ms. SALAZAR changed her vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. Speaker, I was not present during the following House votes today. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 107 and AYE on Roll Call No. 108.
Pursuant to the adoption of House Resolution 1142, the Senate amendment to H.R. 7147 is considered as agreed to with an amendment consisting of the text of the Rules Committee Print 119-21.
Senate amendment:
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026
