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.
12Bill and Joint Resolution Presented to the President
13Adjournment
1 member spoke
14Deletions of Sponsors From Public Bills and Resolutions
Daily Digest
Public Bills and Resolutions Introduced
33 public bills, H.R. 8395- 8427; and 7 resolutions, H.J. Res. 158; H. Con. Res. 87; and H. Res. 1201-1205, were introduced.
Pages H3044-45
Reports Filed
Reports were filed today as follows: H.R. 151, to require a citizenship question on the decennial census, to require reporting on certain census statistics, and to modify apportionment of Representatives to be based on United States citizens instead of all persons, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-619); and H.R. 7567, to provide for the reform and continuation of agricultural and other programs of the Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2031, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 119-620).
Page H3044
Speaker
Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed Representative Nunn to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.
Page H2999
Recess
The House recessed at 10:52 a.m. and reconvened at 12 p.m.
Page H3005
Committee Resignation
Read a letter from Representative Shreve wherein he resigned from the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Page H3005
Committee Elections
The House agreed to H. Res. 1201, electing Members to certain standing committees of the House of Representatives.
Page H3005
Rule for Consideration
The House considered H. Res. 1189, providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4690) to amend the Energy Conservation and Production Act to repeal certain Federal building energy efficiency performance standards; providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 1182) expressing support for rural communities across the United States as stewards of the environment, major suppliers of United States energy resources, critical providers of food production and manufacturing capacity, and drivers of national economic stability, and recognizing the work of the House of Representatives in the 119th Congress in support of those vital communities; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1897) to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to optimize conservation through resource prioritization, incentivize wildlife conservation on private lands, provide for greater incentives to recover listed species, create greater transparency and accountability in recovering listed species, streamline the permitting process, eliminate barriers to conservation, and restore congressional intent; and providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5587) to amend the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to waive the requirement for a Federal drilling permit for certain activities, to exempt certain activities from the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Further proceedings were postponed.
Pages H3006-13
Fire Improvement and Reforming Exceptional Events Act
The House considered H.R. 6387, to amend the Clean Air Act to require revisions to regulations governing the review and handling of air quality monitoring data influenced by exceptional events or actions to mitigate wildfire risk. Further proceedings were postponed. H. Res. 1174, the rule providing for consideration of the bills (H.R. 6387), (H.R. 6398), (H.R. 6409), and the resolution (H. Res. 1156) was agreed to Wednesday, April 15th.
Pages H3013-19
Member Resignation
Read a letter from Representative Cherfilus- McCormick, wherein she resigned as Representative for the Twentieth Congressional District of Florida, effective April 21, 2026, at 1:30 p.m.
Pages H3019-20
Whole Number of the House
The Chair announced to the House that, in light of the resignation of the gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. Cherfilus-McCormick, the whole number of the House is 431.
Page H3020
Recess
The House recessed at 2:49 p.m. and reconvened at 3 p.m.
Page H3025
Suspension: Proceedings Resumed
The House agreed to suspend the rules and agree to the following measure. Consideration began Monday, April 20th. Kari's Law Reporting Act: H.R. 5201, to direct the Federal Communications Commission to publish a report on implementation of the Kari's Law Act of 2017, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 405 yeas to 5 nays, Roll No. 127.
Page H3025
Suspensions
The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the following measures: Women and Lung Cancer Research and Preventive Services Act: H.R. 2319, to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a review to evaluate the status of research on lung cancer in women and underserved populations;
Pages H3020-21
Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act
H.R. 2493, to reauthorize certain programs regarding rural health care, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 406 yeas to 4 nays, Roll No. 128;
Pages H3025-26
Amending the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the telehealth network and telehealth resource centers grant programs
H.R. 3419, to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the telehealth network and telehealth resource centers grant programs; and
Page H3023
Requiring the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the time period during which licensees are required to commence construction of certain hydropower projects
S. 1020, to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the time period during which licensees are required to commence construction of certain hydropower projects, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 394 yeas to 14 nays, Roll No. 129.
Pages H3026-27
Meeting Hour
Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 11 a.m. tomorrow, April 22nd.
Page H3027
Committee Election
The House agreed to H. Res. 1202, electing a Member to a certain standing committee of the House of Representatives.
Page H3027
Quorum Calls: Votes
Three yea-and-nay votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H3025, H3025-26 and H3026-27. Adjournment: The House met at 10 a.m. and adjourned at 6:21 p.m.
Every speech and line is the Congressional Record's own text, read from GovInfo. Speakers are matched to members by GPO's own metadata. Referandom places each turn on the Clerk's video by matching its words: 162 of 244 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Morning-Hour Debate
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2026, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate.
The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with time equally allocated between the parties and each Member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to 5 minutes, but in no event shall debate continue beyond 1:50 p.m.
Mr. Speaker, last week, I had the privilege of visiting a historic landmark in Delaware formerly known as the Hockessin Colored School, which stands as a physical reminder of both the sin of segregation that scars our history and the change that is possible when dedicated citizens dare to build a more perfect Union, one that lives up to our values and our promise.
This small building served as an elementary school for Black students in Delaware from the 1920s until the 1950s, a time when legal segregation still reigned and race determined where you could be educated in our State.
Recently preserved through a mix of public and private dollars and through the tireless work of the friends of the Hockessin Colored School, the building profiles the students, teachers, and families who relied on that school and who fought to make Delaware the first legally segregated State in America to end Jim Crow in our schools.
Now, one of three sites in Delaware that are part of the Brown v. Board of Education National Historical Park, it tells the story of Sarah Bulah, whose daughter would watch the bus pass her by on its way to an all-White school and who dared to fight to end legal discrimination in education for her daughter and all students.
In 1952, the first Black attorney barred in Delaware, Louis Redding, represented the Bulah family in court, securing a win at the State level that would ultimately be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, consolidated alongside four other cases into Brown v. Board of Education. The courage of parents and students across the country like the Bulahs eventually led to the unanimous decision to cast aside separate but equal and end racial discrimination in our schools across the country.
The greatest privilege of my visit was meeting Mr. James ``Sonny'' Knott, who attended the Hockessin Colored School in the 1930s and, after living history, has helped preserve it for future generations.
Mr. Sonny walked me through the building recounting stories of his childhood and his memories within that school. He showed me a picture of his mom on the wall sitting right next to Sarah Bulah. He shared with me that he and his classmates never dreamed of a different world because the segregation of their childhood was all that they knew. He shared his and his fellow alumni's determination to protect that history and to inspire the students of today to believe in the possibility for progress before us, to continue our long march toward freedom and justice for all.
We have a long way to go, but hope flourishes from the knowledge of how far we have come. The stories told in this one-room schoolhouse are the stories of students and our State, of our classmates and our country.
As I stood there in the middle of that landmark, side by side with Mr. Sonny, looking at a picture of him sitting in the Oval Office with the President of the United States as he designated his school a national historical park 80 years after attending it, I was reminded of a simple but profound truth: America is great because America can change.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 120th anniversary of Congregation Beth Emeth, a generational cornerstone of the Jewish community in Wilmington and the surrounding areas.
A welcoming, inclusive, and engaging congregation, Beth Emeth has been celebrating, supporting, and shaping the experience of Jewish Delawareans for over a century and stands as a testament to the power of institutions of faith to bring people together, bridge divides, and to create spaces around shared purpose and compassion.
From their beginning in 1905 to the present, spiritual leaders have spoken at the Beth Emeth congregation. Whether in the home, school, or at work, rabbi after rabbi have transformed the Jewish community of Wilmington with passion and commitment
Today, in their 120th year, Beth Emeth continues to strive to build a community rooted in acceptance, respect, peace, kindness, justice, and integrity, moral imperatives that continue to shape their work and the community around them.
I am grateful for their stewardship and leadership in the history of Wilmington, their role as a pillar of the Reform Jewish community in Delaware, and all that they do for their neighbors.
To the Beth Emeth community, I congratulate you on your thriving community of faith and your legacy. May the next century be full of continued community building and loving leadership of the Jewish community in Delaware and beyond.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Reverend Snow Peabody for his continued efforts to give back to the community of Arizona, specifically through his work with Teen Challenge.
Now, Mr. Peabody has been working with Teen Challenge of Arizona since 1971 and has served as the executive State director for 50 years.
Reverend Peabody married his lovely wife, Ladelle, in 1976. They were married for 49 years and have three children: Sunny, Heaven, and Crystal Rain, as well as five grandchildren.
Now, Ladelle went home to be with the Lord at age 70 on March 14, 2025, just last year. Ladelle was a blessing to all that met her and to all that followed her direction as the Teen Challenge of Arizona State Music Director.
Ladelle could be seen at any of the five Arizona Teen Challenge centers singing songs of praise, engaging with everybody there, the men, the women, especially the children at the center, and bringing a joyful smile to each person that she met.
Together, the two led Teen Challenge for half a century, reaching and impacting countless lives. They began Home of Hope, a Teen Challenge center in Casa Grande. Additionally, they began the Springboard Home for Girls in Oro Valley back in 1976.
I was honored to speak at the Teen Challenge banquet last November where Reverend Peabody talked about leaving a seat open at his table because he knows that Ladelle is there, and she wouldn't want to miss it. She was with him at every single dinner and every single banquet, and at that special one, he left a seat open for her.
At that very moment it was clear to everyone in the room how much Teen Challenge means to both of them.
I thank Reverend Snow Peabody for his 55 years of incredible service with Teen Challenge. May Ladelle's legacy live on forever.
Mr. Speaker, last week was tax day. I probably don't have to remind most folks because it is a day that is both loved and lauded depending on who you are. For millions of Americans it is supposed to be a moment of relief, a chance to catch up, get ahead, and breathe a little easier because of the refunds that many expect.
But for far too many families, including my constituents in Ohio's 13th Congressional District, tax day was just another reminder that their money isn't going as far as it should.
While the President and House Republicans promised lower costs and bigger refunds, families are actually seeing grocery bills that are too high; gas prices that stretch their budgets; and rent, healthcare, housing, and everyday essentials that are taking up more and more of their paychecks.
When they finally get that tax refund, they will realize it doesn't go as far as promised, or they didn't get a tax refund at all, and it went nowhere.
That is not by accident.
Republican policies like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act gave massive tax breaks to millionaires, billionaires, and big corporations. The top 0.1 percent are receiving average tax cuts of more than $300,000. Meanwhile, Americans earning less than $50,000 a year are seeing their taxes go up.
Add in President Trump's lack of strategy on tariffs, which amounts to a national sales tax, and now families are paying more out of pocket while the wealthiest get a permanent tax break.
But that is not all. The one big, ugly bill also slashed a trillion dollars from Medicaid and cut billions to SNAP, jeopardizing healthcare and food for millions of Americans across the country and tens of thousands of my constituents.
And it is not just about coverage. It is about jobs. Hospitals and healthcare providers are the largest employers in Ohio's 13th District. When you cut funding at that scale you are not just hurting patients, you are threatening jobs, closing services, and weakening our local economy.
Mr. Speaker, we don't need to raise costs on working families to give more tax breaks to the wealthy. My Lowering Your Taxes Act expands the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit so working families can better afford childcare, groceries, housing, and other expenses. It would allow families to claim up to $3,600 per child, lift them out of poverty, and allow them to decide where their dollars are needed the most, while also expanding tax relief to workers who are often left out.
My No Tax on Overtime for All Workers Act makes a simple promise: If you work extra hours, you should be able to keep that extra pay because every extra hour on the job is time away from family, time spent working hard. That effort should be rewarded and not taxed, but because of the carelessly thrown together no tax on overtime provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, thousands of members of organized labor, the very people who built and made this country run, are excluded.
I have also worked with my colleagues, Republican and Democrat, through the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus to lower costs, strengthen supply chains, improve trade policy, and protect jobs in Ohio's 13th District, the birthplace of champions.
Trade policy should be strategic, not chaotic, and it should never leave American families paying the price.
I have called for restoring Congress' role in trade decisions because these choices are too important to be made without accountability.
There certainly is a need to ensure that American companies are able to compete with companies and goods from other countries with questionable labor practices, but what is happening with this administration is not the case. It is chaotic. It is expensive, and the national tax on goods costs way too much for the general American public.
At the end of the day, I will never stop advocating for my constituents and for the American public who deserve so much better than this.
We should all ask the question--because at the end of the day this is about who our economy works for--is it working for the families who are doing everything right, working hard, paying their taxes, going to work every day trying to get ahead; or is it working for the powerful and well-connected?
Well, I believe it should be working for the people, for the workers putting in overtime, parents trying to afford childcare, and families choosing between groceries and healthcare.
Working families deserve policies that lower costs and reward hard work and leaders who will fight for them every single day. I am that leader, and, Mr. Speaker, I call upon you and your majority to work alongside me.
Mr. Speaker, I was struck by a recent interview that former Senator Ben Sasse gave with Ross Douthat of The New York Times in which he argued that the future grand divide in human society will not be over income, class, or gender, but about how we incorporate technology into our lives.
If artificial intelligence, as many predict, is going to reduce economic scarcity in the long run, Senator Sasse argued that humanity will be left with
Some will choose to lean into this abundance. While it might result in greater efficiencies for some, it will also turbocharge the worst parts of how we use technology. Deep fakes, pornography, identity theft, placelessness, and social isolation are already rampant in our society and will only skyrocket in a world of mass-adopted generative AI.
Others will keep their eyes wide open and adopt technology more carefully, particularly when it comes to their children.
I recently introduced the AI Children's Toy Safety Act, which draws upon industry-led research about the dangers of incorporating AI chatbots in children's toys and mandates an immediate ban on the manufacturing, sale, importation, or distribution of any toy product in the United States made with an AI chatbot.
Nearly every AI service provider, such as OpenAI, Google, Perplexity AI, xAI, and Anthropic, have terms of service that state their products should not be used by unsupervised children under the age of 13. Yet these companies have been more than willing to let their product be licensed by children's toymakers anyway.
This poses serious data privacy challenges for children and risks locking them into addictive and unpredictable engagement patterns. It also risks exposing them to explicit content given that these chatbots have been trained on data generated by and for adults.
To be clear, I am as eager as any elected Republican to unleash the power of American innovation to win the AI race, cure cancer, and prevent the Chinese Communist Party from setting the standards for AI around the world. However, our approach needs to blend nations' security imperatives with a human-centric ethical framework, a framework that clearly states that more technological abundance is not always the same thing as more flourishing.
That is why I am also looking to introducing a House companion bill to Senator Josh Hawley's GUARD Act, which bans AI companies from developing romantic companion chatbots for minors and mandates that AI companies disclose their nonhuman status to all users to prevent minors from being tricked by artificial displays of empathy or affection.
As commonsense conservatives, we must be honest with Big Tech when their search to improve the bottom line invites serious ethical questions about our children's development.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Carlos Olin Godby.
Many of us here know him as the best IT administrator Capitol Hill has ever known, but much more than that, he was a husband, father, and friend of those who knew him.
It didn't matter the issue or request. Carlos was there ready to lend a hand at a moment's notice. He was a calm and dependable problem solver, intelligent, and trustworthy. There was never a problem he couldn't fix, and if he wasn't sure right then, we knew he would figure it out. Always before he even told me, he was calling me back with a solution.
Carlos brought a special light into our offices. He didn't just fix our IT problems. He asked how we were doing. He asked about our families, and he showed that he cared personally about those he served professionally.
He spoke often about his wife, Angela, and his daughter, Adele. They were truly his pride and joy.
Carlos enjoyed spending time with friends at Mount Vernon Park, trying to perfect his lawn, listening to all kinds of music, creating delicious dishes with New Mexico green chile, and rooting for the New Mexico State Aggies and the Dallas Cowboys.
Our thoughts and prayers are with his loved ones now, especially Angela and Adele. I believe Carlos is watching over them now and is still cheering them on. He is proud of everything they are doing.
Carlos served on the Hill for over 30 years. It is impossible to accurately describe the kind of person he was in just a short speech. I speak on behalf of my staff, myself, and countless others who were fortunate enough to cross paths with him. His impact and generous spirit will outlive him, and we will miss him dearly.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate my district director, Eric White, a scrappy kid from Rozzie, a 23 year old when he first came to work for my city council office. He is a history buff, a voracious reader, a decent hockey player, a proud graduate of our Boston public schools, and a dedicated advocate.
There can be no doubt that Eric's worldview and values were formidably shaped by his upbringing: two loving parents in John and Nina who modeled strong work ethics and even stronger bonds of love for one's family, neighbor, and community.
The stories that Eric's father, John, a union laborer, one of seven children raised by a single mom, I know impacted Eric. That clearly informed the fights that he took on for working families, for workers' rights, for fairness, and for justice. Between his two parents, given his proud Irish and Italian heritage, I know it informed the fights that he took on for immigrants and anyone else in pursuit of the American Dream.
Throughout the years, Eric has been at my side, crafting strategies for transformative legislation like our liquor license reform efforts to support neighborhood restaurants, transformative investments, stewarding our community project funding, and crafting speeches that spoke to the heart, to the heart of the matter, and to the heart of man.
Eric has been by my side for long car rides, for late-night community meetings, marching in parades, or shoulder to shoulder at a union strike.
During my Boston City Council tenure, Eric worked his way up from neighborhood liaison to policy director to chief of staff. As he closes out this chapter as my district director in my congressional office and looks to new horizons for change and impact, it isn't lost on me that the student of history is today a maker and shaper of history.
Eric's impact on Boston politics, municipal, and Federal policy will endure, but I know his greatest legacy is still being written in the family he has grown and the beautiful life that he is building with his wife, Kelsey, whose nuptials I had the honor of officiating; their son, Cam; daughter, Maize; and one day soon a dog named Teddy, named after President Roosevelt, of course.
Mr. Speaker, I am so proud of Eric. I am proud of his contributions. I am proud of his legacy of kindness, compassion, and composure. I am so proud of the man he has become.
John and Nina have raised an exceptional human being. I have not forgotten about Jared. He played a role as a brother, as well.
I know that incredible chapters lie ahead for Eric personally and professionally. His mark on Massachusetts-07 is not deniable, and his impact in my life is indelible.
He has always been there. He has been there as an anchor. He was there when I said good-bye to my mother. He was there when I met my husband. The young man who started as an aide in my office is now a permanent member of my family. Lucky me. Lucky me.
I love Eric ``E-Rock'' White. I thank him for 13 years of dedicated service and innumerable personal sacrifices. I thank him for everything.
Mr. Speaker, as I have recognized the excellent staff members who are working with me in this, my freshman term, may I also recognize and thank the young people, college students and recent college grads, who have labored in the inglorious role of intern doing day-to-day grunt work necessary but often boring. They have given months of their young lives on my behalf, and I am grateful.
They include Pearl Vinard, Emma Balber, Annie O'Connell, Marion Karp, Jacob Niedzielski, Reese Chamberlain, Cheyenne Etemadi, Lauren Flum, and Zachary Couzens.
I trust this experience was a good one for each of them and that in the years to come they will achieve great professional and personal success.
Mr. Speaker, we have spent 1\1/2\ years watching this majority implement Project 2025. I think it is time for us to discuss Project 2027, the things that this House can and should do under new leadership.
Let me highlight a priority for 2027: Stop insider trading by Members of Congress, the Cabinet, the President and Vice President, and their families. We will never gain the faith of the American people proclaiming that we have their best common interest at heart when they see examples of elected and appointed officials putting their own personal economic interests at heart.
My hometown in New York's 16th Congressional District includes many of the most successful financial minds on Wall Street, but it also includes everyday, hardworking people who don't have any holdings on Wall Street. Let's make sure the playing field is fair, not stilted in favor of those who have access to information not available to all.
Let's prove we mean what we say. If this majority in 2026 won't act, then let a new majority act in 2027.
Mr. Speaker, permit me to jump forward and to provide unsolicited advice to a person I do not know. On January 22, 2027, that will be the third day of the Presidency of the 48th President of the United States.
I encourage that person to fire up Air Force One and fly to Ottawa; invite Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney to meet them on the tarmac and give them a big public hug; motor together to the Canadian Parliament, address the collective legislature, and tell them: America, your friend, has come home; announce the end of Canadian tariffs and open up a dialogue on the issues between us.
In so doing, you will not only be sending a message to Canada, but you will be sending a message to England, to France, to Germany, and to Japan. We will begin to restore the respect that we have lost in the capitals of the free world.
Mr. Speaker, the San Fernando Valley mourns the loss of Belinda Barragan.
Belinda was a proud, lifelong resident of the San Fernando Valley, graduating from St. Genevieve High School in Panorama City. For over 30 years, she was at the forefront of public service, advocating for working families and Latinos, ensuring that they had all the opportunities and support to thrive.
Belinda uplifted thousands of women and community members with her uniquely warm, funny, and love-centered leadership. Her career in public service has often been behind the scenes, and she has taught us the definition of steadfast leadership.
Through her work with HOPE Leadership Institute, Belinda empowered hundreds of Latina professionals and created opportunities for these women to strengthen their confidence and grow as leaders.
Her integrity and compassionate leadership helped build the careers of grassroots community leaders as well as those in the public and private sectors. She supported many Latino elected officials when they first started in politics, including former Congressman Tony Cardenas and Senator Alex Padilla.
Congressman Cardenas said that Belinda always helped everyone around her to be their best. Her intensity was infectious. Belinda's caring and loving personality matched her tough, ``let's get the job done'' attitude. He called her a force for good and positive change.
Senator Padilla called Belinda Barragan the nicest person you would ever meet and that she had a special ability to keep you on task and on deadline when there was work to be done.
Senator Padilla asked Belinda to be his campaign manager when he first ran for city council. He said that seeing Belinda at HOPE events over the years always brought him back to his early days in politics. Belinda will be remembered for her unwavering integrity, empathetic leadership, and her lifelong residency in the San Fernando Valley.
Her memory will live on in the hearts of all who knew and loved her.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for a moment of silence in honor of Belinda.
Mr. Speaker, let's talk about naked, open, brazen corruption. The Trump administration is guided and shaped by it, emboldened by what they can get away with while the American taxpayer watches their own hard-earned paycheck siphoned away by ever-growing gas prices, groceries, rent, and healthcare. All the while, Donald Trump flaunts his White House ballroom and D.C. arch, with displays of nauseating corruption for his billionaire buddies in broad daylight.
Take Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law, a man with no meaningful political, diplomatic, or civil service experience, who was handed sweeping authority during the first Trump administration over Middle East policy and was sent across the world to represent the United States. At the same time, his family's real estate empire in New York was in trouble after years of mismanagement and actively seeking foreign investment. He sure found it.
Kushner was shaping U.S. foreign policy while simultaneously building relationships with foreign leaders that would later become financially valuable to him personally. He was acting as a diplomat for himself at the expense of America's interests abroad and our national security.
Kushner communicated directly with wealthy, high-ranking officials like Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, using unsecured and unauthorized channels like WhatsApp, with limited or no transparency and recordkeeping regarding these official and ethically dubious conversations.
Nothing has changed since the first Trump administration. In fact, it has only gotten worse. They no longer even pretend to hide it.
While Kushner and Trump ally and billionaire friend Steve Witkoff meet with Gulf countries about matters pertaining to U.S. national security, they are also directly involved with selling massive billion- dollar deals to friends and family of the President. It is the largest corruption scandal ever seen in the United States, leading back directly to Donald Trump, members of his family, and top administration officials.
Kushner is a private citizen. He is not subject to the rules and regulations of actual public servants, including background checks and requirements for security clearance. He is negotiating America's foreign policy and matters of literal war and peace between the United States and Iran--some of the most consequential negotiations of the 21st century.
Meanwhile, new reporting from The New York Times shows that Kushner is simultaneously soliciting $5 billion in new investment from the very same foreign governments with a direct stake in these negotiations.
It would be too outlandish for a movie script. Yet, this is the reality in America today: an elite ruling class that makes policy decisions based on how it will affect their personal bottom line and using taxpayer-funded government to get rich at our expense.
I mean, Trump is literally suing the IRS, which he controls, for $10 billion--money straight from the taxpayers into his own pocket.
There is hope. All across the world, people are organizing and uniting against corrupt leaders who view government as a tool to enrich themselves and their friends. In Hungary, after 16 years of democratic backsliding in a state molded into a piggy bank for the elite, a broad coalition defeated Viktor Orban, despite him doing literally everything he could to rig the system in his own favor.
Hungary shows us that there is a path forward: follow the money, take no vote for granted, and make corruption shameful again.
When Democrats take back the House in November, I will work to ensure that subpoenas fly out for every taxpayer dollar and cent that Trump and his family have spent during their time in office steering into their own pockets. Kushner will come under oath and testify, and accountability will not stop there.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Miguel Alvarado of Guadalupe, Arizona, a man deeply respected in our community.
For over two decades, Miguel has shown up for his neighbors with consistency and with heart. For 25 years, he has led the Guadalupe Car Show, a tradition that brings thousands together to celebrate culture, creativity, and community pride.
The 25th Anniversary Guadalupe Car Show returns on Sunday, April 26, transforming downtown Guadalupe into a vibrant festival with lowriders, classic cars, and custom builds, drawing 10,000 to 15,000 attendees from across Arizona. It is a must-attend event for families and car enthusiasts alike.
Beyond the car show, Miguel has organized events for over 15 years that support local families, including a back-to-school drive and a Christmas celebration, bringing joy and gifts to children. For more than a decade, he has also provided turkeys to families in need during the holidays.
Mr. Speaker, Miguel's work brings people together, building a network of volunteers committed to giving back. He reminds us that strong communities are built by those who show up. I am proud to represent him in Congress.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a remarkable western New Yorker and my good friend, Edward Herndon, Sr., who passed away on April 19, 2026, at the age of 95.
Ed's life was defined by service to our country, our community, and his family.
Born in Kings Mountain, North Carolina, on November 10, 1930, to Hubert and Anna B. Herndon, Ed's journey led him to Washington, D.C., and then to western New York, where he would leave an indelible mark on our community and everyone he met.
From an early age, Ed embodied the values of hard work, integrity, and faith in action.
After graduating from Lackawanna High School, he answered the call to serve and enlisted in the United States Air Force. Ed served with distinction during two tours in Korea and Japan between 1946 and 1950, and he continued his service as an Air Force reservist until 1956.
Ed's devotion to our country did not end when he hung up his uniform. At home, he found new ways to serve. He worked with the United States Postal Service, Western Electric, and the city of Buffalo, where his skills and leadership earned him appointment as director of real estate in 1957, a position he held for 16 years.
Ed later served on the city Board of Assessment Review, where his approach said everything about him. He was knowledgeable, committed, and, above all, fair. He understood that property assessment is not just a number. It is a real consequence for a family or a senior on a fixed income, and he never forgot that.
That sense of humanity was rooted in his faith. For decades, Ed was an active and devoted member of his congregation at St. Philip's Episcopal Church. Faith wasn't just something he professed. It was the life he lived. It showed in his integrity, his honesty, and his extraordinary ability to connect with people.
Those who knew Ed the most will remember he had a rare gift for making friends, and he used it generously. Everywhere he went, friendships followed. Whether it was a next-door neighbor, a mail carrier, a police officer, or a Member of Congress, Ed greeted everyone with the same sincerity and respect, a big, friendly hello, a genuine smile, and often a welcoming hug.
My own family knew this firsthand. My parents first met Ed at a St. Patrick's Day party, and a friendship was born that lasted decades.
When my father served as the Buffalo commissioner of assessment and taxation, he worked alongside Ed on the Board of Assessment Review. He told me Ed was one of the finest examples of a public servant he had ever witnessed, a man who brought his full character to the job and was beyond reproach.
Ed never missed a chance to celebrate life, either. Whether it was the Juneteenth Festival, Dyngus Day, or St. Patrick's Day, Ed was there to celebrate with his fellow Buffalonians.
Nothing captured that spirit better than his 90th birthday, which was right in the middle of the COVID shutdown. What unfolded was a drive-up celebration unlike any other. Friends, colleagues, and loved ones from every corner of his life lined up to pass by, wave, and wish him well. There was Ed, sitting at the curb, greeting every single car with that same infectious smile, that same wave, celebrating right back. It wasn't a birthday party as much as a testament to a life well-lived.
As extraordinary a servant as he was to the public, Ed's proudest legacy was his family. In 1956, he married the love of his life, Jean Ruth Watts. Together for 58 years, they built a beautiful family. He was father to seven children--Gladys, Brian, Eric, Joan, Edward Jr., Michael, and Gina--grandfather to 9, and great-grandfather to 18.
Edward Herndon was the very definition of a public servant, patriot, husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and leader who gave back more than he ever asked for in return. His story is one of deep devotion and quiet strength, and it serves as a reminder--a challenge-- of what it looks like to live fully and give generously.
Through his service to our country, his dedication to western New York, and the boundless love he poured into his family and community, Edward Herndon's legacy will live on in our hearts as a shining example of our Nation's highest ideals.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a grateful community and a grateful nation, may Edward Herndon, Sr., rest in peace. We loved him.
Mr. Speaker, a recent vaccine trial for patients with pancreatic cancer using mRNA technology produced an astounding result: Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest forms of cancer.
More than 90 percent of people diagnosed with pancreatic cancer die within 2 years, but among those who were in this vaccine trial, half are still alive today, more than 6 years later.
If these results continue in future rounds of the trial, we will have made an incredible breakthrough that could give new hope not only to those with pancreatic cancer but other forms of cancer, as well. This is just one of many ongoing studies showing great promise.
Unfortunately, right when we are on the cusp of making incredible advances in the fight against cancer, the funding for this research is under threat.
Last year, the White House proposed cutting funding for cancer research by 40 percent and canceled a number of research grants. Some of the biggest cuts have been to research of mRNA, the same technology used in the successful pancreatic cancer trial.
In August, the administration canceled grants for 22 mRNA vaccine research studies alone. This does not make America healthier.
My own family has been afflicted by cancer. I know the agony people feel when they receive that terrible diagnosis, the horrible process of chemo and radiation, the cost, and the sorrow that American families have had to live with because of a serious cancer diagnosis.
We cannot turn our backs on those families when we are so close to finding
The truth is that, even before the current administration, we weren't doing enough. Last year, the Federal Government spent about $7 billion on cancer research. The war in Iran is costing us more than a billion dollars a day.
Think about that. We will spend more on the war in Iran in 1 week than we spend on cancer research in an entire year. Think about the lives that could be saved and the families who would get to spend more holidays and graduations with their loved ones if we had the right priorities.
We don't need to spend billions more on unnecessary wars in the Middle East or ballrooms or more ICE agents. Instead, let's do what we do best as a country and invest in innovation and science to save lives.
Mr. Speaker, it has been exactly 1 year since Speaker Johnson said that he supports a stock-trading ban for Members of Congress. One year, and what has happened? Absolutely nothing.
We need to pass a congressional stock-trading ban because it is not fair that Members of Congress have access to inside information that influences major industries--the pharmaceutical industry, the tech industry, and others--and can trade off of that information that average Americans don't have.
By the way, Members of Congress should not be conflicted when making decisions about how to legislate. The overwhelming majority of the American people want this reform. They understand that we have a corruption problem in Washington.
If a bill were brought to the floor today, it would pass overwhelmingly. I have a bipartisan bill along with Chip Roy, and Members on both the left, right, and center: Pramila Jayapal, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Brian Fitzpatrick, and Tim Burchett. We have a great bill with over 100 cosponsors. We could vote on that today, and it would pass.
We have got a discharge petition. We can get this done. We need a Speaker with the courage to do the right thing and call a vote.
Mr. Speaker, south Florida is grieving because Nancy Metayer, the beloved vice mayor of Coral Springs, Florida, tragically passed away earlier this month.
This was not just the loss of a public official. This was the loss of a daughter, a friend, and a powerful voice for our State. It is the kind of tragedy that stops people in their tracks and leaves an entire community asking how someone so vibrant, so committed, and so full of promise could be taken from us so suddenly. Nancy was a rising star and, more importantly, she was a great person.
There were really two types of phone calls I got from Nancy. Whenever I saw her name come up on my phone, I never knew which one I was going to get. The first was a call about somebody who needed help, there was an issue, a family, a problem in the community, something Nancy believed needed attention, action. She was relentless in the best sense of the word. She was never calling about herself, something she needed. She was always calling about help for someone else. She was always their advocate, and Nancy wanted to use her voice for others.
That instinct to fight for people showed up in every part of her public life. Nancy was a proud advocate for the Haitian community, and she understood that representation matters. She knew that public service is about making sure every family, every neighborhood, and every voice counts. She also brought that same passion to fighting for the environment because she believed that we must protect the world and that it must be left better for the next generation.
That, Mr. Speaker, was the first type of call I got from Nancy. The second type of call was actually my favorite type of call. That is where Nancy disagreed with me, maybe something I was going to do, something I had already done, and Nancy never hesitated to make sure I knew how she felt. She had a gift of communicating her feelings. She could challenge you directly, push you to be a better person, and still make you feel respected in the process. That is rare, and that is who Nancy was.
Nancy wanted to join us here in Congress and be our colleague. She was taken from us on the eve of her announcement. I will say plainly what so many others know to be true, that had Nancy decided to take that step the next day, Nancy would have probably won that race. She would have had the strength, the talent, and the heart for this institution. She understood that public service is about showing up for people, standing up for people, and never losing sight of who we send to this body.
While all of us in the Florida delegation cannot help bring Nancy here as a Member of this body, we can help make sure that her name and her legacy are honored. That is why I am announcing today that I will introduce legislation to name a post office in Nancy Metayer's honor, so that her life of service to south Florida will be permanently recognized by the people and the communities she loved.
Nancy Metayer mattered. She mattered to the city of Coral Springs. She mattered to Broward County. She mattered to south Florida. She mattered to her family, her friends, and all of us who had the privilege of knowing her. Her death is a tragedy. Her loss is profound. Her life, her voice, and her legacy will endure.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for a brief moment of silence in Nancy Metayer's honor. May her memory be a blessing.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to a grave injustice unfolding in Pakistan. Last December, an Ahmadi Muslim educator, Mubarak Ahmad Sani, was sentenced to life in prison; not for violence, not for incitement, but for possessing a Koran.
Mr. Sani was convicted under Pakistan's blasphemy laws. His sentence is a stark reminder of how these laws stifle the ability of religious minorities to study, to pray, and to express themselves freely.
Sadly, Mr. Sani's case is not an anomaly. It reflects a systematic persecution of Ahmadi Muslims who are denied equal citizenship rights in Pakistan. They are prevented from calling themselves Muslims under Pakistan's Constitution, jailed and prosecuted under anti-Ahmadi laws, denied the right to participate freely in elections, and even prevented from burying their dead with dignity.
In Pakistan, discrimination has been given the weight of the law. This has emboldened extremists to target the Ahmadi Muslim community. Extremist groups, most notably a far-right Islamist party known as TLP, have engaged in a coordinated campaign of persecution. They vandalize mosques, form intimidating and violent mobs near community events, and even kill worshippers.
Incidents such as these are reported with disturbing frequency. Those responsible are very rarely held accountable. On the contrary, local authorities often bow to extremist pressure. They fail to prevent or contain violence. Then, to add insult to injury, they detain the victims of the attacks.
This climate of impunity sends a dangerous message: that persecution is permissible and that some lives are less worthy of protection than others.
In recent months, the government has taken steps to crack down on the TLP. Ahmadi Muslim communities have been able to breathe a little bit of a sigh of relief, and that is welcome.
However, human rights are interrelated and interdependent. The right to religious freedom cannot be guaranteed without also guaranteeing the right to freedom of assembly, to freedom of expression, and to equal protection under the law.
That means the Pakistani Government must take serious, sustained steps to address these broader crises. It
Mr. Speaker, the implications of this injustice are global. When a state legitimizes persecution, it weakens the universal principles of human rights and emboldens similar abuses elsewhere.
I urge the U.S. State Department to speak out clearly and forcefully to press the Government of Pakistan to release Mubarak Sani from prison, end its persecution of Ahmadi Muslims, repeal discrimination and discriminatory anti-Ahmadi laws, and uphold its international human rights obligations.
I believe when all is said and done, Mr. Speaker, that if the United States of America stands for anything, we need to stand out loud and foursquare for human rights. I hope we will do so in this case.
Madam Speaker, President Donald Trump has a proven agenda of tax cuts, deregulation, energy dominance, and more. An immediate benefit is creating jobs.
The Department of Labor announced 178,000 new jobs in March, nearly triple the number forecast, a powerful confirmation of the Trump pro- growth agenda.
Most positively affected is manufacturing, the first growth in that area in 3 years, and also the construction industry, expanded by gains in specialty trades and residential homebuilding.
Yesterday, the Scout Motor Company with President Scott Keogh dedicated a phenomenal training facility with readySC and technical colleges in Blythewood, South Carolina, beginning the hiring of 4,000 skilled workers. Blythewood is now home of Scout.
In conclusion, God bless our troops. As the global war on terrorism continues, Trump is reinstituting peace through strength revealing war criminal Putin's lies, insulting and mocking Trump as war criminal Putin provides targeting information to Iran to kill Americans.
Our sympathy upon the death of the American patriot Jerry Bellune of Lexington, South Carolina, a fair and honest journalist.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor my constituent, a man whose work has quietly shaped how this institution understands itself for more than three decades. Chuck Conlon is retiring after 31 years with CQ House Action Reports.
As Members came and went and Congresses turned over, Chuck never missed a step. The bills kept coming, the deadlines kept arriving, and Chuck kept delivering every report factual, thorough, and on time.
Members of Congress and their staff, from grizzled veterans who have seen it all to interns on their first week on the Hill, have relied on Chuck's reports to understand what is actually in the legislation before this body: what it does, what it costs, why it matters, and written clearly, completely, and without bias.
Chuck would stay late to iron out the final edits and still find time to brief himself on what happened overnight so
The people of Virginia's 11th District are lucky to call Chuck a neighbor. I thank him for his service and wish him a well-earned retirement.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize an incredible public servant from my district.
After more than three decades of service to the city of Kannapolis, Mr. Mike Legg is beginning his well-earned retirement.
Mike began working for Kannapolis in 1995, earning the community's respect and trust. In 2004, he was appointed city manager, a post which he has stewarded for more than two decades, growing the city, bringing life to the community, and carrying the torch on the downtown revitalization and continued development of the North Carolina Research Campus.
Madam Speaker, Mike's hard work has helped make Kannapolis home for the city's more than 50,000 residents. I thank him for his many contributions to our community. I know he won't be far from the action, but I wish him a long and joyous retirement.
Madam Speaker, hunger in America is on the rise. Food prices are through the roof. Half of Americans are struggling to afford groceries in this terrible Trump economy.
Trump and this Republican Congress have prioritized tax breaks for billionaires, illegal wars, and tariffs that have all come at the expense of cheaper goods for the American people.
Now, they are advancing a farm bill next week that locks in their $187 billion cut to SNAP enacted as part of their big, ugly bill in July for the next 5 years. That terrible policy enacted to give tax breaks to billionaires has already stolen basic food benefits from over 2.5 million veterans, seniors, and families with teenagers. Some of the worst provisions haven't even gone into effect yet.
SNAP provides people with about 2 bucks per meal to afford nutritious groceries. That is it. Republicans are decimating this program, making it even more difficult for families to afford food.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues who care about making food more affordable for working people to join me in voting ``hell no'' on this disastrous Republican farm bill and not be complicit in increasing hunger in America. For God's sake, let's come together to end hunger now.
Madam Speaker, today, I rise in opposition to this administration's plan to completely gut the U.S. Forest Service, move its headquarters to Utah, and shutter 57 research stations.
Our Ag Secretary said that her decision is guided by common sense, but, truly, it is a slap in the face to Teddy Roosevelt and those who carefully crafted the Forest Service as we know it.
I am a hunter, an angler, and someone who spends a lot of time in my national forests. I know my supervisors, my district rangers, and even the volunteer crews. As the cofounder of the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus, I don't see a shred of common sense in this decision.
What I do see is another backdoor move by this administration to push forward an anti-public lands agenda that discards career staff, under- resources our land agencies, and prioritizes corporations rather than focusing on combating wildfires, wildlife habitat, rural communities, and the growing outdoor recreation economy. We need more, not less, U.S. Forest Service resources and staff out West in places like New Mexico.
Madam Speaker, stripping resources from an agency that is already stretched thin and struggling to mitigate the impact of wildfires is the opposite of common sense. It is stupidity.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Dr. Manuel ``Manny'' Berriozabal.
Manny was born in San Antonio, where he met his wife, Maria, and served our community for five decades.
After growing up in Independence, Missouri, he would go on to teach mathematics at UCLA, Loyola Marymount, the University of New Orleans, and Tulane.
Manny joined the UTSA faculty in 1976, and he was a force for change. He worked tirelessly to prepare and inspire generations of students to pursue math and science careers. He founded the Pre-Freshman Engineering Program, PREP, helping give over 50,000 alumni access to rewarding opportunities in STEM. That program is now in 33 sites across seven States.
Outside of the classroom, he fought for equity and opportunities for underserved communities, making our city a better place to learn and live.
He was also a longtime friend.
Madam Speaker, he believed in the power of education and community. His legacy lives on through countless students in San Antonio and across the country. May he rest in peace.
Madam Speaker, out on the water in eastern North Carolina, workers are putting in long hours and long days, doing honest work to feed their neighbors and keep our coastal economy alive.
Their way of life is under threat. Rising costs are squeezing businesses and families. Unfair competition from imported shrimp is making it harder to get a fair price for a hard day's work.
Concerns about mislabeling on imported seafood only make matters worse. Families think they are buying local seafood, but they are not. It only undermines consumer trust.
Spending time with commercial fishermen and shrimpers in eastern North Carolina made one thing clear: Reducing barriers for our seafood industry and bringing costs down will, indeed, make eastern North Carolina stronger.
Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4690, Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act; Providing for Consideration of H. RES. 1182, Expressing Support for Rural Communities Across the United States As...
Madam Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), 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.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, last night, the Rules Committee met and produced a rule providing for consideration of four pieces of legislation.
The rule provides for consideration of H. Res. 1182, expressing support for rural communities across the United States, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees.
The rule further provides for consideration of H.R. 4690, the Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act, under a closed rule, with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 5587, the HEATS Act, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
The rule also provides for consideration of H.R. 1897, the ESA Amendments Act, under a closed rule with 1 hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Natural Resources or their respective designees and provides for one motion to recommit.
Now, Madam Speaker, as the House of Representatives works to deliver on critical issues for the American people, we urge our colleagues to pass this suite of bills that I just described.
As I already talked about, we have a resolution to support our Nation's rural communities. We have legislation to unlock geothermal energy. We have legislation to repeal burdensome energy mandates on Federal buildings, and we have a fix to the Endangered Species Act.
Now, I anticipate some of the arguments my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will make, and I would just note something that is critically important, this is going to raise issues about why we are bringing up a resolution, for example, with regard to support for our rural communities.
The fact is, if you look at what has been happening over the last 16 months, you will see that the Republican House of Representatives has led on numerous issues, issue after issue, month after month.
We started this Congress by passing legislation, the Laken Riley Act, to ensure that we can have adequate and full enforcement by ICE and by our Border Patrol men and women who are securing our country, by improving that law to ensure that people can be adequately removed.
Importantly, it included the sue act which will allow States, such as my home State of Texas, to be able to defend our homes by suing the Federal Government when it fails to secure the border, as occurred under the previous President and the previous Secretary of Homeland Security.
Fast-forward to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a piece of legislation that made permanent tax rates so that we can have growth and economic opportunity for the American people, lower taxes for millions of Americans to ensure that we can actually grow this economy and compete worldwide.
We had legislation in that bill that removed some of the onerous subsidies that were undermining reliable energy in Texas and around the country with the green new scam subsidies that were making energy more expensive for the American people.
We had reforms to our programs, whether it was Medicaid or whether we are talking about food stamps. By the way, those reforms are probably going to make it easier for us to move a farm bill in the coming weeks.
We had significant resources that were put aside for our defense, to modernize our military after it languished under the previous administration, and we had language that is enabling us to fund ICE and Border Patrol right now, which brings me to my final point.
What we have been able to pass has been hitting a wall, a wall in the Senate, of Democrats who refuse to do the job the American people sent us here to do. We had over 40 days of shutdown in the fall, 40 days where we had to deal with the lack of pay and resources for the people who defend our country, including TSA at airports. We are currently in over 60 days of shutdown of
Consequently, yes, we are going to be able to tell the American people and have a resolution for the people in rural communities, that we are passing legislation that benefits them, that enables them to have more affordable energy, that enables them to be able to have lower taxes, and to be able to provide better homes for their families.
What we aren't going to do is allow Democrats to be able to get past or allow them to get away with shutting down our ability to do our job in this country, and that is precisely what they have been doing.
We are going to move legislation this week that is going to provide greater energy resources by harnessing energy and thermal sources. We are eliminating permitting restrictions and making it easier to do that.
We are going to put forward the Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act, where we have got barriers to our ability to have reliable energy to provide energy for our Federal buildings, and the ESA Amendments Act, which makes dramatically needed and necessary improvements to the Endangered Species Act, which has been standing in the way of our ability to provide energy and to provide greater freedom for the American people.
Madam Speaker, the Republican leadership and the Republican Conference in this House of Representatives have been fighting to deliver for the American people, and we have been obstructed by two things: our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and Democrats in the Senate who are using an artificial 60-vote threshold to deny the American people the ability for us to have the changes that they sent us here to Washington to do.
We are going to continue to go down this road. This week is another step in going down this road, and that is why I am going to be urging my colleagues to support this rule and to support the legislation that we put forward under the rule.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me first just say congratulations to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Roy) for congratulating himself. It is a special thing here in the House of Representatives. Apparently, if you work hard enough, you can introduce a resolution congratulating yourself and your colleagues for the resolutions or the bills that you have passed. It is a participation trophy, a Mike Johnson participation trophy, that my colleague from Texas is a proud recipient of along with the other members of the House Republican Conference.
Madam Speaker, it has been 15 months now, 15 months since this Republican majority and the President were elected into office. For nearly a year and a half, Republicans have presided over what is now widely considered to be one of the least productive Congresses in the modern history of our country.
Since President Trump took office, only 86 pieces of legislation have been signed into law. Of course, of those 86, many bills have harmed tragically, profoundly the American public.
Fifteen million Americans have lost access to health insurance since President Trump took office. Millions of Americans are going hungry because of lost SNAP benefits that my colleagues are so proud to have enacted. The country is now involved in yet another deeply unpopular war in the Middle East.
President Trump campaigned on lowering gas prices and no new wars, he said. Of course, that couldn't have been further from the truth.
Last week I stood in this exact same spot and I posed a very simple question, Madam Speaker: Would Republicans continue to waste our time on self-congratulatory, commemorative, meaningless resolutions, saluting themselves, applauding themselves?
Apparently, that was a rhetorical question. We have our answer. The answer is H. Res. 1182. I encourage everyone watching to go online and read the resolution that we are here to debate this week, ``recognizing the work of the House of Representatives in the 119th Congress.''
This is what Republicans choose to spend their time on: resolutions congratulating themselves, giving themselves a pat on the back, participation trophies. It is an utter absurd waste of time, and it is illogical.
It is nonsensical that Republicans would choose to spend their time for the second week in a row on a resolution that does nothing, changes nothing, accomplishes nothing, but congratulating themselves for what they would describe as a job well done.
They have the audacity to suggest that they are supporting rural communities. I represent a district that is one-third rural. Let me tell you, families are struggling in northern and western Colorado as a result of the policies that the Republican Conference have implemented, as a result of President Trump's reckless and extreme agenda.
It is no wonder that President Trump is deeply unpopular, the most unpopular President in the modern history of our country.
I simply say to you, Madam Speaker, that I suspect we will have some debate about the underlying bills that my colleagues have introduced and are asking this august Chamber to consider, bills that weaken a variety of different environmental standards, bills that weaken protections for endangered species. They are not the kind of matters that are coming up at my townhalls in Colorado. Perhaps my colleague from Texas has a different experience in his district.
What I am confident of is that no citizen in our country, no Republican--I am not talking about the politicians here in Washington, D.C. I am talking about their voters--would think that it would be a prudent use of our time to pass self-congratulatory resolutions.
Honestly, I hope if there are folks watching, Republicans watching this--I understand we will have principled disagreements about a wide variety of policy matters and proposals that this House ought to consider, but just understand something: They are squandering their majority.
They are not here debating immigration or gas prices or healthcare costs or any number of priorities. They are not here debating legislation that, frankly, I am likely to oppose, but nonetheless would be legislation and priorities that Republican voters might care about. They are not here debating that. We are here wasting time handing out another participation trophy to the 218 Members of the House Republican Conference.
Madam Speaker, I ask my friend, my colleague on the other side of the aisle, it may just be easier next time to put this into a press release. Put it into a letter. We will help you and that way we can get back to the business of the House.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I note my colleague invoked that we could be down here debating, for example, immigration. Well, this Republican House has stood up to defend our borders and defend this President and defend this administration's active enforcement of our laws at the border of the United States in the face of willful resistance by Democrats who refuse to fund it.
That is the actual truth. We know this because we are now in day 63 or something to that effect or higher than 60 days of a shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security after enduring over 40 days shutdown in the fall.
Republicans are having to move money around in order to pay our men and women in Border Patrol and ICE so that they can do their job and be able to fund TSA, FEMA, and the Coast Guard.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle say we keep offering amendments and bills to fund it. No. They have rejected our bills to fund the entirety of the Department of Homeland Security because they are trying to keep it hostage for political purposes.
This Republican Congress, as I said, passed the Laken Riley Act. This Republican Congress, as I said, passed funds in the big, beautiful bill last summer to ensure that we can secure the border of the United States. This Republican Congress has been backing up the President and Department of Homeland Security in doing the job that Joe Biden and Alejandro Mayorkas would not do.
Now, we see the ramifications of this in continuation as we see Americans losing their lives while people are in our country who should not be. There was a woman in Florida, a mother, who walked out of the convenience store because her car was being destroyed by a Haitian who had come here and was operating under a temporary program. This individual bludgeoned this American to death, this mother, with a hammer in front of the convenience store, and I am met with utter silence from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I am met with utter silence while we tried to ensure that we fund the men and women responsible for securing us against these individuals.
Now we are having to figure out how to backdoor find a way to fund these important, core constitutional responsibilities in defending the United States of America because our Democratic colleagues refuse to do it. They refuse and are willing to create chaos for the American people and endanger the American people for crass political purposes.
The American people observe this. They know this. They see what we are doing and, yes, we are going to move important legislation this week, critical legislation this week to do what our Democratic colleagues also do not want to do: free up the American entrepreneur to produce energy for the American people. We are getting barriers and regulations out of the way. We are getting barriers and regulations, obstacles that stand in the way of people who actually know how to produce energy.
As a Texan, I know what that looks like. I have had to fight and deal with the abuse of the Endangered Species Act to prevent the ability of us to be able to have frac sand and to be able to go out and produce the energy and the oil and gas that we need, that right now is providing the independence that gives us the freedom to not be reliant on people around the world.
That is what we are doing this week. That is what we have been doing for the last 16 months. There is one obstacle for the American people's prosperity, and that is the Democratic Party.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, first, I will say with respect to the shutdown of DHS, I find it exceedingly rich that my colleague would say what he said when, last night, he voted against an amendment in the Rules Committee that would have enabled this body to consider the bill that passed the United States Senate twice on a unanimous basis to fund the Department of Homeland Security.
Ted Cruz didn't object. Mike Lee didn't object. No Member of the United States Senate objected to that bill. If it were put on the floor for a vote, it would pass with an overwhelming two-thirds majority today.
He knows it. You know it, Madam Speaker. So, spare me these complaints that somehow Democrats are responsible. It is contradicted by the clear facts and procedural history.
Madam Speaker, I will also say, with all respect to my colleague, that the gentleman covered a lot of topics: immigration, Joe Biden, gas prices, and Joe Biden again. What is fascinating is that the resolution that the gentleman has offered, or, rather, that he is being asked to debate today, has nothing to do with any of it.
``Resolved, That the House of Representatives, through policies . . . has demonstrated support for the prosperity and economic growth of the United States.'' They are saluting themselves. What are we doing here?
Again, I understand that the gentleman from Texas does not decide what bills we debate on the floor, so I am talking to Speaker Johnson. If he wanted to, he could put a bill on the floor today to pay TSA agents. He could put a bill on the floor regarding healthcare costs. We could spend all week debating hundreds of bills that have been introduced by Democratic Members and Republican Members. He has decided to force the House to vote on this press release instead for the second time.
What is this obsession with the House recognizing House Republicans? We get it. They are proud of themselves. Everyone understands that. Can we move on?
That, to me, is the absurdity of what we are debating here on the floor today. I am hopeful that this will be the last week, but I am not optimistic.
Last week, I thought it was a joke. I said that maybe next week, we will debate a resolution congratulating House Republicans for passing the congratulatory resolution that they passed last week. Apparently, that was not a joke.
If the Speaker is listening, I didn't mean that literally. I think we should stop with the self-congratulatory resolutions so that Mr. Roy and I can actually debate the underlying policies and the challenges that are facing the country.
Yet, this is not that.
Madam Speaker, before I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Tran), I just will explain that if we defeat the previous question, I intend to offer an amendment to the rule to adopt the Senate amendment to H.R. 7147, which was and is the bipartisan Senate compromise bill that I just referenced a few moments ago that the Senate unanimously passed twice now.
I understand Mr. Roy is vehemently against that bill. I get it. I understand that he believes that the bill that Mike Lee and Ted Cruz didn't object to doesn't satisfy his ideological goals. I understand that.
Yet, I suspect that the vast majority of the Republican Conference would pass that bill today if we had an opportunity to. The good news is that we hope to create that opportunity by ultimately defeating the previous question and enabling the House to be able to consider that bill.
Spare us more debates on commemorative resolutions, and let's fund the government.
Madam 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 Colorado?
Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for yielding.
Madam Speaker, the Department of Homeland Security has been shut down for 66 days, the longest shutdown in history. Yet, this shutdown is solely the choice of the House majority, my Republican colleagues.
Madam Speaker, 1 month ago, the Senate passed a bill that funded TSA agents responsible for security at our airports, the cybersecurity officers who protect us from online threats, the servicemembers in our Coast Guard, and FEMA disaster assistance as we get closer to hurricane and wildfire seasons.
This bill will also give us time to continue negotiating much-needed reforms to ICE and border protection. Americans from New York to Minneapolis to L.A. have watched as their neighbors have been wrongly arrested, beaten, and even killed in broad daylight.
ICE agents need to be held accountable and focus on deporting violent criminals, not creating terror in our schools, hospitals, or our places of worship.
While the Senate continues to make progress, my Republican colleagues have been sitting on their hands, ignoring the fears and suffering of our constituents.
How does that even serve the American people? Being stubborn in the face of terror does not serve the American people.
It is past time for this body to take action to fund our public safety infrastructure and get back to work for the people. Let's pass this DHS funding bill, and I urge all of my colleagues to
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I note that there are three pieces of legislation that are coming to the floor that will make meaningful differences for the American people.
The Harnessing Energy At Thermal Sources Act is adding to a laundry list of things that we have done over the last 15 or 16 months to try to free up energy production in the United States. It amends the Geothermal Steam Act to streamline the permitting processes. A constant theme is the barriers to the American people being able to go out through their entrepreneurial spirit and produce energy that is affordable. In many instances, it makes dramatic improvements in terms of its cleanliness.
Currently, geothermal operators on non-Federal land that produces any quantity of Federal resources, like federally owned mineral estates, must comply with permitting, even if the Federal share of the mineral estate is trivial.
This would alleviate that burden and others by clarifying that the geothermal exploration or production on non-Federal lands is not subject to NEPA, the ESA, or the National Historic Preservation Act permitting processes. It doesn't change anything specific to our ability to produce them and the royalty structures, and it keeps in place important safeguards while allowing geothermal to be built out.
Madam Speaker, these are important, important changes for the people out there trying to produce them. We act like this is trivial. We act like this isn't a big deal for the ability of the American people to have affordable energy and for our business leaders to be able to go out and produce alternative energy sources.
The Reliable Federal Infrastructure Act repeals a 2007 mandate that Federal buildings reduce their use of fossil fuels by 2030 by, I think, 90 percent. These mandates came at a time when we thought that the United States would run out of oil.
Obviously, we had the shale revolution. We have the ability to be able to produce significant cleaner energy in the production of natural gas. We need reliable energy to be able to keep our buildings operating.
An overreliance on subsidized, unreliable wind and solar, including in my home State of Texas, has created difficulties with having reliability on the grid and, in many instances, has not produced any of the so-called improvements in terms of green energy that were promised.
We want to reduce those barriers, reduce the burdens, and be able to ensure that we are able to proceed.
Madam Speaker, the final point is the ESA Amendments Act of 2025. The ESA Amendments Act of 2025 makes the first major reform to the broken Endangered Species Act.
Again, as I mentioned before, working with businesses in Texas, we have had numerous issues where that has been a major barrier to our ability to be able to get energy in production.
In the 50 years since the ESA was signed, only 3 percent of the listed species have ever recovered. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't be working and finding ways to make sure that we can protect certain species, but we often are listing certain species that aren't going to have a chance of recovery and that are actually used as a weapon and a tool of the left to stop the ability of us to be able to produce affordable energy for the American people.
The American people sit at home wondering why they can't afford goods and services, can't afford cars, can't afford energy, can't afford to be able to pay for their families. It is almost always tied back to the regulatory state and the burdens placed upon them by this body and by bureaucrats in this town.
What we have been trying to do for the last 16 months is unwind even just a fraction of those burdens. Yet we are met with constant resistance by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
I know that we talk about gas prices and how they are at a point right now where we all want them to go down as we are dealing with the conflict with Iran, but they were $6 a gallon nationally under the previous administration. Now they are somewhere around $4 a gallon, and we want them to go down. We certainly can do that.
The best way to do that is to have massive production of oil and gas in the United States. We have tankers that are coming to the United States to get oil and gas. We have the ability to produce oil and gas if we get the regulatory climate such that they can do it, and that is what we are trying to do with this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, a lot to respond to. Apparently, my colleague from Texas wants the American people to believe that the reason they are paying astronomically high prices for gas is because the protections for bald eagles and humpback whales are too strong; that we need to weaken protections for endangered species, and lo and behold, we do that, gas prices will drop. It has nothing to do with the war in Iran. It couldn't possibly be connected to the unconstitutional war that the President has decided to wage. It must be the protections for bald eagles. I am sure that is the case.
Give me a break. The American people know better.
They have the audacity to lecture the House, lecture their colleagues on the other side of the aisle about affordability when, right now, everything is getting more expensive.
For families back home in Colorado, the families that I am privileged to represent, times are tough. Costs for everything are going up. Health insurance, car insurance, appliances, gasoline, you name it, the price is going up.
I am sure it will come as great solace to those families that House Republicans have decided this week that the best way to address it is to pass a resolution congratulating themselves for the work that they have done. I am sure that is going to solve the problem. Republicans are on the case.
Again, with all respect to my colleague, I think he has been given an impossible assignment today: to defend that resolution. I suppose that is why he focused on some of the other bills that we are considering today, because that resolution is indefensible.
I suspect my Republican colleagues aren't necessarily watching today. I think me and my colleague from Texas are the only two Members of Congress in this Chamber. Nobody else is here--oh, of course, the Speaker as well--three Members. There is nobody else who will be here to debate this resolution.
I hope that some of my Republican colleagues, perhaps, may watch some of this and maybe decide tomorrow to vote against the rule because voting for the rule is an endorsement of Speaker Johnson's strategy to waste everyone's time, to waste our time, and to waste your time, and fundamentally, more than anything else, to waste the American people's time when there are real issues of consequence that merit our attention, our scrutiny, our inquiry, and our work.
The best way to stop this Chamber from debating meaningless and needless self-congratulatory resolutions is for a few Republicans to vote against the rule and to suggest that maybe there are some other issues that they would like this body to consider.
I hear a lot--you see all of this on social media all the time--my Republican colleagues who will demand votes on this legislation and that legislation, a laundry list of Republican priorities, none of which the House is considering, none of it. I guess we will find out, but I look forward to--I don't look forward, actually. I bemoan the fact. I suspect maybe Mr. McGovern will be managing that rule next week when we do the congratulatory resolution on the resolution for the last resolution. We will have someone else debate that one because I suspect Mr. Roy and I will have grown tired of engaging in this debate.
In any event, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I would note to my colleague from Colorado that the previous administration racked up a rather undistinguished list of antireliable energy policies and results. President Biden closed the Keystone XL pipeline on day one and rejoined the Paris Climate Accords, handicapping our industry.
In the final days of the administration, he used the stroke of a pen to grow a national monument by 85 percent and closed off thousands of acres to reliable energy production.
He closed off the Gulf of America to new oil and gas leasing. It is a decision thankfully reversed in the Big Beautiful Bill Act last summer. He singlehandedly paused the exportation of liquefied natural gas, recognizing that LNG has the ability to free up the rest of the world from reliance on numerous of our enemies around the globe, and to create wealth and jobs and opportunities in the United States.
Biden's Department of Commerce sought to limit how fast boats could go in certain waters because of the Endangered Species Act. NOAA also abused the Endangered Species Act to deny oil leases.
Meanwhile, we have bills on the floor this week to try to reverse those issues. We have been dedicated to passing energy reform for the last 16 months. Just last week, we sent a number of bills to reform the Clean Air Act. There is issue after issue, some of which are recounted in the resolution the gentleman seems so hung up on spending time worrying about, when we have bill after bill that we are passing, some of which have become law and passed through the Senate and gotten to the President, but many of which are hung up by a Democratic Senate obstructionist that has the inability to actually move anything because of an artificial 60-vote threshold.
That is the simple reality. We are being hamstrung by resistance to our ability to deliver on the things that the American people sent us here to deliver upon.
The gentleman brought up the issue with respect to, I suppose, the motion to recommit that would be offered and that was offered as an amendment last night in committee. I wholly recognize that, yes, I opposed that amendment and have opposed it before because I do not believe that we should fund a Department of Homeland Security specifically isolating and pulling out Border Patrol and ICE. I just don't believe we should do that. I think it is wrong. I think we are setting a bad precedent. I think we are setting up a structure in which we are going to start saying we are going to have X pieces of these important--by the way, these are core functions that defend our way of life, defend our community, and defend our country. We can have debates about their policies. I understand that my colleagues want to add riders and want to add changes and impact policies attached to the funding, but we are setting a terrible precedent by going down the road of saying we are going to carve out and say that we are not going to fund Border Patrol and ICE, which is the resistance. The American people understand that, because we have an obligation to fund all of the Department of Homeland Security. I believe that, and I think that is something that we should do. Whether we do that this way or whether we have to backdoor it through reconciliation, I am not sure I care. I think we should do it through appropriations, but I don't believe we ought to isolate it. We will see what the Senate does. We will see what the House does.
I am going to continue to stand up on the principle that Border Patrol and ICE should be funded fully through the appropriations process as the entire Department of Homeland Security should, whether it is FEMA, TSA, and every other function like Coast Guard, but that we should do it together: debate the policy, offer amendments on it, and move on.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, first and foremost, I would just say the approach that my friend from Texas describes is wrong and imprudent and whatever adjectives he might characterize it as. That is the approach that Senate Republicans took, so the argument is best made to your colleagues in the upper Chamber. Republicans control the Senate, not Democrats. They passed that bill. They sent it here to the House, not once, but twice.
I understand that my colleague from Texas opposes that bill, and he has explained the reasons why he opposes it. I believe, as I said previously, that the vast majority of this House would vote in favor of that bill, which is why it ought to come up for an up-or-down vote. Let the chips fall where they may, no pun intended.
I will say this, Madam Speaker: I have been keeping meticulous count. I have a little, I guess you could call it, Biden bingo card here. I like to keep track. My colleague from Texas has mentioned Biden six times, six times and counting, in the last couple minutes.
I get it. I understand. He does not like Joe Biden. I understand. The message is received. Joe Biden isn't President anymore. Republicans have been in charge for 16 months. Republicans have had the majority for 16 months. Republicans have had complete control in Washington, the Senate, the Presidency.
What do Republicans have to show for it? Republicans have meaningless resolutions, whereas clause after whereas clause: We are wonderful. We have passed this resolution. We passed this bill. We are frustrated that some Senate Democrats have opposed it.
That is it.
This is 16 months of work.
Again, I would just say to you: I certainly can say very confidently that citizens in our country are not satisfied or pleased or heartened by the way in which this body is functioning. I think my colleague from Texas knows that too.
For the Republican voters out there, for those who believe in the House Republican Conference's policies or, you know, perhaps share their worldview, share their ideology, I am here to tell you they are not pursuing that agenda either. It is not that I disagree in this instance with the substance of what they are pursuing; it is that they are not pursuing any substance; it is that we are just wasting time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would note that the reason that the former President's name comes up is because the lingering impacts of the previous administration continue. I mean, I already mentioned you have got the mother in Florida, but I can mention dozens and hundreds of examples of American citizens that have died as a result of people who were let in under the previous administration's policies, people who have died here today in America, policies we are trying to reverse and that we are trying to enforce against.
The lingering effects are fairly profound. I can assure you that the American citizens getting killed at the hands of criminals allowed into our country by the previous administration do not take solace in the fact that we now have a new administration, yet that administration is being hamstrung by virtue of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle's unwillingness to fund the very entities that try to stop the danger and the attacks on the American people.
That is what this is all about. That is what this all boils down to.
Again, I can assure you that the people I represent, the people I talk to across the State of Texas, are thrilled with tax cuts. They are thrilled with regulatory relief. They are thrilled with our actions in Venezuela. They are thrilled that we are reestablishing our strength in the Western Hemisphere and around the globe. They are thrilled that we are standing up to the cartels. They are thrilled that we designated the cartels as terrorists. They are thrilled that we stopped the flow at the border. They are thrilled that we have been enforcing the law and removing dangerous aliens. They are thrilled that our military has the highest recruitment and the highest enlistment in a generation because people actually believe in our country again. They are thrilled in the direction that this administration and this Congress wants to go, and they recognize that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are throwing up barrier after barrier
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Again, my colleague from Texas has spoken with great passion, great passion about any number of issues and policies that he favors and he would like to see accomplished. None of that has anything to do with the resolution that we are debating today. We might as well just--we can set aside a different time for Mr. Roy and I to engage in that debate.
Today, we are debating the resolution that is before us, a resolution that does nothing, achieves nothing, and changes nothing. As I said, it is a participation trophy.
I wish that I would have proposed perhaps a motion to recommit that would maybe change the name of this resolution to the participation trophy. We will have to think of that for next week. I have no doubt I will have another opportunity because I imagine that Speaker Johnson is going to keep this going for the next 7 months.
I am very curious about what participation trophy House Republicans intend to hand out to themselves next week. This week's was--I think rural America was the caveat that they added. Last week's was the big, beautiful bill--or not the big, beautiful bill. That is what Mr. Roy called it today. They changed it last week to the working families bill or something to that effect.
So anyway, we will have to see. I don't know. Maybe next week's resolution will be a commemorative resolution to congratulate House Republicans on the 14-day FISA extension that they passed, and we can spend a half an hour talking about all the ways that House Republicans have changed the country for the better. They are so desperate to convince Americans that they decided that a House resolution is a tool for them to make that case.
Again, there are better ways, Mr. Speaker, to spend this body's time.
I can't imagine that our Framers--that James Madison would have thought that this is how the House of Representatives would be functioning 250 years later. I can't possibly believe that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I regret that our time for debate has come to a close. I will note, as I did last week, the fact that not a single member of the House Republican Conference is willing to come down to the floor and debate in support of these bills is telling. It tells you all you need to know. For those that are watching in the gallery and all of those who might be watching from home on C-SPAN, there are 218 members of the House Republican Conference, 218. None of them, save for my colleague from Texas, were willing to come to the floor to speak in support of the resolution congratulating themselves for the work that they have done this year, not one.
What is even more fascinating, because, of course, as you know, Mr. Speaker, this resolution is a long resolution, four or five pages, whereas clause after whereas clause recounting all of the bills and the resolutions that were passed last spring and last fall and last summer, and this winter, they gave this resolution to the newest member of the House Republican Conference. He has been in Congress for like 6 days, I think. He was sworn in last Tuesday or Wednesday.
I get it. I understand why they gave this resolution to the new guy. You know, it is a tough assignment to say your first bill is going to be a bill congratulating the rest of us for a job well done. That is a tough assignment.
Mr. Speaker, rural America is struggling. I know I don't need to tell you that. Rural farmers in my State are struggling. The cost of everything is going up. Trump's burdensome tariffs forced costs to skyrocket a year ago.
In 2025, 15,000 farms closed, 15,000 farms. The rate of bankruptcy for America's farmers has never been higher. It has never been higher. I challenge any of my Republican colleagues, those who, like me, represent rural communities and farmers and ranchers, I challenge them to go take this resolution to their constituents. Ask them whether they think that this House deserves applause and plaudits and credit and congratulations for a job well done.
I am pretty sure I know the answer. I urge my colleagues, if they, like me, are sick and tired of this place wasting time functioning in this dysfunctional way, then oppose the previous question, oppose the rule, oppose the underlying bills, and join us so that we can get back to the serious issues that face the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would note that we are talking about rural America. Last summer, when we passed the largest tax savings for the American people in history, it included significant savings with respect to the death tax that cripples American farmers, and not a single one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle supported that.
We advanced that legislation. We advanced that tax reduction so that American farmers can pass down their farms to the next generation without having to give it up because of the burden of Federal Government.
My colleague invoked the Founders, that they couldn't imagine we would be here having this discussion. I, in fact, think that the Founders would be quite pleased to see us on the floor reversing the regulatory state and reversing the burdens being placed on the American people that are limiting their ability to do what God gave them the ability to do.
That is what we are doing with respect to getting these barriers in the Endangered Species Act: the energy mandates on the Federal buildings, putting us into unreliable power rather than reliable power, and allowing ourselves to have geothermal production without barriers that stand in the way of the American people doing what they do best.
That is absolutely what the Founders would have envisioned us doing on the floor of the House of Representatives. I am proud to be doing that. I am proud of what we have been doing the last 16 months.
As I said before, the people whom I talk to when I go home to Texas are thrilled that our border is secure. They are thrilled our enlistments are up with our military. They are thrilled we are standing up to cartels. They are thrilled we are removing bad actors in this country.
They are thrilled we are removing the bureaucratic state. They are thrilled we are firing Federal bureaucrats. They are thrilled we held flat spending for discretionary spending for the last 3 years. They are thrilled that we have tried to make sure that we have money aside to be able to do what our Democratic colleagues refuse to do.
Today, I urge adoption of this rule, a rule to put forth legislation that will help the American people in the face of opposition from my colleagues here.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
The material previously referred to by Mr. Neguse is as follows:
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1174, I call up the bill (H.R. 6387) to amend the Clean Air Act to require revisions to regulations governing the review and handling of air quality monitoring data influenced by exceptional events or actions to mitigate wildfire risk, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1174, the bill is considered read.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce or their respective designees.
The gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 30 minutes.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Palmer).
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on H.R. 6387.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Alabama?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6387, the FIRE Act, a bipartisan bill introduced by Congressman Gabe Evans of Colorado and co-led by Congressman Adam Gray of California.
The FIRE Act ensures that States are not penalized for wildfire mitigation practices like prescribed or controlled burns and brush clearing. States currently limit these practices for fear of falling out of containment of national air quality standards.
Unlike wildfires, prescribed burns do not automatically qualify as exceptional events under the current provisions of the Clean Air Act. This is because prescribed burns are human caused, likely to recur, and preventable. As a result, prescribed burns are often counted against States for the purpose of national air quality standards.
In 2016, the EPA amended the exceptional events rule in an effort to include prescribed burns, but the attempt failed. Only one prescribed fire qualified for the exceptional events exception in the last decade.
Congress must amend the Clean Air Act to allow wildfire mitigation to be included as an exceptional events exception.
Time has taught us that agency action is not enough to address the current statutory obstacles. The FIRE Act directly amends the Clean Air Act so that prescribed burns are treated as exceptional events and States are not penalized for wildfire mitigation measures. It provides clarity and predictability for air quality planning and encourages proactive wildfire measures.
There is nearly unanimous agreement that increasing the use of prescribed fire and other wildfire mitigation practices is necessary to reduce the growing wildfire threats across the country.
With what is projected to be a severe wildfire season around the corner, Congress must modernize the Clean Air Act to ensure that wildfire mitigation practices are eligible for the exceptional events rule. The FIRE Act allows States to perform prescribed burns and wildfire mitigation activities without severe economic consequences, protecting their communities from the devastating impact of wildfires.
Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6387, the FIRE Act. The FIRE Act is yet another dishonest attempt, in my opinion, by Republicans to weaken the Clean Air Act, which will make Americans sicker while healthcare costs skyrocket.
Republicans are peddling this dangerous bill as an attempt to promote prescribed burns and combat wildfires. As has been true for the other dirty bills that we considered over the last week or so, this bill fails to address the stated goal and instead provides overly broad exemptions to the Clean Air Act that will harm American families and children.
The FIRE Act does little to make it easier for States to use prescribed burns as a tool for wildfire management. Instead, it expands the definition of exceptional events that States can claim when demonstrating compliance with air quality standards, to include regularly occurring weather like drought and heat. To put it simply, the FIRE Act would give corporate polluters a free pass on the Clean Air Act and use a hot day as an excuse to ignore the harm inflicted on the health of Americans.
Prescribed fire is an essential tool for wildlife management, particularly as climate change increases the occurrence of large, high- intensity wildfires. When done properly, prescribed fires can effectively manage wildfires while reducing smoke exposure to wildfire- prone communities. When disaster strikes and wildfires occur, States should not be punished for pollution that is beyond their control.
Fortunately, the Clean Air Act already gives EPA the flexibility to qualify wildfire and prescribed burns as exceptional events under the Clean Air Act, which States can claim when demonstrating compliance with air quality standards. In fact, Trump's EPA issued a memo clearly stating that the agency will not count emissions from prescribed fires toward attainment designations under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, making provisions of this bill essentially redundant and unnecessary.
It is worth highlighting that this bill goes much further than wildfires and prescribed burns. As I mentioned, the FIRE Act drastically changes the definition of exceptional events to include regularly occurring weather events, like drought and hot days. If signed into law, the FIRE Act would allow States to write off all pollution that occurs during a dry spell or heat wave, events we know will occur more often due to climate change.
I find this provision to be deeply troubling. We know climate change is making drought and heat waves more persistent. Republicans want to use them as justification to increase pollution, which will worsen public health and accelerate climate change, without any consequences.
It is another line of evidence that Republicans are more interested in helping out their polluter friends than protecting the health and well-being of Americans.
Unfortunately, Republican attempts to undermine the public health protections at the core of the Clean Air Act are commonplace. The health harms of air pollution are well documented and being felt by communities across the country.
Today, over half of Americans live in an area with unsafe levels of air pollution. These communities see more diagnoses of diseases like asthma, COPD, heart disease, and certain types of cancer, all of which require long-term treatment and medication.
These things are becoming more common, but now Republicans and the Trump administration want to make it easier for industry to pollute more. Worse, they want to cover up these harms.
House Republicans are doing nothing to lower costs or address the affordability crisis. Instead, over the last week, they have had us debating bills that gut the Clean Air Act's public health protections, and this bill is no exception. It is a retread of old ideas that would drive up pollution above levels that are safe to breathe. The bill does nothing to improve the lives of the everyday Americans we are elected to serve.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this dangerous, damaging, and, essentially, dirty air bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am constantly amazed at what my colleagues across the aisle say in response to these bills. They make this claim that prescribed burns will increase air pollution, when the fact is that we are trying to prevent wildfires.
When you compare the emissions from a prescribed burn to the emissions from a wildfire, it could be as little as 17 percent of what a wildfire produces. They both emit fine particulate matter and carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide, but prescribed burns are managed to ensure more complete combustion and less overall polluted output per acre, whereas a wildfire consumes more fuel and produces denser and more toxic smoke.
What they are arguing for is more pollution and more dangerous fires. We have seen what has happened in California and other States, where wildfires have gotten out of control. Look at Paradise in California, the number of lives lost and the amount of destruction there. Those fires actually produced more pollutants, more toxins, and more tremendous damage.
I am, again, amazed. I guess they doubt the common sense of the average American about these issues, when the fact of the matter is that prescribed burns reduce the amount of pollutants that are emitted into the atmosphere.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to remind my colleagues of the cost of air pollution to the American people because it seems they are only focused on the cost to their polluter friends.
More than 26 million people, including over 4.5 million children, in the U.S. live with asthma. Asthma causes nearly 1.8 million emergency department visits, more than 94,000 hospitalizations, and an estimated $80 billion in healthcare costs annually. Air pollution is known to cause and exacerbate asthma.
Republicans claim that existing regulatory processes, like exceptional events demonstrations, are too hard and take too long. They don't acknowledge why we have these processes in the first place, and that is to protect the health of our families, our children, and the most vulnerable among them.
The FIRE Act would worsen health harms to our communities. While the Clean Air Act has successfully cut air pollution in the U.S. by nearly 80 percent in its over 50-year history, nearly half of the U.S. population still lives in areas with poor air quality. We should be taking action to protect public health, not rolling back safeguards that the Republicans find inconvenient.
The FIRE Act has serious problems that allow industry to exploit hot days and drought to drive up pollution without consequence. That is the problem.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no,'' and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, once again, it is as though we are debating two different bills. I have no idea where industry comes into this. This is about protecting forests. It is about promoting wildlife. It is about reducing emissions by prescribed burns.
If my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are interested in looking up this data, what they are saying is in direct contradiction to what the science
Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Kiley).
Mr. Speaker, the best way to protect air quality is to stop catastrophic wildfires. This is a statement that should not be controversial and is one the truth of which we know all too well in California.
For years in my State, the State piled on regulation after regulation after regulation, piled on new forms of litigation, new fuel blends, all things that raise the cost of living for people in our State. Yet, even more perversely, at the same time, they made it more difficult to proactively mitigate the risk of wildfire through active forest management.
Let me tell you what the perverse result of that was. Between 2004 and 2020--this is a period of 16 years--you can aggregate all the emissions that were reduced through emission reduction policies in California--a period of 16 years leading up to the year 2020--take every single emission that was reduced as a result of State policy over those 16 years, and double that number of emissions were released into the atmosphere because of the fires that occurred just that year.
All of the sacrifices Californians had made over the preceding 16 years were wiped out two times over because of these devastating wildfires that, of course, on top of the environmental damage that they inflicted, caused untold damage to life and property and our communities.
The measure that we have before us today could not be more commonsensical. It is that we should not disincentivize States from taking steps that have been proven by the best science to reduce the risk of wildfires that are an absolute catastrophe for the environment. That includes the use of prescribed burns, which should not be considered a detriment to air quality when the entire point is to improve air quality over the long term.
This bill, in addition to other measures like the Fix Our Forests Act, which will allow us to do better forest management without as many arbitrary delays and hurdles to jump over, are vitally needed to assure that we don't continue to have wildfires that devastate our communities and devastate our environment.
I will say it again: The best way to protect air quality is to stop fires from happening, and this bill will help us do that.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong opposition to the FIRE Act, a bill that undermines the protections that keeps our air safe to breathe.
In 1970, Democrats and Republicans came together to pass the Clean Air Act and put public health at the center of our national policymaking. That was a promise to the American people, and it is a promise we cannot forget. That law has delivered cleaner air and longer lives, but our work is not finished.
More than 100 million Americans live in counties with unhealthy levels of pollution. Our children, our seniors, low-income communities, and communities of color continue to carry the heaviest burden. The public has been clear with us. Nearly 70 percent of Americans believe everyone should be held to the standards set by the Clean Air Act.
The question before us is simple: Why would we disregard the commonsense policy that protects the very communities we are here to serve?
The FIRE Act undermines a centerpiece of the Clean Air Act: the National Ambient Air Quality Standards program. Right now, there are narrow exceptions to the rules that set limits on how polluted our air can be. Republicans want to blow those exceptions wide open, so even routine conditions like hot weather or drought could be used as an excuse to ignore pollution limits.
I represent Oregon, where wildfires are a constant and defining challenge. We manage wildfires and conduct prescribed burns every year to protect our forests and communities. I have spoken directly with the people doing that work, and this is not a bill they want.
They have asked for clarity and precision. This bill offers neither. Instead, it creates a vague, sweeping policy that risks turning ``exceptional'' into ``routine.''
As a physician and lung doctor, I know exactly what that means. It means more asthma attacks, more heart attacks, more strokes, and more cancer diagnoses.
We know better than this, and it is not why my constituents sent me here. They sent me here to fight for clean air, for healthy communities, and for a future where public health is not compromised.
For these reasons, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill to committee. If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill. My amendment would ensure this bill does not take effect until EPA and CASAC certify that it will not increase health harms or the cost of treating them.
I ask unanimous consent to insert the text of my amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Oregon?
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6387 to ensure States are not unjustly penalized under the Clean Air Act for engaging in responsible, proactive wildfire mitigation activities.
Mr. Speaker, wildfires are, unfortunately, all too common in my home State of Wyoming and across the intermountain West.
According to the Office of State Lands and Investments, approximately 250,000 acres of land in Wyoming were burned in 2025 due to more than 1,600 wildfires. The numbers were even worse in 2024, with around 850,000 acres burned through more than 2,000 fires. With just one fire, it burned 25,000 acres in 3 hours, giving an indication of the fuel load in the Bighorn National Forest.
Wildfires have profound effects on all of my constituents, including threatening the livelihoods of our farmers and ranchers, endangering our courageous first responders, and causing serious respiratory and other health complications for Wyoming families.
Given these life-altering consequences, we must use every tool at our disposal, including responsible forest management--which has historically been hampered by bad policies coming out of Washington, D.C.--to minimize the scale and damage caused by these destructive forces of nature.
Active forest management through prescribed burns and mechanical thinning is essential to supporting healthy ecosystems, preventing catastrophic wildfires, and improving the long-term air quality.
Unfortunately, as it currently stands under the Clean Air Act, the use of these individual wildfire mitigation measures can create uncertainty, discouraging their use out of concern that doing so would lead to noncompliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
Failure to meet these standards can result in nonattainment designations, which can come with a host of immediate and downstream challenges, including excessive fees and sanctions, delayed infrastructure projects, and slowed economic growth, all of which can lead to immeasurable harm for smaller Wyoming communities.
By reforming the Clean Air Act to ensure these wildfire mitigation activities are appropriately treated as exceptional events, we are incentivizing their use and putting a stop to unfair and counterproductive regulatory punishments.
I thank Representative Evans and Chairman Guthrie for their steadfast leadership on this legislation and urge all of my colleagues to support H.R. 6387.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I again am at a loss to understand where my Democratic colleagues are coming from with this argument about all of these problems
If you are talking about pollution from fires, it is from wildfires, uncontrolled wildfires. As I have pointed out, if they are interested in looking it up, it is clear that we reduce air pollution by having these prescribed burns.
The other thing they keep talking about is public health. Most of these wildfires occur in rural areas. The Republicans in the Working Families Tax Cut Act put in $50 billion to transform rural healthcare, and every one of my Democratic colleagues voted against it. The State of Oregon got $197.3 million this year. Again, I am just at a loss to understand where they are coming from on some of this. It is in direct conflict with what the science shows.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Carter.)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the FIRE Act.
This bill ensures that actions taken to prevent wildfires, such as prescribed burns, are not used to penalize a State when determining nonattainment. Under the FIRE Act, States will no longer miss nonattainment status solely for trying to reduce the impact of wildfires through wildfire mitigation activities.
Nonattainment status has significant consequences. New or expanding businesses in the State would face more restrictions, tougher permitting, and expensive pollution control measures that would cause economic development to move to States without nonattainment status.
Since EPA allowed prescribed burns to qualify for exceptional events, only one prescribed fire has been granted an exceptional events exemption. These concerns aren't hypothetical. They are measurable and prevent States from engaging in wildfire mitigation.
This is the epitome of commonsense legislation. Why should American businesses and workers be penalized for efforts to reduce air pollution? Again, I ask you: Why should American businesses and workers be penalized for efforts to reduce air pollution?
A recent study found that wildfires are reversing the progress made in air quality by this country over the last 40 years. Prescribed burns produce only a tenth of the PM 2.5 produced by wildfires.
Prescribed or controlled burns are our greatest and most effective tool for preventing wildfires. By discouraging wildfire mitigation, this outdated provision in the Clean Air Act undermines efforts to improve air quality.
Hopefully, improving air quality and reducing the devastating impact of wildfires is more important to the Members of this Chamber than thwarting Congress' efforts to make necessary updates to outdated provisions of the Clean Air Act.
Legislation like the FIRE Act and my bill, the CLEAR Act, will modernize the Clean Air Act to work in the 21st century, protecting us from pollution without strangling business development and job creation.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend Representative Evans for introducing this bill, and I urge its immediate adoption.
Mr. Speaker, it is Earth Day tomorrow, and yet here we are today in front of the House Chamber with yet another bill attacking our fundamental environmental health bills.
Mr. Speaker, I stand here in strong opposition to H.R. 6387, the FIRE Act, but more importantly, I rise in fierce defense of the environmental laws that protect our people and our planet. Because on Earth Day, instead of celebrating progress, we are watching a coordinated effort to dismantle the very safeguards that generations of Americans, Democrats and Republicans, have put in place.
The Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act are all on the chopping block this week of all weeks.
They are the reason our air is safer to breathe, our water is cleaner to drink, and our national heritage still exists for us today and for future generations. These laws were not passed in this Chamber lightly. They were enacted with overwhelming bipartisan support because leaders on both sides of the aisle understood something fundamental, that protecting the public health, that protecting the environment, that protecting planet Earth is not a partisan issue, but it is a patriotic duty.
They created a simple but powerful framework: follow the science, measure honestly, inform the public, and give communities the opportunity to weigh in.
Today, that framework, and so many of our environmental laws, are being systematically weakened here, bill by bill, loophole by loophole.
Today, the FIRE Act is another clear example of that approach as this bill does not actually reduce pollution but changes the way we measure it by expanding what qualifies as an exceptional event like heat and drought, allowing States to exclude air pollution from official records.
These are not rare anomalies anymore. This is the very heart of climate change evident in the data itself. Instead of addressing the crisis, this bill is trying to erase it by obscuring it in the data, in the science.
Why does this matter? Because accurate data is the foundation for every protection we have under our environmental laws. It determines whether our communities can meet basic standards, whether it is safe for us to be outside, whether it is safe for us to drink water, whether it is safe for us to consume products, whether it is safe for us to continue to protect the fundamental basis of our natural ecological heritage.
Whether it is bypassing environmental review under NEPA, rolling back species protections under the Endangered Species Act, or trying to redefine the very foundation for how we carry out the Clean Air Act, as this bill does, the result is the same: less accountability, more risk for Americans, and chipping away piece by piece at the protections that generations before us fought for in this body to protect the planet and our communities.
Mr. Speaker, I have to say, especially in 2026 as our communities are not only facing more intense heat waves but some of the most catastrophic snowpack and drought conditions certainly in my lifetime, this is not a time to be rolling back environmental protections.
Let's be honest about who this is really about. It is not for the American people. It is not for families who are worried about whether or not their children will be able to breathe. It is not for the communities that are on the frontlines of climate change. It is not for the people of this planet and this country. It is for powerful interests, industries that have worked to weaken protections and avoid accountability.
This week, on Earth Day week, we have a choice: Do we stand with the bedrock laws that have protected this country and our communities for decades? Do we uphold the bipartisan legacy of our air, our land, our wildlife, and our water, or do we walk away from it?
I will tell you this, Mr. Speaker: I stand with science, with our communities, and with our future generations.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am amazed at what my Democratic colleagues say about these issues as far as quoting data. The data shows, as I have already pointed out, that the emissions from controlled burns, from prescribed burns, could be as low as 17 percent of what would come from a wildfire.
As a matter of fact, controlled burns consume one-sixth of the fuel per acre as an intense wildfire. As I pointed out numerous times about my Democratic colleagues and their talking about what they want to do for healthcare and worried about people's health, we put $50 billion into the Working Families Tax Cut Act to help rural healthcare, to transform rural healthcare. Every one of my Democratic colleagues voted against it.
As a matter of fact, the State of New Mexico received $211.5 million, and they voted against it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Kennedy).
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Colorado and my friend from Alabama for the opportunity to speak in favor of the FIRE Act. I appreciate the important work that is being done, which is critical for my home State of Utah.
Last year, Utah saw over 1,000 wildfires burn 160,000 acres. I represent a district that has watched wildfires tear through our communities. I have seen what fire does to our land, and I have heard from the land managers, the ranchers, and the State officials who want something done about it.
In many cases, we actually know what to do about it. We know what steps we can take to mitigate the risk, how to proactively manage the land before a fire even begins. The problem isn't the will or the answers. The problem is too often the regulations. It is regulations that actually limit our ability to take the steps needed to protect ourselves.
The FIRE Act gives States the regulatory certainty they need to act before fires grow out of control, and it has my full support.
Mr. Speaker, the communities I represent cannot afford continued inaction. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the FIRE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New Jersey for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I completely understand that many State and local governments are dealing with severe air pollution related to wildfires, but as we approach Earth Day, it is important for us to recognize that efforts like the Clean Air Act should be continued to be implemented to the fullest and even enhanced where necessary.
I will be crystal clear: The Clean Air Act already allows States to submit data for air pollution caused by exceptional events, preventing these emissions from penalizing them when determining compliance with air quality standards. Now, exceptional events are events that are typically uncommon and not easily within the State's control.
Air pollution due to wildfires, including prescribed burns for wildfire mitigation, can definitely count as exceptional.
In 2019, EPA issued guidance addressing how prescribed fires can satisfy the statutory definition of ``exceptional events.'' In 2024, EPA issued a number of other tools to assist States in meeting the regulatory requirements.
Mr. Speaker, it is true that this guidance does require States to take steps to allow prescribed burns to qualify as an exceptional event, including making certain that appropriate mitigation and monitoring measures are taken to reduce risks to people in a given area.
If Members of the majority stop to think about this for a moment, they would appreciate the need for such guidance. Not every man-made fire should be able to qualify automatically as an exceptional event.
EPA's requirements ensure that States are doing everything possible to follow best practices and limit health risks from prescribed fires that cause unsafe air quality. Yet, despite the bill's name, eliminating these safeguards for prescribed burns isn't the only change to the Clean Air Act included in this order of legislative change.
The FIRE Act allows and greatly expands what could be considered an exceptional event in the first place, including meteorological conditions that are commonly occurring, such as high-temperature days and drought, which tend to have worse air quality. We know that these types of days are becoming more common due to climate change, meaning that this bill would make it much easier for States to essentially write off air pollution on days with increasingly normalized conditions. It is just a poor sense of timing for this bill to arrive on the scene.
Exceptional events should be limited to things that are truly exceptional. It is critical that during high-temperature and low- precipitation times, days that are more likely to experience poor air quality, we are still seeking to protect people.
Exempting prescribed fire activities from air quality standards, not to mention the other commonly occurring conditions that would be considered exceptional under this bill, simply does not protect public health.
This bill is seeking to legislate a quick fix that papers over legitimate pollution-reduction issues. Instead, we should build upon the existing law and EPA's efforts to bring together partners from the Federal, State, and local levels to work together to reduce wildfire risks, including addressing climate change, while also mitigating risks to public health.
Mr. Speaker, I personally thank the chairman for his leadership and partnership on this legislation and Congress' broader efforts to modernize the Clean Air Act.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my bill, the bipartisan Fire Improvement and Reforming Exceptional Events Act, or FIRE Act for short. This commonsense bill ensures that States like Colorado are not punished for smoke and emissions that they cannot control while still maintaining strong environmental protections and incentivizing good forest management practices to prevent wildfires.
The Front Range of Colorado has consistently struggled to meet ozone attainment levels set by the Federal Clean Air Act, despite the fact that data and science show that more than 70 percent of emissions originate from sources outside of Colorado.
My mission when I came to Congress was to find a streamlined, nonpartisan solution to this problem, to cut red tape, and to help lower costs and protect the economy for my constituents.
My proposal simply clarifies how emissions from wildfires, prescribed burns, and other exceptional events are treated in Federal air quality reviews. It maintains environmental protections that benefit Americans while allowing States the flexibility that they need to comply with the Clean Air Act without needlessly enacting punitive regulations on the economy, job creators, and consumers.
Mr. Speaker, I have heard some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle argue that this bill is unnecessary because there is already enough flexibility under the Clean Air Act for exceptional events and prescribed burns. Allow me to address that.
Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago this week, four Western State Governors, two Republicans and two Democrats, including my Governor, Jared Polis, and the Democratic Governor from Arizona, sent a letter to President Biden highlighting challenges that Western States face in complying with the Clean Air Act and asking for greater flexibility.
I have the letter. Their number one request was for the Biden EPA to ``identify how the exceptional events framework can more appropriately be implemented given increased wildfire activity and provide more consideration for the emissions benefits of wildfire mitigation strategies in reducing air pollution in the West and nationally.''
Mr. Speaker, two Republican and two Democratic Governors agree that good wildfire mitigation reduces air pollution.
The FIRE Act does exactly this, and I am proud that it has been endorsed by the Western Governors' Association, whose members range from Greg Abbott to Gavin Newsom.
Additionally, 3 years ago, 25 Democratic Members from California, including both current Senators, wrote to the EPA under President Biden, claiming that the Clean Air Act, as written, jeopardizes their State's ability to deploy prescribed burns and comply with the Clean Air Act.
Part of the letter reads: ``While we appreciate the possibility that our concerns could be addressed through the use of EPA's exceptional events rule, the reality is that this process is unworkable for the scale of prescribed fire that will be necessary to protect our communities from increasingly catastrophic wildfires. The exceptional events rule is specifically designed for `unusual or naturally occurring events that can affect air quality but are not reasonably controllable.' This simply does not describe prescribed fires.''
Mr. Speaker, legislation like the FIRE Act has been asked for time and again by Members of both parties, and it is why I am so proud to lead this bill alongside my good colleague, Adam Gray, a California Democrat.
Mr. Speaker, while I have heard that some claim that the bill is unnecessary and accomplishes nothing, I have heard others say that the bill would do too much and fill our air with pollution. This also could not be further from the truth. As the father of a son who struggles with asthma, no one wants clean air more than I do. I want a healthy environment for all Coloradans and all Americans.
That is why this bill is narrowly tailored to maintain strong environmental protections. It actually reduces negative health outcomes that result from catastrophic wildfire smoke by encouraging more mitigation practices that reduce emissions through better wildfire prevention.
I will illustrate this point. A 2024 report compiled by fire experts and Tribal leaders asserts that the severe health and economic harms of wildfire smoke are ``largely neglected, if not inadvertently caused by Clean Air Act regulations themselves.''
I would also add that, under current law, working families are penalized for emissions that they are not responsible for, which leads to unemployment and higher costs--in a word, poverty. Poverty also worsens health outcomes.
The FIRE Act is a commonsense, bipartisan solution to existing air quality regulations, and it is sorely needed. That is why the bill has been endorsed by more than 25 different national, State, and local organizations that transcend industries, interests, and partisan divides. It protects the environment and promotes clean air by cutting red tape and allowing us to do a better job of reducing fuel loads and reducing damaging emissions from wildfire smoke.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Representative Gray, for his support and leadership, as well as the chairmen of the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations for all of their work advancing this bill. I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of the FIRE Act.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I need to respond to the comments made by the gentleman from Colorado. The EPA promulgated an exceptional events rule in 2016 to allow States and Tribes to use prescribed burns for fire management and exempt emissions from wildfire from regulatory requirements. This was reinforced by a 2025 EPA memo titled ``EPA Policy on Provisions to Allow Wildland Prescribed Fire in Clean Air Act State Implementation Plans.''
This bill is unnecessary, and I am going to repeat that. Republicans are claiming that the process is so burdensome and that very few determinations are made by the EPA. That is misleading. The value of prescribed burns is to mitigate wildfire and to minimize air quality impacts on communities.
That is why forest managers conduct prescribed burns under particular weather conditions. Under these conditions, prescribed burns do not contribute significantly to the area's ambient air quality, which means an exceptional event demonstration may not be necessary in the first place.
Proponents of this bill have lots of complaints about the current program. However, the FIRE Act does nothing to reform the exceptional event demonstration process for States or the EPA. Instead, it just provides broad exemptions, which is not what should be done.
One exceptional event waiver has been approved, clearly not workable. As was just discussed, bipartisan Governors--two Democrats from Colorado and Arizona, and two Republicans from Utah and Wyoming--wrote a letter in 2024 saying that this exceptional event process, as it is currently written under the Clean Air Act, is not workable.
Madam Speaker, while I greatly appreciate references to a 2016 letter, this is a problem that was still impacting folks in 2024, prompting a bipartisan outcry from Western Governors on both sides of the aisle to modernize the exceptional events waiver--the same thing from members of the delegation from California.
In a letter in June 2023, 25 Members signed a letter saying that the exceptional events waiver is not workable, asking for these updates and for modernization. That is borne out by the data and by the science, which say that we have only had one exceptional events waiver approved.
The science is clear. The data is clear. The environment is crying out for reducing emissions through better forest management and wildfire prevention, which, as we have heard, reduces emissions anywhere on a scale from 1 to 6 to 1 to 10. If you do the controlled burns and the mitigation now, you have fewer emissions from damaging wildfires in the future.
Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Alabama, and I thank my colleague from Colorado (Mr. Evans) for sponsoring this bill.
Colorado, my home State, is facing years of severe drought. Last year, Colorado saw one of the worst wildfire seasons since 2020, with more than 200,000 acres burned statewide.
This past winter didn't deliver the snowpack that Colorado relies on to help tamp down that wildfire risk. As many Coloradans already expect, this year could be even worse.
At the same time, wildfire mitigation has not been carried out at the pace or scale needed to reduce the risk of catastrophic fires. Across the West, wildfires are becoming more intense. They are destroying homes and businesses, damaging soil and watersheds, and making it harder for the land to recover.
Of course, they produce more emissions, and that creates a real problem for States like Colorado that are struggling to maintain compliance with the Federal air quality standards.
Along the Front Range, ozone levels already exceed Federal limits, and wildfire smoke has contributed to some of the highest ozone days on record. Yet, the EPA's current process for handling wildfire emissions does not provide States with enough certainty to secure exemptions for these so-called exceptional events.
In fact, some of Colorado's highest ozone readings have been driven by wildfire emissions, pollution that is entirely outside the State's control. If those wildfire days were excluded in 2024, Colorado's highest ozone reading would have been 73 parts per billion instead of 88, well within the Federal standard of 75.
Without these exemptions, States and local communities are forced to bear the consequences of nonattainment, whether that means new regulatory burdens, higher costs for consumers, or barriers for businesses trying to operate and grow.
It also makes it harder to carry out the very actions that would reduce wildfire risk in the first place. Prescribed burns, one of the most effective tools we have, become more difficult because their emissions count against compliance.
Research from Stanford University shows that prescribed burns can reduce wildfire severity by 16 percent and net smoke pollution by an average of 14 percent. That is backward.
I am proud to cosponsor the FIRE Act, led by my colleague, Gabe Evans, which brings much-needed clarity to how the Clean Air Act treats wildfire emissions and ensures that States aren't penalized for taking proactive steps to reduce risk. We should not have environmental policies that lead to worse environmental outcomes.
Right now, by discouraging prescribed burns, we are making it harder for States like Colorado to do proper fire mitigation. We are contributing to more emissions, not less, and that just doesn't make sense.
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his leadership on this issue,
Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, in closing, the FIRE Act is a bad faith attempt by Republicans to let industry pollute without consequence under the guise of expanding the use of prescribed fire.
In reality, it would allow everyday occurrences, like hot days and droughts, to be excluded from air quality determinations. We know that these events are occurring more often and with more intensity. Excluding these now common events all but ensures that communities across the country will continue to breathe unhealthy air and suffer the health consequences.
The Clean Air Act is one of the most successful laws to protect Americans ever enacted by Congress because it prioritizes public health and gives States flexibility to foster economic growth simultaneously.
We have made significant progress, but still too many people live in areas with dangerous air pollution. Every year, over 100,000 Americans die prematurely as a result of air pollution. Doctors and scientists widely consider fine particulate matter to be one of the most toxic air pollutants, as it can cause asthma, COPD, heart disease, and certain types of cancer.
We can't ignore the broader political landscape in which we are considering this bill, either. Earlier this year, EPA announced it will no longer consider the benefits of protection of public health when developing new rules for particulate matter and ozone pollution. Instead, EPA will consider only the compliance costs for industry. That makes it even more important that any Clean Air Act legislation taken up by Congress ensures that public health protections remain at the center of the law.
The American people are asking us to lower healthcare costs. They are asking us to ensure that our families have safe water to drink and healthy air to breathe. Our responsibility is to them, but our Republican colleagues seem to only answer to their corporate polluter buddies who are asking for regulatory rollbacks to save a few dollars. That is just a bad deal for the American people.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this dirty air bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, once again, I want to point out some of the inconsistencies in the argument.
They have talked about healthcare, and I pointed out three or four times already that Congress put $50 billion into the Working Families Tax Cuts Act specifically to modernize and improve rural healthcare. They are largely the ones who suffer the most from uncontrolled wildfires. Every Member of the Democratic side of the aisle voted no.
I pointed out before that they talk about impact on senior citizens. This year, 51.4 million senior citizens paid no income tax on their Social Security. However, every one of my Democratic colleagues voted against that.
They talk about families. In the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, Congress eliminated taxes on tips. These are some of the hardest working people in the country living largely off of tips. I think, on average, they are going to get about $3,000 back. That could be used to buy needed school supplies for their children, to pay a bill, to maybe even make a repair on an automobile, or to improve their housing, which is one of the leading factors in asthma.
According to the CDC, there is no single definitive known cause for the development of asthma but indoor air quality is a significant factor that is related to housing. This is what troubles me about the opposition to this bill. The science, the data, shows that controlled burns mitigate the intensity of wildfires. It reduces the amount of emissions into the atmosphere. This is a way to improve air quality, not make it worse.
They cite climate change in the frequency and intensity of wildfires. That is exactly what we are trying to mitigate against by doing these prescribed burns.
I am amazed at how many of the policies that they propose stifle the formation of new businesses, providing more jobs and better opportunities for families when the data, particularly on this issue, is clear. This is good for the local communities. It is good for rural communities. It is good for air quality.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 6387, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
Pursuant to House Resolution 1174, the previous question is ordered on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2319) to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a review to evaluate the status of research on lung cancer in women and underserved populations, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on this bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Tennessee?
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2319, the Women and Lung Cancer Research and Preventive Services Act of 2025 led by my colleague Representative Brendan F. Boyle.
Lung cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States, and it claims the lives of more Americans than any other type of cancer.
Globally, over 600,000 women die every year from lung cancer, and we know that nearly 20 percent of lung cancers occur in individuals who have either never smoked or smoked less than 100 cigarettes over their lifetime.
These findings demonstrate that we need to be doing more to understand the risk factors beyond just smoking cigarettes and improve both our strategies and tools for screening, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, especially among women who face unique risk factors.
H.R. 2319 would allow us to strengthen and advance emerging research opportunities that we rely on to reduce the burden of lung cancer mortality.
Further, this bipartisan bill requires an interagency review between the Department of Health and Human Services and the Departments of War and Veterans Affairs to determine the current research landscape in identifying new areas of research to explore.
H.R. 2319 is an opportunity to take another critical step in our fight against cancer in the United States.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2319, the Women and Lung Cancer Research and Preventive Services Act of 2025.
I want to begin by commending my colleague, Representative Brendan F. Boyle, for his tireless leadership on this critical issue.
Every 9 minutes, a woman loses her life to lung cancer. In the time it will take the House to consider this bill, more mothers, daughters, sisters, and friends will be lost. This legislation is a meaningful step in addressing the disproportionate impact of lung cancer on women.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. It kills more people each year than breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and uterine cancer combined.
Despite historically lower smoking rates than men, women are estimated to make up over half of all new lung cancer cases and nearly half of all deaths.
In the United States, we are seeing a concerning trend among young and middle-aged women who are being diagnosed with lung cancer. Even more striking, lung cancer disproportionately strikes women who have never smoked.
Approximately two-thirds of never-smokers who have been diagnosed with lung cancer are women. A clear understanding of the existing research and innovative opportunities to reduce lung cancer mortality, particularly among women in underserved populations, is needed.
This legislation directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services, working in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to conduct a comprehensive interagency review of lung cancer in women and in underserved populations.
This legislation will help us take steps toward answering key questions our researchers need to answer. We need to know what environmental and genomic factors contribute to lung cancer in women. We need to know where the gaps are in our existing research. We need to know how we expand access to early detection and screening, which we know saves lives. And we need to know how we mount a
So for all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to once again support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2319, the Women and Lung Cancer Research Preventive Services Act.
Lung cancer is the leading cancer death among women, and it disproportionately impacts women who have never even smoked.
This bipartisan bill requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs, to conduct an interagency review of current research on women and lung cancer.
Madam Speaker, this bill addresses the disparities women with lung cancer face, and it addresses it head-on, strengthening research, access to preventative services, and raising awareness. This is a significant step in addressing a disease that has left far too many women in my community and across the country vulnerable.
The unique impact of lung cancer on women requires an investment in strengthening research and access to preventative care. I look forward to continuing to work across the aisle to ensure that real progress is delivered, that this bill makes it across the finish line, and that women and families impacted by this devastating disease finally get the help that they need.
I also thank my friend and fellow Pennsylvanian Brendan Boyle for his partnership and leadership on this very, very important policy, and all my colleagues on the Energy and Commerce Committee for working to advance this critical bill to save lives.
Finally, I thank the tireless advocates who have championed this legislation for years and who have been working to address this disparity in cancer research and care.
Madam Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 2319.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my legislation, H.R. 2319, the Women and Lung Cancer Research and Preventive Services Act. This is a bipartisan, commonsense bill that takes on a serious and too often overlooked public health disparity.
The legislation would require the Secretary of HHS, in consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs, to conduct an interagency review of research on women and lung cancer, including access to preventive services.
It would also strengthen interagency coordination on public awareness efforts so more women have the information they need to understand their risk, seek early detection, and get care sooner. This matters because while smoking rates, fortunately, have declined in the United States and overall lung cancer rates have fallen, one troubling disparity remains. Women who have never smoked are still more likely to develop lung cancer than men who have never smoked. Research has continued to point to that gap, and it deserves far more attention than it gets today.
According to the American Cancer Society, about 120,000 women in the U.S. are expected to be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2026. That is roughly 170 women every day who will die as a result of this. That is roughly one woman in 8\1/2\ minutes. Approximately 62,000 women will die each year from this disease.
As my colleague and good friend and partner in this, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick, mentioned, lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, so these numbers should get our attention.
This bill is about doing something constructive. It is about improving research, strengthening prevention, expanding awareness, and helping ensure women have better access to the services that can support earlier diagnosis and treatment.
Simply put, earlier detection saves lives. Better information saves lives, and more attention to this disparity can save lives.
Despite progress in prevention and treatment, declines in lung cancer incidence have continued to move faster for men than for women. The reality is the scientific community still does not know why, so this tells us, frankly, we have plenty of work to do.
Madam Speaker, I want to tell you something that is personal. I have been working on this issue for 8 years now, ever since our late colleague who passed away 2 years ago, Rick Nolan, asked me to take this up just in the back there in the Members Cloakroom as he was leaving the Congress in December of 2018. He had shared with me the struggles that at the time his daughter was going through. Rick's daughter, Katherine Benson, courageously battled stage IV non-small cell lung cancer until her passing in 2020 at only 46 years old. She courageously fought this awful form of cancer for about 5 years.
Rick's legacy and Katherine's legacy lives on in this fight and in the determination to spare other families the same heartbreak.
In addition to thanking my friend and colleague, Brian Fitzpatrick, whom I mentioned previously and who has been a great Republican partner and co-lead with me in this effort, I also thank Chairman Guthrie and Ranking Member Pallone for their support as well as all of the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee.
At the end of the day, this bill does something very simple and important. It focuses attention on a deadly disparity that has gone overlooked for far too long, and it pushes the Federal Government to respond with the seriousness this issue demands.
Madam Speaker, this is a thoughtful, bipartisan proposal that can save lives, and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2319.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2319.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2493) to reauthorize certain programs regarding rural health care.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material into the Record on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Tennessee?
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2493, the Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act of 2025, led by my friend from Georgia, Congressman Carter.
Too often where a patient lives determines whether they are able to access adequate healthcare services, and patients who live in rural areas, in particular, often face barriers like a shortage of local providers and transportation challenges of traveling longer distances to reach points of care.
To overcome these challenges and build toward a healthier future, we must continue leveraging tools like telehealth to ensure that rural and underserved communities have access to quality healthcare.
H.R. 2493 reauthorizes grant programs that utilize integrated healthcare networks to help connect patients to high quality care. More specifically, the programs we are reauthorizing will help address critical healthcare gaps in rural communities such as access to preventive screenings and chronic disease management while improving services in primary care settings.
We must continue to invest in these community-driven policies to promote better health outcomes for rural and underserved populations.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I thank the sponsors, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2493, the Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act.
H.R. 2493 reauthorizes programs at the Health Resources & Services Administration that increase access to healthcare services in rural communities.
Rural communities often face significant challenges to accessing quality healthcare, including provider shortages, hospital closures, and long travel times to medical facilities. Rural communities also often face higher rates of poverty and unemployment which can contribute to poor health outcomes.
The community-based programs extended by this bill address the unique needs of the rural communities they serve by collaborating with local networks and partnering organizations. This includes implementing disease prevention and health promotion activities and enhancing healthcare delivery.
The programs also include the Healthy Rural Hometown Initiative, a targeted program that works to address the underlying factors contributing to the five leading causes of death in the United States. That would be heart disease, cancer, unintentional injury, stroke, and chronic lower respiratory disease.
This is an important bill, and I am hopeful that it will gain strong bipartisan support. This legislation comes at the same time rural communities are being devastated by the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts Republicans passed in their big, ugly bill. These cuts are going to have a disproportionate impact on rural Americans. Rural clinics and maternity care centers are already being forced to close their doors, and another 300 rural hospitals are likely to shutter, closing down altogether or reducing services.
Madam Speaker, I am pleased that we are considering this legislation to extend these programs. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 2493, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of my bill, H.R. 2493, the Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act of 2025, a bipartisan bill that ensures Americans, no matter where they live, have access to quality healthcare.
Let me be clear, healthcare outcomes should not depend on your ZIP Code. Today, for millions of Americans living in rural communities, that is exactly the reality.
Rural residents face serious barriers to care: provider shortages, long travel distances, hospital closures, and limited access to specialists. The consequences are real.
Rural Americans experience a 43-percent higher mortality rate compared to those in urban and suburban areas. That is simply unacceptable.
This legislation is about addressing those disparities head-on. The Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act builds on improving programs that are already making a difference in communities across the country.
Specifically, this bill reauthorizes critical rural health grant programs through 2030, programs that expand access to care, improve care coordination, strengthen rural health networks, and support quality improvement for providers.
These are not just theoretical ideas. They are programs with a track record of success. In fact, more than 85 percent of grant recipients have demonstrated measurable improvements in clinical outcomes, including better control of chronic conditions like diabetes and hypertension. That means healthier patients, stronger communities, and lower costs.
One of the most important aspects of this bill is that it provides community-driven solutions. We are not imposing a one-size-fits-all approach from Washington. Instead, we are empowering local providers, local leaders, and local communities to identify their own needs and build solutions that work for them.
The bill ensures that rural communities are directly involved in planning and implementing these programs so that care is tailored, targeted, and effective. That is how you get results.
As a pharmacist, I have seen firsthand how critical access to care is, especially in rural areas where providers are already stretched thin.
This legislation also helps to expand telehealth services so patients can access care without traveling hours, improve coordination between providers to reduce gaps in care, and strengthen small clinics and hospitals that are often the backbone of rural communities.
When a rural hospital closes, it is not just the loss of healthcare. It is a loss of jobs, a loss of economic stability, and a loss of security for the entire community.
At the end of the day, this bill is about fairness. It is about making sure that whether you live in a big city or a small town, you have access to the care you need. It is about strengthening our rural communities, improving health outcomes, and ensuring that no American is left behind.
We have an opportunity today to build on successful programs, deliver real results, and make a meaningful difference in people's lives.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2493.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 3419) to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the telehealth network and telehealth resource centers grant programs.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
Madam Chair, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Tennessee?
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3419, which would reauthorize the telehealth network and telehealth resource grant programs, led by my colleague Congressman Valadao.
Telehealth has been an extremely useful tool that helps patients overcome various physical barriers to care and expands access to a wide array of services provided by high-quality healthcare professionals. It is both an effective and efficient way to deliver healthcare services to patients living in rural and medically underserved areas across the United States.
As we continue working to build a healthier America, telehealth is an incredible tool to help break down barriers and promote patient access.
H.R. 3419 reauthorizes key grant programs, namely the Telehealth Network Grant Program and telehealth resource centers.
Under the Telehealth Network Grant Program, awardees can receive funding to provide services through a telehealth network for patients in rural and medically underserved areas.
Additionally, the telehealth resource centers provide telehealth technical assistance for regional and national entities that support providers to best utilize this technology to care for their patients.
Ultimately, this bill continues critical support and strengthens the telehealth infrastructure that Americans rely on.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I thank the sponsors for their work on this bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3419, the Reauthorization of Telehealth Network and Telehealth Resource Centers Grant Programs.
H.R. 3419 reauthorizes programs at the Office for the Advancement of Telehealth within the Health Resources and Services Administration, including the telehealth network and telehealth resource centers grant programs. These programs promote the use of telehealth networks to improve healthcare services for communities across the country.
Currently, the program promotes the use of rural tele-emergency services by delivering 24-hour emergency department consultation services for rural providers without emergency care specialists.
The Telehealth Resource Centers Program provides technical assistance, education, and information to organizations and individuals through 2 national centers and 12 regional centers. These centers help implement and expand telehealth programs so they can expand the reach of healthcare in rural and underserved communities.
I am glad that we are taking steps to reauthorize these programs. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 3419, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge support for my bill, the Reauthorization of Telehealth Network and Telehealth Resource Centers Grant Programs.
In the Central Valley and rural communities across the Nation, telehealth is a lifeline.
For many families I represent, getting to a doctor isn't easy. It can mean hours on the road, time off work, and waiting too long for an appointment.
When healthcare is delayed, small problems can turn into something much more serious. This bipartisan bill helps close that gap.
H.R. 3419 reauthorizes critical telehealth programs through fiscal year 2030 so patients in underserved areas can connect with doctors, specialists, and mental health providers without having to travel long distances or wait weeks for appointments.
We have already seen this work in the Central Valley, with thousands of telehealth visits helping people get care for things like depression, anxiety, and substance abuse.
These resources are incredibly important for rural, underserved communities and help make hospitals stronger, improve access to specialists, and provide more support for recruiting and retaining healthcare professionals in the communities that need them most.
I thank Chairman Guthrie and his staff on the Committee on Energy and Commerce for their work on this important bill, as well as my co-lead, Representative Adam Gray.
Together, we can ensure no one is left behind, no matter the ZIP Code they live in.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I just want to urge everyone to support this legislation. Telehealth expansion is obviously something that is particularly important for rural areas and underserved areas, so I think it is really important that we pass this legislation. I yield back the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, in closing, I encourage a ``yes'' vote on this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3419.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1020) to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the time period during which licensees are required to commence construction of certain hydropower projects.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Tennessee.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the legislation and to insert extraneous material on S. 1020.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Tennessee?
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of S. 1020, led by Senator Daines and, in the House of Representatives, by Representative Newhouse.
Hydropower is a critical part of our Nation's energy mix, supplying baseload power to approximately 30 million homes and businesses and accounting for 40 percent of our black start capacity.
S. 1020 authorizes the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to extend construction deadlines for critical hydropower projects licensed before March 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted global supply chains and halted many projects.
Current law requires hydropower projects to commence construction within 10 years of receiving a license. This legislation allows FERC to authorize an additional 6 years for certain projects to ensure fully licensed infrastructure is not permanently halted, depriving Americans of reliable energy.
There are currently 37 projects, across 15 States, that are at risk of losing licenses without the passage of this bill providing additional construction time.
These projects in limbo would provide energy that is imperative to power our communities, win the artificial intelligence race, and lower electricity prices for consumers.
I urge my colleagues to support S. 1020, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of S. 1020, which will grant an extension to hydropower projects impacted by the COVID pandemic.
The Federal Power Act requires hydropower projects to start construction within 2 years of receiving a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC. Subsequent amendments have allowed FERC to grant extensions of up to 8 years to a project's construction deadline.
While I think it makes sense to have a hydropower license expire if a project can't start construction within a decade of the license being issued, I recognize that the COVID pandemic and resulting supply chain issues wreaked havoc on the hydropower industry. Therefore, this bill would allow FERC to grant up to 6 additional years for projects whose licenses were issued prior to COVID to start construction and would allow FERC to reinstate the licenses of projects whose authorizations have since expired.
Madam Speaker, I will note that this authority is not a blank check to any developer with a license issued pre-COVID. The bill explicitly only allows FERC to grant an extension for good cause. I expect FERC to adhere to that restriction.
In addition, I will also note that while the House has been able to complete work on this bill, my colleagues from the Energy and Commerce Committee, Representatives Schrier and Fulcher, have another bill on hydropower, H.R. 3657, that has been sitting in the Senate for 9 months. I certainly hope our friends over in the Senate can pass that bill, which grants additional transparency into the hydropower licensing process as soon as possible.
Madam Speaker, in any case, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I close by saying, again, that our committee is always concerned about hydropower. I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to talk on this very important bill.
As everybody who knows me knows, I am a huge fan of hydropower. The Pacific Northwest boasts some of the most abundant form of low-cost, carbon-free renewable baseload power in the country, and I want to see other parts of the country be able to enjoy the same kind of benefits that we do in the Pacific Northwest from hydropower.
That is why this legislation is so important. It will extend the deadline so that construction projects can commence because their licensing opportunities will be extended.
Our country needs this hydropower. We need all forms of power, but this, in particular, is something that will help us provide a critical role in meeting the growing demand that we see throughout our country.
As I said, this is baseload power. It is carbon-free. It is something that is important to everybody in the country to make sure that we are good stewards of our environment.
I appreciate the opportunity to be able to speak in favor of an option that we have in front of us that potentially could provide 2.5 gigawatts more power in the near future, which will go a long ways in meeting the important demands that we have in our electrical future.
Madam Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on S. 1020, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, S. 1020.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 5201) to direct the Federal Communications Commission to publish a report on implementation of the Kari's Law Act of 2017, and for other purposes, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 405, nays 5, not voting 20, as follows:
Mses. CLARKE of New York and CLARK of Massachusetts changed their vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Improving Care in Rural America Reauthorization Act of 2025
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2493) to reauthorize certain programs regarding rural health care, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 406, nays 4, not voting 20, as follows:
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Extension of Time to Commence Construction of Certain Hydropower Projects
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 1020) to require the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the time period during which licensees are required to commence construction of certain hydropower projects, on which the yeas and nays were ordered.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Harshbarger) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 394, nays 14, not voting 22, as follows:
Mr. PERRY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Mr. Speaker, I was unable to vote today due to a commitment in my Congressional district. Had I been present, I would have voted YEA on Roll Call No. 127, YEA on Roll Call No. 128, and YEA on Roll Call No. 129.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize National Library Week, celebrated April 19 to April 25. Since its establishment in 1958, National Library Week has served as an opportunity for us to acknowledge the essential role libraries play in our communities.
This year's theme, ``Find Your Joy,'' encourages Americans to discover the new books, spaces, and programs offered at their local libraries.
With more than 100,000 libraries across the United States, these institutions are the cornerstone of our neighborhoods.
Librarians are there for us at every stage of life. From helping young students to read to assisting adults with research, library staff provide the support that individuals in our communities need.
As part of the weeklong celebration, today is National Library Workers Day. I strongly encourage everyone to thank a librarian for their dedicated service and the expertise they provide.
Mr. Speaker, librarians are pivotal to the success of many individuals, and I thank them for their commitment to public service.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the workforce cuts taking place at FEMA.
We all remember the images from Hurricane Sandy--Coney Island torn apart in our backyard in the New York area, families climbing onto rooftops to escape rising floodwaters.
We remember the lessons of the California wildfires, when entire neighborhoods were crumbled.
We remember the parents in Texas who never got to pick up their daughters after a mudslide overtook their summer camp.
These are real devastations, not hypotheticals, and they are growing in strength and frequency. Yet, this administration is diminishing the very workforce that is tasked with helping survivors rebuild, even questioning the value of the assistance FEMA provided when people had nothing left.
We must urge this administration to protect its essential workforce and pray that no community we call home is vulnerable when the next disaster strikes.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Clarkstown Police Chief Jeff Wanamaker on his retirement after nearly four decades of service to the town of Clarkstown and Rockland County.
Beginning his law enforcement career with the Clarkstown Police Department in 1987, he rose through every rank of the department, serving as a patrol officer, field training officer, detective, sergeant, lieutenant, captain, and, ultimately, chief. He also served as a volunteer firefighter.
A graduate of Nyack High School, SUNY Oneonta, Seton Hall University, and the FBI National Police Academy, Chief Wanamaker served with distinction on the department's honor guard, leading with the simple principle of community first.
Chief Wanamaker's career reflects the very best of law enforcement. A devoted family man and respected leader, he has spent his entire adult life protecting others.
Mr. Speaker, I join the people of Clarkstown in thanking him for his extraordinary service and wish him and his family all the best in a well-earned retirement. I thank my friend for his many years of dedicated service. God bless him.
Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to honor the remarkable life and legacy of Barbara Flynn Currie.
Barbara was nothing short of extraordinary, a true trailblazer in every
As a founding mother of the Illinois Women in Leadership, also known as IWIL, Barbara inspired me and countless others to pursue a career in public service.
She was a force who opened doors for generations of women in Illinois politics. She led with integrity, always putting people before politics, and proving that government can work effectively when guided by principle and purpose.
That is the kind of leadership we need now more than ever.
Mr. Speaker, Barbara will be deeply missed, but her example will continue to guide and inspire us for years to come.
Mr. Speaker, today, we celebrate the remarkable career of a true pillar of Kansas dentistry, Dr. Lucynda Raben.
For over 40 years, Lucynda has been more than a dentist. She has been a pioneer and a dedicated advocate for dentistry. From the very beginning, when she formed the first father-daughter practice in Kansas history, she has set a standard for excellence that has become a benchmark for our community.
As the founder of Raben Dentistry, she provided world-class care to Wichita families, but her impact reached far beyond the walls of her clinic. Whether serving as chair of the Delta Dental of Kansas, being named KDA Dentist of the Year, or testifying before the State legislature, Lucynda has been a tireless advocate for us all.
Through her work with the KIND program and her years of dedicated outreach, she has secured a clear path for the next generation of dentists.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Dr. Raben's career of leadership, integrity, and unwavering commitment to Wichita. I thank her for her decades of service and the lasting mark she has made on our community. I congratulate her on a remarkable legacy.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the more than $36 million in funding I have requested for Oregon's Fifth Congressional District.
This money will strengthen our communities by investing in clean drinking water, education, childcare, public safety, and workforce development.
In central Oregon alone, over $10 million will go toward expanding access to childcare, good-paying jobs, and wildfire preparedness.
Across Oregon, these projects will make sure families, small businesses, and our children will have everything they need to survive and thrive because funding these projects builds on my work to support the next generation. The pillars of my K-30 agenda are education, jobs, and housing. These projects will unlock our ability to make progress on those key issues to set the next generation up for success.
At the end of the day, Mr. Speaker, this is an investment in expanding opportunity and lowering costs for Oregonians. I will keep fighting in Congress to deliver real results back home.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of George Parsons, a proud American and decorated veteran of the Korean war, who passed away last week.
Born in Brooklyn in 1930, Mr. Parsons answered the call to serve, enlisting in 1950 in the National Guard. He fought in the Korean war with courage in multiple major Army offensives, defending freedom and earning numerous medals and citations.
After his military service, Mr. Parsons moved to Staten Island and embarked on a 33-year career serving our city in the Department of Sanitation.
In 1958, he heroically rescued three children and one adult from a house fire, earning him the Medal of Valor.
George proudly served as commander of the Allan F. Kivlehan Chapter of the Korean War Veterans Association and earned a place in the New York State Senate Veterans Hall of Fame.
Mr. Speaker, George was a dear friend to me and the community. We are forever grateful for his service and now must ensure future generations know the significant role that he and other Korean war veterans played in the fight against communism.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor one of Houston's and this Nation's great public servants. Ambassador Arthur Schechter ended his journey in life on April 13, at the wise age of 86. He was an attorney, a diplomat, a philanthropist, and one of Houston's most committed civic leaders.
Ambassador Schechter was a Houston man through and through. He built his legal career there, fought for maritime workers and working people and poured himself into this community for decades.
His impact didn't just stop in the city. President Clinton appointed him U.S. Ambassador to the Bahamas in 1998, and he served our country with dignity and honor.
The Governor General of the Bahamas called him the finest ambassador ever posted to that country. That says everything you need to know about the ambassador.
When Ambassador Schechter finished his post abroad, he continued the work back home. He chaired Houston's Public Transit Authority and helped open Houston's first light rail on our Main Street. He rode in that very first car with his grandchildren. That image captures who Arthur Schechter was. He didn't just build things. He made sure that the people he loved and everyone else in our communities got to experience them.
To Joyce, to Jennifer, to Leslie, and to the grandchildren and other family members that Ambassador Schechter loved so deeply, an entire Nation is grieving with you. God bless Ambassador Schechter in his service. May we carry his legacy forward.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and legacy of Mr. Willie Cooper, whose decades of service left a lasting mark on agriculture in Louisiana.
For 56 years, Mr. Cooper served with the United States Department of Agriculture and the Farm Service Agency, supporting farmers and advancing one of Louisiana's most vital industries.
In 1972, he was appointed Louisiana State Executive Director of the Farm Service Agency, a role he held for 42 years.
He served under 8 Presidents and 13 Secretaries of Agriculture, an extraordinary testament to his expertise and the trust placed in him.
Mr. Cooper was known for his integrity, humility, and unwavering commitment to doing his work the right way. He embodied the very best of public service.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this body, we extend our deepest condolences to his family, friends, and all who had the privilege of working with him. May we honor his memory through our service.
Mr. Speaker, last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was asked why Americans don't feel better
Let him tell that to the families in Pawtucket who are paying more at the grocery store and at the doctor's office, or seniors in Smithfield choosing between prescriptions and rent, or drivers paying over $4 a gallon to fill up for their commute from the East Bay or Aquidneck Island.
Working families don't feel Trump's economy in their hearts. They feel it in their wallets. This administration needs to stop the gaslighting. Trump's tariffs illegally took billions from American consumers for everyday goods, and he won't give a dime back.
Instead of fighting an unlawful war in Iran, they should be focused on lowering costs here at home. If they want people to feel good, then do good.
Mr. Speaker, stop the war, end the chaos, and make life affordable for Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Scott Blades of Tucson, Arizona, for more than three decades of leadership and service to individuals living with HIV in Pima County.
At the height of the HIV/AIDS crisis, when stigma and fear left many isolated, Scott responded with compassion and resolve, bringing community members together to provide care, dignity, and connection.
In 1994, he founded the Tucson Interfaith HIV/AIDS Network, building a powerful model that united faith communities, volunteers, and service providers to support those in need. Under his leadership, he recruited thousands of volunteers and, together, TIHAN served more than 1,600 people living with HIV, improving health outcomes, reducing stigma, and strengthening the community.
Scott Blades' career reflects the very best of public service, a lasting commitment to dignity, equity, and care for others.
I ask the people of the Seventh Congressional District to join me in honoring his extraordinary contributions to southern Arizona.
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow marks the 111th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, the systematic murder of 1.5 million Armenians by the Ottoman Empire. For more than a century, that truth was denied.
I represent California's 30th District, home to the largest Armenian- American community outside of Armenia. For my constituents, this anniversary is not history. It is living memory. It is their friends and family.
Unfortunately, aggression against Armenians is happening again. More than 120,000 Armenians have been ethnically cleansed from Artsakh, their ancestral homeland, and 23 prisoners remain unjustly detained in Azerbaijan. Sacred cultural and religious sites are being destroyed. These are sites that I had the honor of visiting several years ago.
Today, I recommit to fighting to demand the release of every Armenian prisoner of war, the end of military aid to Azerbaijan, and the right of displaced Artsakh families to return home to their lands. I will fight to protect Armenia from ongoing threats from Turkiye and Azerbaijan.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to mark this solemn occasion.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Darren Cronkite on an extraordinary milestone of 30 years of dedicated business leadership in Riverside, California.
In 1996, Darren opened Back to the Grind, which quickly became more than a coffeehouse. Through open mikes, art showcases, and community events, it has become a cornerstone of downtown Riverside's cultural life.
Darren's commitment to inclusion and community building has made a lasting impact across the Inland Empire. By ensuring that all people, including members of the LGBTQ+ community, have a place to feel seen and connected, he has strengthened the social fabric of Riverside.
I congratulate Darren on 30 years of service, leadership, and community impact. His work will continue to make a meaningful mark, and I look forward to celebrating this milestone with him.
Mr. Speaker, how bad does it have to get for the GOP in this Chamber to do something?
Unhinged posts threatening war crimes; an illegal war in the Middle East that has killed thousands and thousands of civilians; 13 U.S. soldiers dead; an illegal invasion in Venezuela; illegal killing of civilians in the Caribbean; billions of dollars in grift, including insider trading and oil shorts, shady crypto deals, selling pardons, and his son-in-law making billion-dollar business deals while negotiating a war; and the biggest coverup in American history in the Epstein case, where the President is not only implicated but named as accused.
My question, Mr. Speaker: When is enough enough to impeach, to invoke the 25th Amendment, to stop these wars, to rein in this insanity, and to remove this President now?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material in the Record.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with my colleagues from the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Assistant Democratic Leader Joe Neguse to call out the many ways that Donald Trump's 2027 budget request will make life harder for our neighbors and constituents.
I will start with the fact that families across the country are already hurting because of Republican policies. Last year, Trump's budget bill made drastic cuts to healthcare and food assistance, and 17 million people will lose healthcare coverage as a result. Yet, that wasn't enough for Trump because his 2027 budget proposal cuts even more.
For example, the President's budget request eliminates $4 billion of affordable housing investments, wiping out programs that help families find housing, stay in their homes, and get back on their feet.
My district has suffered from severe floods over the last 2 years, and some of my constituents were displaced from their homes. As rents rise, Trump wants to cut programs that are designed to help keep a roof over their heads.
The President's budget also eliminates LIHEAP, a program that helps 5 million families afford their utility bills, leaving them unable to cool their homes in the summer or pay heating bills in the winter. When you combine that with surging prices at the gas pump because of Trump's illegal war with Iran, Trump is making the American people suffer twice.
As if this wasn't bad enough, Trump's budget proposal also calls for deep cuts to food assistance like SNAP and WIC.
With all of these cuts, what is Trump increasing the budget for? One word: war.
As he proposes to cut $73 billion for housing, food, education, and health, he is asking for $1.5 trillion for the Pentagon, a record- shattering amount that demonstrates just how detached Trump is from our constituents' needs and priorities.
Trump started a cruel, illegal, deeply unpopular war that costs billions of dollars every day, sent gas prices skyrocketing, and triggered a global fuel crisis.
This budget request would enable him to do more destruction with more money, while lining the pockets of his defense contractor friends. This makes us all less safe.
Just last week, Trump said: ``It is not possible'' to help Americans afford healthcare or childcare because ``we are fighting wars.''
Through this budget request, Trump isn't just waging illegal wars abroad. He is waging war on working families here at home.
I thank my colleagues for joining me to talk about how Trump's proposed budget request would make a tough situation even worse for working families.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Neguse), the Assistant Democratic Leader.
First, Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the distinguished gentleman from Chicago, Illinois, for his friendship, for his partnership, and for articulating so well today the stakes.
Since returning to office, as my colleague from Illinois referenced, President Trump has made life harder for everyday Americans. He has made life less affordable for everyday Americans, certainly for the working families that I represent in northern and western Colorado.
Let me give you a sense, my colleague from Illinois, about what the last 16 months have been like for my constituents, the folks that I have the privilege of serving in Colorado.
President Trump has denied not just one, but two major disaster relief requests for massive fires that took place last year in Western Colorado, the Lee and Elk fires, and devastating flooding in Southwest Colorado. These are communities that are conservative, rural communities that President Trump denied disaster relief to them all the same.
He has gutted childcare support for Colorado families. Childcare centers across Colorado--Larimer County, Adams County, Western Slope, Southern Colorado--are closing because of this President's policies.
He slashed Medicaid, the largest cut to SNAP in the history of that program, families going hungry across our State and across our country, chaos for our farmers and our ranchers, record-high bankruptcies for America's farmers, including in Colorado.
He fired thousands of workers at our Federal laboratories, in our national parks, and in our national forests.
He has--again, the gentleman said it so well--increased costs on everything. Everything is more expensive. Groceries, medicine, car insurance, health insurance, you name it, it has all gone up.
Now, given all that I just described, the President has the audacity, the gall to propose a $2.2 trillion--trillion with a t--wish list in the form of his budget request that would implement historic cuts to education, to housing, to health programs, all while creating a $1.5 trillion slush fund for the war that he has unconstitutionally declared.
In my view, it is reprehensible, and it is not consistent with the needs of the American people.
We need this administration to get serious about helping everyday Coloradans and Americans afford healthcare and afford the basic needs that they have. We need them to get serious about an economic agenda that actually makes life better for working people.
Unfortunately, this budget proposal is anything but that--quite the opposite.
Now, the good news is that Republicans here in Congress don't have to follow the President's budget. It is not a requirement. I know that may come as a surprise to some folks who are observing the proceedings here in Washington, D.C., because, for the last 16 months, House Republicans have capitulated to virtually every whim, every request, and every demand that this President has made. But they don't have to do that. In fact, they are expected by our Framers and our Founders not to, to instead jealously guard the powers of our branch of government under Article I.
Democrats and Republicans can work together through the appropriations process to advance a proposal that would actually lower costs for everyday Americans. That to me ought to be our North Star.
I hope our colleagues are listening today.
I thank the gentleman from Chicago and so many of my House Democratic colleagues who I know will be speaking this evening for making the case in such an impassioned way. Let's hope it doesn't take my colleagues too long to ultimately do what is right.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Garcia and Mr. Neguse for organizing this Special Order hour about President Trump's budget request for next year.
The one saving grace of the President's budget is how clearly it demonstrates the failed policies and misplaced priorities of the White House and the Republican Congress. While proposing a massive increase in defense spending to support a reckless war of choice in Iran and supporting numerous policies to protect the billionaire class, the Trump budget would slash programs that provide healthcare, education, and housing to working Americans and would do nothing to lower gas prices or make groceries more affordable.
While there are too many outrages contained in this budget to mention all of them, I want to focus on one program in particular that highlights the senseless cruelty represented by this budget: the President would completely eliminate support for the Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS, or HOPWA, program.
HOPWA provides critical housing support to hundreds of thousands of individuals and their families across the country. Housing is one of the greatest needs for those living with HIV/AIDS, and it is among the strongest predictors of access to treatment and health outcomes. Unstable housing or homelessness is linked to late or limited access to care, higher viral loads, increased hospitalizations, and premature death.
HOPWA was created in 1990 to respond to the HIV crisis, and it has enjoyed bipartisan support for decades. It has led to dramatic improvements in healthcare and reduced mortality for people living with HIV and AIDS. Yet, this President wants to cut HOPWA to the bone, leaving people with HIV and AIDS vulnerable to more HIV transmissions and a spike in homelessness.
Congress established HOPWA--under a Republican President, I might add--because of illegal discrimination in the private housing market against people with HIV and AIDS. As for public housing, many individuals with HIV and AIDS on the waiting list for housing tragically died while waiting for an open unit. HOPWA changed that.
A study from 2010 found that HOPWA has been tremendously effective in improving the physical health and housing status of enrollees. These gains did not come overnight. They came from funding this program year by year for over 30 years, and Donald Trump wants to gut all of it.
I was proud to lead 107 of my colleagues in supporting HOPWA funding for fiscal year 2027 appropriations, and I am outraged at the President's disregard for vulnerable Americans. We must protect HOPWA and stand up for all Americans in need.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Garcia) for yielding time.
Mr. Speaker, a budget for our country is a moral document. It shows our
A budget should reflect investments in Americans by funding education and housing while also lowering costs. But Donald Trump's budget request sends a clear message about the kind of country Republicans want; one that invests in war, not Americans.
What happened to the so-called America First project by this President? What happened to the so-called America First project?
The President's budget slashes $8.5 billion from K-12 programs, cuts 52 percent of the budget for the agency charged with protecting our air and water, and reduces housing programs by $11 billion--all of that to pay for the largest percentage increase to the Department of Defense since World War II. Let me say that again. All of that is to pay for the largest percentage increase to the Department of Defense since World War II.
The American people are tired of seeing their tax dollars fund more endless wars in the Middle East. They are tired of seeing a President who sends our sons and daughters to war while apparently being increasingly unstable both mentally and emotionally. They are tired of seeing his top aide say nothing, nothing, and do nothing to intervene when the President clearly needs help.
How much longer does this have to go on before this Republican majority steps in? How many more AI-generated Jesus images does the President have to post before you, my Republican colleagues, are alarmed like the majority of Americans?
History will remember this Republican-controlled Congress as complicit in this President's behavior and his ill-informed proposals.
Mr. Speaker, it is not too late for Republicans to join Democrats in fighting for a budget that actually puts Americans first, one that seeks to fund and build schools at home and not fund bombs abroad, a budget that reflects the values of a government and its President, and that fact rings true here.
The President is asking Congress to steal from our children's future to prop up a war that no one wants. I urge my Republican colleagues to stand opposed to this cruel budget.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to President Trump's 2027 budget. Let me be clear. This budget is completely and totally morally bankrupt to its core--rotten to its core.
While we debate numbers and line items here in Washington, the reality is being felt at home in our communities. In New Mexico, people are worried about how they are going to put food on the table, a roof over their head, how they are going to keep the lights on, how they are going to make their rent. They are looking to us, the leaders in this body, to do something to help the American people.
Yet, this budget does the exact opposite. It is a betrayal to the American people. It guts fundamental programs that support the working people of this country. At a time when utilities are at an all-time high, this budget eliminates LIHEAP, which is vital to helping low- income families heat and cool their homes, including millions of seniors.
At a time when we have a housing crisis in every community across this country, this bill guts block grants and housing programs that provide affordable housing in our communities.
At a time when millions of Americans can't afford healthcare after the GOP in this body decided to not extend healthcare subsidies, they are proposing to slash $5 billion from the National Institutes of Health. They are proposing to gut and consolidate and eliminate billions of programs from the CDC, from SAMHSA, and from HRSA.
In a time when Americans are struggling with an opioid epidemic and an addiction crisis that is literally claiming lives every week in communities across this country, they are gutting the programs that keep Americans alive.
In a time when New Mexicans are facing one of the most difficult water years we have probably ever seen in the history of our State in modern times, they are threatening to cut funding for water infrastructure.
This is a morally bankrupt budget, and it will bankrupt the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I stand here tonight to reject the moral bankruptcy of this administration, to reject the moral bankruptcy of this body that refuses to act, and to call on all of us to put forward a vision for our people that invest in the working people of this country who wake up every day and go to work in order to put food on the table and care for their families.
Now, people will say we can't afford it. How could we afford to invest in our people? Let me just say this: In New Mexico, we are one of the poorest States in the United States, but we have made the moral choice to invest in our people. We have made the moral choice to become the first in the Nation to guarantee free childcare and early childhood education for every single family. We are the first in the Nation to guarantee free higher education and trade school to every New Mexican.
When the GOP shut down the Federal Government and Donald Trump threatened to gut healthcare and food assistance, New Mexico stood up and acted. We extended healthcare to thousands of New Mexicans and made sure that not a single family would go without food on their table.
We reject the cruelty and moral bankruptcy of politics that says we can't invest in our people, and we reject a budget that would steal from them so that an out-of-control madman in the White House could take the American people's hard-earned taxpayer dollars and buy more bombs.
That is why we are here tonight, because we reject that America.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say this: We are the wealthiest Nation in the world. We can invest in our people. We can lower costs. We can build an economy for every single person. We can value our communities. We can care for our communities. We are here tonight to stand up, to speak out, and to reject the moral bankruptcy of a budget that would bankrupt our people.
Mr. Speaker, the convicted felon in the White House is not an honest man, but when he rebranded the Department of Defense as the Department of War, for once, for once, he told the truth because war is what we have. War is what he wants, and war is what he is asking the American people to pay for.
President Trump's budget requests $1.5 trillion in taxpayer money for the Department of War--$1.5 trillion, a $440 billion increase. Who pays the extra $440 billion? Not the billionaires who just got tax cuts, not Elon, not the Trump family, not White House insiders cashing in on trades ahead of market-moving announcements, no. Trump's war machine will be paid for by working people, just like his tax cuts for billionaires were paid for by working people.
In the last year, Trump has made the largest cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act in history and the largest cut to food assistance in history, all to make the richest Americans richer and the biggest corporations bigger.
This time, it is not tax cuts but war he wants.
What ATM is the President tapping again to pay for it?
It is the working men and women of this country.
How does the President propose paying for more war?
I am glad you asked, Mr. Speaker. It is with cuts to heating assistance, with cuts to housing, with cuts to education and job training, and even cuts to programs that provide food for women, infants, and children, all to pay for wars that the American people don't want.
What is the agenda?
It is to cut healthcare to fund war, cut food to fund war, cut housing and heating programs to fund war, and cut maternal health to fund war. He wants to cut more, take more, and sacrifice more.
And for what?
It is for war. Wars the American people do not want. That is not just grossly irresponsible, it is gross and immoral.
Mr. Speaker, I don't know who is winning Trump's war with Iran, but I
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Garcia and assistant Democratic leader Neguse for holding this important conversation on Trump's budget request for 2027.
We are here because Trump and Republicans led us to a cost-of-living crisis that is making life more unaffordable for working families. Trump's budget proposal will make this crisis worse. I have heard from people across my district that life is too expensive, from food to gas to rent.
Budgets are a reflection of our values, and Trump made his values heard loud and clear: Leave working families behind.
Trump's budget cuts $73 billion in programs that support working families. One of the programs that will be facing serious cuts is the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP. LIHEAP is a key program that helps families with reducing the costs associated with home energy bills, energy crises, weatherization, and minor energy- related home repairs. LIHEAP helps environmental justice communities like mine deal with the effect of extreme heat and climate change, and Trump wants to gut $4 billion in funding for LIHEAP.
Southern California is no stranger to heat, especially in the summer. However, due to climate change, periods of extreme heat in southern California, especially in the San Fernando Valley, are becoming more common, more intense, and more harmful. Eliminating critical funding for LIHEAP means my constituents will be less prepared to deal with periods of extreme heat while also paying more to keep their homes cool. Extreme levels of heat with no support or financial assistance to keep homes cool will be dangerous and even deadly.
Additionally, Trump is proposing a 52 percent cut in EPA funding. EPA has helped environmental justice communities like mine breathe cleaner air and drink cleaner water. By cutting EPA funding by over one-half, Trump will make our communities sicker.
Trump's budget proposal does not make life healthier or more affordable for working families in my district and across the country. In fact, prices will skyrocket. Since Trump's war in Iran started, gas prices in Los Angeles County have shot up to an average of nearly $6 per gallon with some gas stations seeing prices as high as $8 per gallon. Trump's budget request does not bring gas prices down for working families in the San Fernando Valley or across the country.
Trump's budget will also harm pregnant women, mothers, and children. WIC programs across my district help many of my constituents access the resources that they need for a healthier life, including food vouchers, nutrition education, and healthcare referrals. Trump's budget proposal slashes funding for WIC programs and will force millions of Americans to go hungry.
At a time when Americans are struggling to afford to put food on their table, Trump and Republicans are offering no life raft for those who need it the most. Trump wants to continue spending over $1 billion per day to continue his war in Iran while working families in my district and across the country continue to struggle with the rising cost of gas.
As Donald Trump turns his back on working Americans, my Congressional Progressive Caucus colleagues and I are fighting for them and the resources they need to succeed.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Garcia for his leadership on this.
Americans are struggling. They are struggling with the high cost of living because of Republican policies that are doing nothing to bring down prices.
The cost of gas is too high. Americans are paying more for gasoline this year because of Trump's war of choice against Iran. Americans have seen the price spike in the last month, and the average household is expected to spend an extra $740 on gas this year because of Trump's war of choice against Iran.
Groceries cost more. The average family paid over $300 more for groceries last year. They are paying more this year, whether it is for bananas, coffee, and other basic goods. We can thank Republicans and Trump's tariff war for that along with the war on Iran. Trump's tariffs cost families more than $2,500 extra this year.
Utilities bills are also soaring through the roof. Since Trump took office, electric bills have gone up as much as 13 percent nationally while residential natural gas prices have increased by 12 percent.
Mr. Speaker, do you remember when Donald Trump and Republicans promised to lower costs on day one?
That was a lie. The cost of everything is going up, squeezing every penny from American families. As costs continue to rise, this administration is doubling down on the wrong priorities. The President's latest proposed budget not only does nothing to lower the cost, it puts Americans last. At a time when energy bills are rising, they want to eliminate energy assistance programs to help keep the lights on for many families. At a time when food prices are high, Trump and Republicans want to cut programs that would put food on the table for mothers and children. At a time when housing is unaffordable, they are cutting programs to help keep a roof over people's heads. At a time when families are struggling to get by, they are proposing massive increases in defense spending and pouring billions of dollars more into wars of choice overseas.
Americans were forced to pay an extra $1,600 on everyday expenses last year because of Trump's and Republicans' policies, and Trump's budget will force many of them to pay even more.
I have heard from people in my district. Erica from my district is a single mother of two. She worries about how to plan meals for her children because she can't buy as many groceries. She takes them to free parks and pools because she can't afford extracurricular activities.
A restaurant owner, Ralph, in South Gate, had decided between making payroll or paying the electricity bill. He paid his staff. His electricity was cut off, and it cost him thousands of dollars more to have it turned back on.
A nonprofit in my district told us that families are calling for help because they are forced to choose between paying for food or paying for basic expenses like electricity and water. Working people can't keep up with rising costs, and many are falling behind.
Mr. Speaker, Americans deserve a budget that works for them, not one that burdens Americans with higher prices while taking resources away to keep families afloat.
Americans deserve better. They deserve to be put first. Democrats are using every available tool to fight back against Republicans' dangerous agenda and fight for the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Representative Garcia for his leadership and for giving us the opportunity to weigh in on this budget.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on this administration's budget request, a proposal that makes one thing painfully clear: Trump's budget isn't America First; it is America last.
While working families struggle to get by, this budget spends $350 billion on another endless and illegal war abroad. To fund this, his budget cuts the very programs people rely on here at home.
In Arizona, we are already seeing the devastating consequences of cuts from the big, ugly law. More than 400,000 Arizonans, including 180,000 children, have lost SNAP access just this last year. That is nearly half of all recipients in my State, the largest drop in the country. That means parents skipping meals so their kids can eat. This means seniors choosing between groceries and medication. It means food banks stretched beyond capacity, trying to fill the gap that the Federal Government has created.
Instead of reversing course, Trump's budget doubles down. It eliminates financial assistance for families that are facing rising utility bills. It slashes affordable housing programs like CDBG. It cuts nutrition and health assistance for women, infants, and children, WIC. It guts cancer research and public health funding, even as rural hospitals struggle to stay open.
This budget is a statement of values, and it shows clearly that the priority is not our people. It tells us exactly who this administration is willing to fight for and who it is willing to leave behind, with a 42-percent increase in funding for the Pentagon while cutting programs that support the American people here at home by 10 percent.
I will not support a budget that asks working families to sacrifice more just to bankroll endless wars abroad and hand out tax breaks to the wealthy.
``Our people deserve better''; ``nuestra gente merece mejor.''
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Menefee), and I thank him for his patience. He was here at the beginning of this Special Order hour, waiting patiently to make the case for his district and the people he was sent to fight for here in Washington.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to oppose President Trump's budget. A budget is a statement of values, and this one shows what President Trump cares about: his senseless war first and American families last.
Across the country and in my home in Houston, Americans are fed up with a government that seems more focused on endless wars than on whether people can afford groceries or gas.
President Trump's proposed budget cuts many of the programs that would offer even a little bit of relief to the economic pain he has caused. It would even cut childcare, ignoring the realities families face. As a father of two, I know how costly childcare is, and I am troubled by leaders who would make it harder, not easier, for parents to work and raise their children.
We are feeling these cuts uniquely in my city of Houston. Despite having some of the most food-insecure neighborhoods in the entire country, we have seen massive cuts to food banks, including tens of millions of dollars from the Houston Food Bank.
Despite having the largest medical research hub in the entire country in the Texas Medical Center, which relies on a routine basis on NIH grants, we have seen $5 billion cut from the NIH.
Despite having some of the most environmental injustice-ridden communities in the entire United States of America, we have seen more than 50 percent in funding cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency. We know that those cuts are coming mostly from the environmental justice divisions.
This budget is immoral. It is an attack on Americans. It is going to severely harm people in Houston.
The President's policies have raised costs, worsened the affordability crisis, undermined access to healthcare, and delivered tax breaks for billionaires while working families fall further behind. Millions of people risk losing vital care and financial security while a small number of billionaires see their wealth grow. Think about that: Families are going without care so that the rich can get richer.
We are the wealthiest nation on Earth. Our budget can and must afford investments in childcare and healthcare and support for our seniors while managing our finances responsibly. What we cannot afford are priorities that put the richest first and leave working families behind.
Mr. Speaker, President Trump's budget represents not America First, but America last.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for his continued effort to protect and fight for working families.
For the last 7 years that I have been here, I have been pushing for us to fund and acknowledge that safe, accessible, and affordable drinking water is a human right. Right now, in our United States, we have programs for electricity and gas shut-offs, but nothing for water. Water is life. It is sometimes literally a barrier to a public health crisis.
Congresswoman Debbie Dingell and I are changing that. In 2021, we established the first-ever low-income housing water assistance program, a financial assistance program to pay off bills and debts and keep people's water connected during the pandemic. It was a total of $1.1 billion.
The program saved countless lives, but the money has run out. Millions of Americans right now are struggling to keep up with the affordability crisis and having their water shut off.
It is not just an issue in Detroit, but also in communities like the city of Inkster, Redford Township, and other areas in the 12th Congressional District. This is a nationwide issue. Every Congressional district right now has a water crisis.
That is why Congresswoman Dingell and I are introducing the Water Access and Affordability Act to establish a permanent low-income drinking water assistance program within the Environmental Protection Agency.
Our bill would dedicate $20 billion every year to keep people's water flowing. This program would include direct financial assistance and bill payments, debt relief, reconnection assistance, and water efficiency upgrades.
It will set up community advisory committees to help advise the EPA on how to implement these programs to make the biggest difference possible.
This bill would ban water shutoffs as a punishment for not being able to afford their water bills. This is the richest country in the world. We say it all the time, but it is important. Many families see the money flowing but not to essentials.
The President just requested a $1.5 trillion military budget, but they want to tell us they don't have money to make sure that every family in our country has access to clean drinking water. This bill is an important first step in our movement to recognize, again, that water is life. It is a human right.
This has become an issue for me and something very important because there was an African-American couple in my community in their seventies. Their story was published in one of our local outlets. One of the homeowners had put snow in a bucket to melt so he had water to be able to flush the toilet.
Their story talked about the fact that they worked all their lives. They paid for their home. They have to pay their taxes every year on their home. They have a little bit of bills here and there, but the water costs went so high that they just couldn't afford it. They literally, in their seventies, in their retirement, couldn't afford water.
I say this lovingly to my colleagues: It is about time we find money for our families here at home. If our country has money for endless wars, we have money to make sure that people aren't melting snow to flush their toilets or living in fear of getting their children taken away because water has been shut off.
We will literally take children away from homes that don't have access to water and spend money on putting them in foster care, but not make sure that, again, we have programs like this one to make sure that they are protected and have access to something that is lifesaving.
Mr. Speaker, water is a human right, and I hope my colleagues will try to support, again, the funding of this program. Trust me, all across the country, you will find a family that is struggling to pay their water bill.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who joined us on the floor today, as well as Assistant Democratic Leader Neguse for cohosting this Special Order hour.
We are all elected to bring our constituents' voices here to Congress and to pass policies that help them live better lives. I urge my colleagues to protect housing, education, and healthcare especially; in other words, to prioritize the needs of all of our constituents.
Mr. Speaker, I come here this evening as someone proud to be a
I have people that I represent in Texas, constituents, but I also have people throughout the entire State, people across the country who stop me in airports, and they talk about what we do as the Freedom Caucus.
I say: Pretty simply, we stand up for freedom. When people say: Well, why would I want to be in the House Freedom Caucus? My answer is: Well, why wouldn't you want to be in the House Freedom Caucus?
It is a caucus of individuals dedicated to the Constitution, dedicated to freedom, dedicated to limiting government, all of the principles on which most of us, at least on this side of the aisle, run on. We happen to believe that when you come to Washington, you should do what you say when you are campaigning, that you should do what you say. It shouldn't be that complicated. Unfortunately, it often is.
I am proud to be in the trenches often with so many colleagues in the Freedom Caucus who recognize the importance of standing up and fighting for the principles and for the changes the American people sent us here to carry out and execute.
We have had a number of really extraordinarily important issues before this body in my time in Congress and in recent years. Right now, we have extraordinary issues facing us.
Earlier today, when we had bills on the floor of the House, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle were complaining and criticizing and alleging that we are not accomplishing anything, we are not getting anything done. Alternatively, when I talk to the people that I represent, when I talk to Texans, and I talk to the people that I said that stop me in airports and that thank us for doing what we do in the House Freedom Caucus for conservatives here on the House floor, I would say that I am very proud of the things that we have done over the last 15 months.
I am proud that we cut taxes. I am proud that we made sure that we put reforms in place to stop fraud and abuse. I am proud that we were able to put reforms in Medicaid and in food stamps to eliminate welfare for people who aren't working and for people who are illegal aliens. I am proud of the fact that this President has stopped the flow of illegal aliens at the border, that he has designated cartels as terrorist organizations, that he has taken the fight to the cartels and is going after Venezuela and trying to restore our dominance in the Western Hemisphere. I am proud that we have people now registering and enlisting in the United States military in record numbers because he has restored people's belief and confidence in the United States military. I am proud that he is standing up in defense of common sense, of saying that we shouldn't have boys in girls' locker rooms, and that we should be doing the things that would restore order and common sense throughout our country.
I am proud of what we have been doing. I have to say that the House Freedom Caucus stands at the epicenter, I think, of the great things that we have been accomplishing. But for the Freedom Caucus 3 years ago, in a notorious event here with respect to the Speaker and selecting a Speaker, we demanded certain changes to this institution.
We demanded that we have better representation in the Rules Committee and on Appropriations, and we demanded that we move solid and strong legislation, like H.R. 2 and our border security bill that we passed 3 years ago. We demanded that we have reforms on spending and that we try to move regular order and get bills through so we can actually get appropriations done.
Over the course of these years, we managed to pass the strongest border security bill in the history of this body. We managed to pass spending bills that held spending flat for the last three cycles. For 3 fiscal years, we have been able to hold discretionary spending flat. We managed to have serious influence in shaping what happened in the big, beautiful bill, as it came to be known, in particular stopping the absurdity of the green new scam subsidies. We singlehandedly stood up and took the arrows to say: We are not going to pass this, and we are going to demand change, and we are going to demand reform.
I can go through a list of countless things, whether it was the FISA reforms from 2 years ago, which I am proud that we implemented because we demanded that we actually protect Americans from warrantless surveillance and warrantless searches. We should demand to protect citizens when we had abuse under FISA and abuse by our intelligence community and the FBI against the American people.
By the way, sidenote, we should do that again. We should have more reforms. We shouldn't allow the intelligence community to roll over us. We should stand up again here on the House floor and make sure that the American people are protected. I think there is bipartisan support for that.
The Freedom Caucus has stood at the center of these fights and tried to demand that we protect the American people, that we protect them against the long arm of the government, that we try to hold taxes in check, hold spending in check, do even an ounce of what we said we would do when we campaigned.
I am proud to affiliate with such a great group of people. I am proud of what we do. I have no problem taking the arrows from people in this town that I am a part of the Freedom Caucus because I can promise you, the American people thank me and the American people thank us. They thank us for standing up against the inevitability in this town of Big Government, big spending and debt, and the expansion of the tyrannical bureaucratic state against the freedom of the American people.
I am proud to be affiliated with the Freedom Caucus. We are here today not only to talk about that and to talk about the things we need to do, but we are here to celebrate one of our own, one of our dear friends, Tim Reitz, who serves currently as the House Freedom Caucus executive director. Tim will be leaving this week to go continue to stay in the fight and go to an organization down the street. We will miss, Tim.
His work has been tireless in the advance of freedom. His work has been at the center of all that we have been able to accomplish over these last 4 years in his role as executive director, which I think now has been just over 4 years.
He has served under at least three different chairmen of the House Freedom Caucus, one of whom is here, and I am sure I will hand over the mike in just a second, to my good friend, Scott Perry from Pennsylvania.
Before that, he served as chief of staff, legislative director, and legislative assistant to my good friend and former Member of this body, Jody Hice, who is sitting behind me now.
We are all here to thank Tim for his service. He is a great American, a Georgian who worked for Paul Broun, a former Member of this body as well, before he worked for Jody Hice of Georgia. He is a graduate, I believe, of Georgia State University, but a big fan of the Georgia Bulldogs as well. In fact, he is so much a fan of the Georgia Bulldogs that he owns two bulldogs, Rocco and Rockette. He is married to his beautiful bride, Dawn-Marie, who works for the President in administration in the Office of Management and Budget and who herself was a staffer on Capitol Hill.
Now, as someone who served as a staffer himself, someone who worked over in the Senate as a staffer, I can tell you how much work goes into being an accomplished and a productive staffer.
Look, I have got a lot of staffer friends who are here in the leadership office, the whip office, my team, but I don't know anybody who has worked harder than Tim Reitz as a staffer, whether it was for Jody or in an individual office, whether it was for us, the Freedom Caucus in advance of his duties, but importantly in advance of the cause of freedom.
For those of us who come here--and I have got to be blunt here. I always offend people, but I might as well just stick with what works for me--we have got a tendency in this body to come up here to be part of a club. It is like people come here to be a part of something. It is like, look at me, I am a Member of Congress. There are a fewer number of people--and this includes staff, too--there are a fewer number of people who come up here to do, to do things, to fight for things, to take the
It is not enough to come here and just check the box. It is not enough to just come here and pass a bill because somebody tells you we have to. You come here, and you stand up, and you say: When the American people elected us--and when you have staffers who are sitting there working for us, knowing what they fought for and why they work for us, and they stand up and say: Yeah, but we didn't come here to do that.
Like let's take FISA. We didn't come here to rubberstamp what the intelligence community tells us to do. One of our House Freedom Caucus colleagues, Michael Cloud--I want to give him credit. Michael said he is in Appropriations right now or he would be here to celebrate Tim. As Michael said about 3 weeks ago in a Republican meeting: When does the intelligence community ever come forward and say: Hey, we have all this power to collect data and to do all this stuff, hey, we are going to give it back today. Here, we are going to give you some of that power back.
Has that ever happened in the history of mankind? Has that ever happened here? Of course not.
We came here to say we are going to do something about it. Tim came here to do something about it. Tim joined forces with the House Freedom Caucus to say we are going do something about it.
Two years ago, we did something about it. We worked legislation through the Judiciary Committee. We worked legislation in coordination with the Intelligence Committee and actually got some good reforms and a minimal 2-year reauthorization so we could come back and do it again.
Here we are and it is going to expire in another 10 days because we extended it 2 weeks last week. We actually have an obligation now to do the right thing, and I know Tim. He would say, look, I am going to stick around another 10 days if we can get it right because we ought to protect the American people.
The people who come here to effectuate change, those are the people that you, the American people who are watching this on C-SPAN, all 12 of you, should be thanking your lucky stars that you have someone like Tim Reitz here fighting for you as a staffer and being willing to work as the executive director of the Freedom Caucus, which I think is one of the most respected organizations among the American people and one of the most reviled organizations among the swamp creatures because they don't like having their BS called. Tim Reitz has been a faithful member of that.
Mr. Speaker, now that I have a quorum of my colleagues here, I will stop filibustering and turn it over to my good friend Scott Perry, who is the chairman of the Freedom Caucus when Tim was an executive director.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to my good friend from Pennsylvania (Mr. Perry).
Mr. Speaker, I thank the good gentleman from Texas for organizing this.
Mr. Speaker, we sure appreciate our good friend Tim Reitz, and my good friend from Texas has laid out things about the Freedom Caucus that we have accomplished and the things that we stand for.
Everybody comes to Washington--I don't care what side of the aisle you are on or what district you are from--you want to make a difference. You want to make your country better. That is what I believe, but Washington has a way of capturing everybody that comes here that maybe has a little bit of a shaky foundation, not really sure about how devoted to that cause they are.
The Freedom Caucus, in my experience, are the individuals that came to save the Republic. That is what they came for and that is all they came for. They want to do the right thing even if it is at their own peril.
As the gentleman from Texas said, we are respected and lauded by many people across the country like at airports or in different cities, even in my own hometown with thanks for the things that we engage on and in for the American people.
We are not doing it for ourselves. We are doing it for the people that we represent. We are trying to make their lives better and save the Republic for them and their children and grandchildren.
With that comes the ire of many of the people that live and work and count on Washington, D.C., to keep on doing the same thing, which is take money from all the people in the rest of the country and spend it on the priorities of the people in Washington, D.C., instead of the priorities of the people in the rest of the country that are paying their taxes.
To be a member of this organization, you have to decide: Do I want to have zero friends in Washington, D.C., right? Oftentimes it is said that you can choose to have your friends in Washington, D.C., or you can choose to have your friends in your district.
Well, a lot of folks don't like that decision and who can blame them. Nobody really likes confrontation, generally speaking. I remember when Tim came to the Freedom Caucus because he wanted to be part of that fight. We had a lot of good candidates as I recall, but Tim stood head and shoulders above all the rest. I found out some years later that Tim is an Eagle Scout and his organizational skills and the way he carries himself, his professionalism is indicative of that kind of person. I probably should have known that kind of coming into the job.
Just like any other organization, we had our challenges. Not everything was perfect, but Tim dug right into those problems, those challenges that we had and made them right. Why that is important is because the organization has to continue, but the Members of Congress that are here, we didn't come to run an organization. We came to save the Republic, to fight for the things that need to be fought for. It is always easy to fight the other side, but it is hard to fight your own side.
Mr. Speaker, I am a proud Republican. I have been since first grade, but we don't always get it right, which is why people like me and some of my other colleagues are here to make sure that we get it right, to make sure that the things we do here are the same things that we told the people at home who elected us they are the same things we told them we were going to do.
Tim joined that effort. Of course, almost immediately upon joining that effort, getting some things right that needed to be dealt with in the organization, we found ourselves embroiled in this battle over the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
It shouldn't be personal. It wasn't personal for us, but we just knew that if we kept doing the same things the same way with the same people, we were going to get the same outcome. We just knew that.
Of course, we also knew that picking on your own team is frowned on by other Members of your team. Even though many of them wanted to see things change, they didn't want to go through the problems and the challenges of meeting that head-on.
Tim was right there in the dark hours of that whole thing. He had faith in us, and our Members had faith in him. He kept the notes. He kept us on track. This is what was said. This is what was going to be done. This is what was agreed upon. This is still hanging out there. Tim, in his own right, became respected in this body among other staff members and other leaders as a person that they could count on for his work who knew the issues, who knew the process, and wasn't going to take a bunch of crap that, quite honestly, gets shoveled around here where they just expect you to take it because that is the way it has always been done.
This organization and our successes are due in great part to Tim Reitz, which is why we are here because we want to honor him on his departure. We wish him well.
This is not easy. This takes a toll on you personally, professionally, and it is a sacrifice every single day. The long nights, the time away from home, the extended heartache and trouble, the ire, unfortunately, sometimes of the people around you.
They will be happy that it got done, but they won't like what they had to go through to get there. Somebody has to do that hard work. Somebody has to be willing to stand up and say, we are not going to keep doing the same old tired things, especially during the challenge for selecting a Speaker round
Since that time through the many, many battles all for the right reasons, all for the right things, there has been one person who has been at the epicenter of that unsung, behind the scenes, making sure that the details were recorded, making sure that we stayed on track, making sure that what was possible could be achieved, and that was our friend and our colleague Tim Reitz.
While we are celebrating him and his future because this place has a way of grinding you down and using you up. We are also very sad for the loss of someone that is so skillful, so professional, so respected, and achieves results. That cannot be found just anywhere.
We made the right selection then. He remains the right selection now. We are honored to have had him working side by side, shoulder to shoulder with us in these endeavors.
We wish him well. We know he is not out of the fight, but he is going to change his battle position a little bit. We are here to say Godspeed Tim Reitz. God bless you.
Mr. Speaker, I do have to say this, too, while Jody Hice is sitting here. We stole him from Jody. He was working for Jody and we stole him for a greater cause. Jody, of course, part of that cause, as well so he was gracious about it.
It is painful when you lose somebody as competent as Tim. The accolades all around and the well wishes all around. It has been my honor and privilege to serve with you, sir.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Pennsylvania, who ably, as I said, served as the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus. He knows all too well the service that Tim provided to not just the House Freedom Caucus, not just the House of Representatives, but to this great country, in service, obviously, alongside our colleague, Jody Hice.
As my friend from Pennsylvania said, we are growing the movement. That is what is happening here, and Tim is going to be part of the movement in a different position, just as our friend Mr. Hice is from another position. God has a place for us at a certain time, and that place has been here with the House Freedom Caucus these last 4 years. Now, it is going to be somewhere else, and we are going to miss him.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Burlison), so that he can share a few of his thoughts.
Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to honor my good friend Tim.
William F. Buckley, Jr., once said that a conservative is someone who ``stands athwart history, yelling `stop,' at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.''
Tim has been the executive director during my entire time here in the Freedom Caucus. His hard work and dedication have left a lasting mark on this body.
Just think about the changes to the rules that occurred just 3\1/2\ short years ago, those rules that every Member of this Congress benefits from today. It was an effort that was monumental, but shepherded and strategized by Tim, to give back power, which is normally inclined to consolidate to one or a small group. For once in recent history, we have seen an effort to actually disseminate power from leadership back to the individual Members. We couldn't have done it without the work and strategy that Tim provided during those difficult times.
Tim is the kind of guy who you don't always see, but his impact is felt with every victory that we have had. Behind the scenes, he has been instrumental in advancing our mission to fight for freedom and to serve the American people.
Mr. Speaker, there are few people who come to Congress, who enter this crazy circus, and give up and sacrifice so many other opportunities because they are driven to actually save this country. Tim is one of those. The members of the Freedom Caucus are those.
It is a group, a band of brothers and sisters, that I am extremely proud to be a part of. They are people who pray. When everyone else in this town is going out to fancy dinners on fly-in nights, having steak or lobster or whatever, this is a group of men and women who sit and eat Chick-fil-A in a boardroom with a whiteboard and strategize about how we can continue to make this country better and how we can stop the steady decay of this great Nation.
Whether it is having negotiations at 3 o'clock in the morning or strategy sessions on weekends ahead of critical votes, Tim has always been there, putting in the hours, fighting in the arena with us to save this Nation, but not taking the spotlight.
Tim, your tireless work and your unwavering dedication have made you an invaluable part of this team and a game changer in the Halls of Congress. You will be deeply missed on this team, no doubt. Yet, you will continue to fight for conservative principles, I am certain.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Missouri, and his quote of William F. Buckley about standing athwart history yelling ``stop'' is one of the, I think, seminal moments of the modern conservative movement that Buckley launched and that Ronald Reagan then carried forward. People don't realize that that was literally the first edition, the first version, of the National Review.
It was a seminal moment of the conservative movement, and I think it encapsulates very well what we try to do in the House Freedom Caucus in standing athwart the institutional largesse of this town, this body, Congress, and the swamp in general, and yell ``stop'' and say ``enough.''
We came here to do something different. We came up here not to rack up debt. We came here to change things, to stand up for the people, to stand up for freedom, and to stand up for limited government.
Tim has been at the center of that, and so has my good friend Josh Brecheen from the great State of Oklahoma. I know we have to move through, and we have several other colleagues. He has what he is going to say, a little extemporaneous point. My good friend worked for Senator Tom Coburn, another great advocate and someone who served in this Chamber, served in the United States Senate, and understood that point of yelling ``stop'' and standing athwart history.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen).
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Roy for yielding.
Tim Reitz has led our little merry band behind the scenes for 4 years, the Freedom Caucus. Most people do not realize that when you have the type of intellect that Tim has, the type of principle that Tim has, that is a rare commodity because in Washington, D.C., just typical of anyplace in our culture, you are going to utilize that brain trust that you have been handed to make the most money when you have workable years. Tim could have gone a number of different places, but he chose to be an oak.
For those who would wonder why I would say that, it is because an oak tree, if you ever look at an oak tree, you have to realize that, once upon a time, it was just a crazy little nut that decided to stand its ground.
Thanks for standing your ground. Thanks for being someone who actually knows what the enumerated powers of the Constitution are and someone who didn't take what you could have, the treats of the moment that all of us are offered. Instead of holding out the dream of tomorrow, which is for our country, you can take the treats of the moment, you can get a better job, you could go work on K Street, but you knew in your conscience that your conscience was calling out to put your Nation and your principles first and to go back to look at the wisdom of our Founders and try to move the needle, to give this grand experiment of liberty another breath to gulp in, in the hope that this thing would endure long past us.
I am so grateful to Eric Burlison, who recited all the rule changes. Eric and I weren't even sworn in to Congress and were fighting.
Eli Crane, I see him sitting over here. We weren't even sworn in to Congress, and you were signing us up for a fight. We weren't even true Members of Congress when that standoff was happening and you tried to get rule
To all of our friends--to Chip's point, maybe it is just 12 on C-SPAN who are actually watching, but for any of our colleagues who are watching, going, ``Oh, the Freedom Caucus,'' you have to love us. We are kind of like the weight room, right? You have to realize that through the weight that you hate, resistance builds strength.
This little group, when you know that you benefit because of the strength of this group, you have to know it is great staffers like Tim Reitz who helped to create the backbone.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I am so honored just to stand in this august body in support of my friend and brother, Tim Reitz. It is bittersweet because we are going to miss him. We are going to miss him within the heart of the Freedom Caucus. His counsel, his wisdom, his humor, his guidance, and his skill set are rarely matched, I think, in the history of this body.
Tim became senior counsel and staffer at the Freedom Caucus at a time years ago when the Freedom Caucus was struggling to become the relevant and powerful faction within this body that we knew it could be.
Yet, history required a man named Tim Reitz to be the deep rudder of our intentions at the Freedom Caucus, which was to steer this body that we love, for this Nation that we would shed our last life's blood for, to steer it deeper into the conservative spectrum and principles that made our country great, that drive us each day. We rise from bended knee and ask our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, to help us to be worthy of service to we the people.
Yet, we struggle to understand the details of how to make that happen. Tim Reitz has informed our caucus in such a manner that I don't believe it would be possible, Mr. Speaker, for us to stand before you as members of the Freedom Caucus and unwaveringly know that we are one of the most powerful factions within this body standing upon conservative principles. Tim helped make that happen.
I am just going to say that sometimes we have contentious and complex meetings. Mr. Speaker, Tim was the guy, especially for a regular man like me, that I could call after a meeting or send him a text and say: ``Tim, when you get a minute, will you call me and let me know what the hell just happened?'' He would do that at any time of the night or on the weekend. He would say: ``Yes, sir, Mr. Higgins. This is what just happened.''
We are going to miss you, brother, but you are going to a great spot, right around the corner. We are certainly well aligned, and God bless you in your endeavors. We have been honored to serve with you, sir.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Louisiana, a gentleman who knows law enforcement and the United States military.
I would note that, in the House Freedom Caucus, as a Representative of the House, we have a diverse group of individuals, numerous men who have worn the uniform, including my friend from Pennsylvania, Scott Perry, who spoke earlier, and, notably, the gentleman I am about to yield to who served faithfully in service to this country and put his life on the line in defense of freedom. He knows why we are here.
I echo what my friend from Louisiana was just talking about and why I tell people that as proud as I am to be in the United States House of Representatives representing the district in Texas, the 21st Congressional District that I represent and 750,000 Texans, I am proud to be serving in this body. It is an honor. It is the honor of a lifetime. I am even prouder to associate with the men and women of the House Freedom Caucus who lay it on the line every day, in the political sense, in trying to fight for the things we said we would do and to mean it, and to take the arrows and to wear the scars of trying to actually move this body, to move this country so that we can save it for our kids and grandkids.
I say that on purpose here because Tim has been at the center of that. I know that this man, my dear friend from Arizona, a great patriot, Eli Crane, shares the sentiment of what I just tried to share rather ineloquently.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Crane).
I usually don't like speaking on the floor very much. It is not one of my favorite things to do, but I will tell you right now, this was something I wasn't going to miss.
Tim Reitz has been a friend to me in many ways. He has been a mentor and counselor to me. As a matter of fact, I called him this morning because I missed a meeting last night, and Tim gave me a recap and helped explain to me what went on last night.
If you really want to know how valuable and important Tim Reitz is to the House Freedom Caucus, the conservative movement, for saving and protecting this country, all you have to do is look around. It is about 5:30 p.m. right now. We are done for the day, most of us. We don't have to be here, but I counted eight Members of Congress who came to speak on behalf of Tim Reitz. You don't see that very often. You are probably never going to see eight Members of Congress coming to speak when a valuable staffer like Tim Reitz is moving on.
Tim, I hope that is not lost on you, brother. There are a lot of places we could be right now, but all of us are down here because of what you mean to this group and what you mean to the country.
I am a little bummed that you are moving on. I know you are not going to be far. I think the role that you are taking is going to be instrumental for the country. I am just grateful that men like Tim, with all of his wisdom, his knowledge, his intelligence--like my friend from Oklahoma said, he could be off making money somewhere. He could be doing some amazing things. Instead, he has been in the trenches with us, fighting for this country, fighting for our families, fighting for our communities, and fighting to preserve what has made this country so great in the first place.
Thank you, brother. We are going to miss you. We are proud of you, and it is an honor to speak on your behalf.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend from Arizona (Mr. Crane). I thank him for his service to this Nation in the military. I thank him for his service here in Congress, as I do all of my colleagues here.
As I get ready to recognize my friend from North Carolina, I would like to note that, as my friend from Oklahoma (Mr. Brecheen) said earlier, the House Freedom Caucus opens all of our meetings and tries to close all of our meetings in prayer. People don't realize that when we had the big debate over the Speaker 3 years ago, and it was heavily a good number of the Freedom Caucus who were a part of that debate, we met or spoke on the phone I would say literally every day, or all but a couple, from election day in November all the way through early January and through the resolution of that debate.
Every single one of those meetings and every single one of those calls we opened in prayer and closed in prayer, with the humility of knowing that we don't always know the right thing to do. We try to follow God. We try to follow the Constitution. We try to follow our hearts and to honor the constituents who sent us here in making tough decisions. Nobody has all the right answers. Through our prayer and deliberation at our weekly engagement, our brotherhood and sisterhood and camaraderie and faith in each other, and the support of people like Tim Reitz, we try to come to a conclusion to try to shape this body and to shape this country.
That is what we are called to do. We are not called to come here to punch the clock. We are not called to come here to just do the same old thing because the same old thing has resulted in $39 trillion in debt. The same old thing has resulted in expansive government at the expense of liberty.
Tim knows that. That is why he has sacrificed. That is why he has been here, working in the trenches, as has my good friend from North Carolina, Mark Harris. I know he feels the same way about Tim. I know he feels the same way about prayer. I know he feels the same way about this brotherhood and sisterhood that is the House Freedom Caucus.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Harris).
Mr. Speaker, today, we pause to recognize a man whose work has made an incredible difference in the fight to preserve the values that made this Nation great, Tim Reitz.
Tim has served the House Freedom Caucus with conviction, discipline, and a clear sense of purpose. In a town where it is awfully easy to lose sight of first principles, he has remained grounded in them. He understood that our responsibility is not to expand government, but to restrain it, not to chase headlines, but to deliver results for the American people.
Behind the scenes, where much of the real work gets done in this city, Tim brought steady leadership and sound judgment. He helped advance policies that defend our Constitution, protect taxpayer dollars, and uphold the freedoms entrusted to us by our Founders.
More than that, Tim has served with integrity. Tim has built trust. Tim has earned respect. He reminded all of us that public service is, at its core, about serving something greater than ourselves.
I say to you this evening, Tim, that we are grateful for your dedication to the House Freedom Caucus and to the cause of liberty. Your work has left a mark, and the principles you championed will continue to guide us forward. May God bless you in the next chapter, and may God continue to bless these United States of America.
I thank my friend from North Carolina (Mr. Harris) for his remarks, and I thank my colleagues who have come down to the floor to speak.
We have got a little time remaining in this Special Order, and I am going to do what I want to do, which is filibuster a little bit in case any of our colleagues are trying to get here from other parts of the campus.
I will note that we had other colleagues that wanted to come, one of those, my friend Keith Self from Texas who replied back to the thread that he was down reading the Bible at the Museum of the Bible. And I said: Well, where are your priorities, Mr. Self? And I joke only because we can say that as a group because of how much this group reveres the Word of God and tries to honor the Word of God. My friend from Georgia, Tim Reitz, does so as well.
I would note that there are other Members who are stuck working hard in the Appropriations Committee. I think our chairman, Andy Harris, is in the Appropriations Committee as we speak. Michael Cloud wanted to come down here, and he is stuck in the Appropriations Committee. I would say that it is arguably in part because of Mr. Reitz' great work that we have got those guys on the Appropriations Committee in the first place so that they were able to be otherwise occupied. It is not a committee that was often known for Freedom Caucus members participating.
I will say a couple things here before we break loose just to see if a few other people can get to the floor. I will focus on policy for a minute and then bring it back to Tim, which is this: None of us came here, nobody in this body came here campaigning on spending more money that we don't have, nobody; but yet we do. I am proud that the Freedom Caucus has stood up to say enough, and as a result, for 3 straight years, discretionary spending has been flat. That is a big deal. That is a big deal.
Nobody came to Congress saying they wanted to expand the power of the Federal Government to engage in warrantless surveillance of the American people and spy on them. That was happening. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago we made massive reforms as a direct result of the work of the people in the House Freedom Caucus and Tim Reitz. Now the people are safer and more secure. By the way, we should build upon that.
Nobody ever runs on saying that we should have open borders allowing anybody in the world to come into the United States.
Nobody runs on saying we should allow criminals to stay in the United States, and yet, often we adopt the very policies that allow those things and encourage those things to occur, but not the House Freedom Caucus and not Tim Reitz.
We stood up and we said: Enough. We need to change things. We need to fight for policies that will secure the border, and we laid the groundwork for many of the things the President is doing. We sent a loud message to the American people that we believed in that when we passed H.R. 2 because we worked hard as a body to develop past that, and that is no small thing.
One of my other staffer friends was reduced to tears on this very floor sitting right here because she has spent 20 years of her life fighting to try to secure the border of the United States knowing how bad it was, and finally, finally, we had advanced legislation that would accomplish the task.
We couldn't have done that or held spending flat or fought to stop spying on the American people without the work of Tim Reitz. We couldn't have fought for any of the reforms that we got in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. We couldn't have stood on the wall, four of us in this body, my friend Mr. Kean, my friend Mr. Clyde, myself, and my friend Mr. Norman from South Carolina. We couldn't have stood up and repealed green new scam subsidies destroying our grid and undermining the security of the American people but for the work of Tim Reitz working through the weekend alongside us making sure that we got that done.
Now I have million-dollar ads being run against me by some Marxist in California. Thanks, Tim.
Look, fighting is hard for the reasons that my colleagues have talked about. Tim has done it, and he has done it knowing that the scorn of the town, the scorn of the swamp would be directed towards him. He has done it as a staffer, not as somebody who stands up--and I don't know if you call this the limelight or not, I don't know what this is, but not like those of us who are Members who run and carry the election certificates. He has done it, as my friend from Louisiana said, behind the scenes as counselor, as a staffer--and by the way, Tim is emblematic of a number of staff that I am not going to name here because I will leave people out. But there are people on this very floor and in this body right now that we rely upon who are great patriots and serve their country every single day.
We often give a shout-out to staff, but there are some who rise to the top, and Tim is one of those. He is one of those who gets it, who understands it, understands what is at stake, he who stood up when it mattered and figured out how to take a win. You can't be afraid to win. You can't be afraid to figure out a way to fight and then deliver.
The country depends on people who are willing to do that. I know that, as my friend from Arizona said, he is a little bummed. I share that sentiment. I know my friend from Georgia, Mr. Hice, who is still a very active part of the movement, as I said earlier, I know he was bummed when he lost Tim to the Freedom Caucus. We are going to be bummed to lose Tim down the road, but he is joining friends of ours in continuation of the fight.
For those of us who want to fight for the country, the fight never ends. We are called by Paul and Timothy to finish the race. I am proud to say that we are in this race, and we are going to finish this race.
I often will say on the campaign trail that when I went through cancer 15 years ago and had Hodgkin lymphoma and had a less than a 50 percent shot, they told me--although my doctor was great. He said: Your shot is either 0 or 100 percent. You should choose 100 percent. I think that is great advice. Choose 100 percent. When I got through to the other side of that, my daughter at that time was 3 months old. My son was 2 months old. And God gave me another shot at this. He gave me a little bonus time on this Earth. I decided to not care, and as I will say on the campaign trail: ``Leave it all on the field.'' Leave every single thing out on the
Speaking of that, as I was getting ready to wind down to a rousing conclusion, I am proud to hand over the microphone to another veteran, another man that has put it all on the line both in service to his country in the military and now in Congress, a dear friend who was the gentleman that I earlier said was reading the Bible down at the Museum of the Bible. I think he sprinted here from the Museum of the Bible.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self) to celebrate our good friend Tim Reitz.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make an analogy. When I was first assigned to a Special Forces team as a young lieutenant, I had already been in the 82nd Airborne Division for a couple years. When I got to the A-Team the team sergeant was an old, grizzled, experienced NCO.
My team sergeant had been in Vietnam. He had run the patrols. He had been behind the lines. He had seen his soldiers wounded and killed. That was the man that actually did my training. That is the kind of man you need.
To put it in context, if you have seen the movie ``We Were Soldiers,'' the command sergeant major, that is Tim Reitz for me and for the Freedom Caucus. Tim Reitz is the one that knows the rules, but he knows more than the rules. He knows what we need to do to get things done.
So my analogy for Tim Reitz is one of utmost respect because just as the NCO corps is the backbone of the United States Army, Tim Reitz was the backbone of the House Freedom Caucus to me.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self) for his comments, and we are about to wrap up and wind down here. I just want to say a couple more quick things. I am giving a heads up to those that are coming in that we have a couple more minutes.
I would note that we have got to recognize those who have served before my friend Tim Reitz: Justin Ouimette and Steve Chartan. We have had great patriots who are still very active in the conservative movement who were a part of this organization that Tim worked with and learned from. I know he wants to give credit where it is due. I would just tell you that I had a friend of mine who was a former member of the House Freedom Caucus who texted me watching this on the floor who said: Tim is a hero and a patriot that never throws in the towel and deserves to be honored.
I have gotten lots of messages like that from staff, from current Members, and from former Members who recognize what Tim has meant, again, not just to the House Freedom Caucus, but to the House of Representatives and, importantly, to the United States of America in service to a greater cause than just being here. They are in service of the Constitution, of God, of freedom, and all those who have given the last full measure of devotion to defend this great country.
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues for coming down. I thank my good friend, Tim Rice. I want to wish him well in his next endeavors. I thank him for his service to the United States of America. I wish him the best of success, luck, health, and happiness with his beautiful bride.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Private Bennett Waters, a serviceman who tragically died as a prisoner of war during World War II.
Private Waters was a southeast Georgia serviceman whose remains were recently identified by the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency. A member of the Army Air Force 17th Bombardment Squadron, 27th Bombardment Group, Private Waters was stationed in the Philippines.
He was taken prisoner during the Japanese invasion of the Philippines in April of 1942 and remained a POW until his death in 1944.
He is forever memorialized on the Walls of the Missing at the Manila American Cemetery and Memorial. His remains will now be transferred from the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Honolulu to his final resting place among family in Georgia.
We thank Private Waters for his bravery, service, and sacrifice to our Nation 82 years ago.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize 30th anniversary of St. Marys Submarine Museum in St. Marys, Georgia. The museum is the largest of its kind in the South and the fifth largest in the country, with nearly 5,000 square feet of exhibit.
After being converted from an old movie theater, St. Marys opened its doors on March 30, 1996, receiving thousands of visitors since. It is here visitors get the opportunity to see, enjoy, and learn about submarines and their artifacts. Thousands of these artifacts, some older than 100 years, are on display, including patrol reports, uniforms, and battle flags. Mr. Speaker, you can even operate a real submarine periscope to view the beautiful St. Marys River.
Former submariner and current executive director, Keith Forest Post, has been dedicated to preserving submarine history and artifacts at the museum since 2010. The historical importance of this museum cannot be understated.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate St. Marys Submarine Museum on this fantastic accomplishment and wish them 30 more years of success.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Tom Draffin for his work as the president and CEO of the McIntosh County Industrial Development Authority. Tom is retiring after several years dedicated to the growth and development of McIntosh County.
During his tenure, he has led a number of major initiatives promoting the county's hospitality, tourism, and seafood industries. He is also a founding member of the Tri-95 Georgia Joint Development Authority, where he also serves on the board of directors.
Tom's work on the Tri-95 and McIntosh County Development Authorities is critical to the development of southeast Georgia.
I thank him for all the work he has done over the years to grow our region. He has been a close friend to me over the years, and his retirement will be a significant loss for the community.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Cecily A. Hill of St. Marys, Georgia, who passed away on March 30, 2026, at the age of 83.
Cecily was born in Woodbine, Georgia, in 1942, where she learned to embody true southern grace and strength. With a heart rooted in deep faith in Jesus Christ, she made every person feel seen, valued, and genuinely loved.
A true trailblazer, Cecily became the first female and first Republican State representative from Camden County. Serving District 108 in the Georgia House from 2003 to 2011, she chaired the subcommittees on ports and on tourism and film. She also served with distinction on appropriations, transportation, and economic development committees, earning respect across party lines.
A respected businesswoman, she co-owned Prudential Magnolia Realty for over 30 years and earlier operated Hill's Drug Store and Gift Shop with her late husband, Meredith Langley Hill, Jr.
A devoted mother, she cherished her grandchildren and great- grandchildren, who carry forward her spirit of hospitality and love. Her legacy of faith, service, and kindness endures along the Georgia coast she called home.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a true young hero from Richmond Hill, Georgia, 12-year-old Macy Johnson.
After school, Macy stepped off the bus to see flames tearing through her family's garage. Thick smoke filled the two-story home where her two older brothers were inside, completely unaware.
Instead of running for safety, Macy raced to the front door and screamed: Get out.
Her urgent warning gave them just enough time to escape unharmed. Thanks to Macy's quick thinking and courage, her entire family survived.
Five crews from Richmond Hill and Bryan County knocked down flames, but the home suffered severe damage. The Johnsons lost nearly 80 percent of their belongings and are now relying on the American Red Cross as they begin to rebuild.
Lisa Johnson, Macy's proud mother, calls her daughter incredible. In the face of danger, this 12 year old showed bravery far beyond her years and put her family first.
Macy Johnson reminds us that heroes come in all ages and selfless actions save lives.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate a shining honor for coastal Georgia.
Brunswick has been named one of the 13 Prettiest Towns in the United States by World Atlas, earning the number seven spot among more than 19,000 communities nationwide.
Nestled along our scenic coast near the Golden Isles, Brunswick charms visitors with its waterfront, moss-draped live oaks, and timeless southern charm.
Once known as the Shrimp Capital of the World, its historic fishing industry still defines its vibrant identity. At the heart of its beauty stands the majestic Lover's Oak, a 900-year-old southern live oak stretching over 13 feet in diameter, wrapped in local folklore.
In the Brunswick Old Town Historic District there is a plethora of historical sites, like the century-old city hall and the skillfully restored 124-year-old Ritz Theatre, still welcoming audiences today.
With breathtaking waterfront views, rich history, and easy access to pristine beaches, Brunswick blends natural beauty and cultural heritage. This national recognition reminds us why Georgia's coast remains one of America's treasures.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize St. Joseph's/Candler Health System, recipient of the President's Ambassador Award at Georgia Southern University's 2026 Gratitude Gala.
For over two centuries, these pillars of compassionate care have served southeast Georgia and the Lowcountry.
Candler Hospital, the second oldest hospital in America, dates to 1804, while St. Joseph's Hospital was founded in 1875. Together they now reach 33 counties with expert healing.
They hold true to their mission statement: Rooted in God's love, we treat illness and promote wellness for all people.
Guided by values of compassion, integrity, and teamwork, St. Joseph's/Candler treats the mind, body, and spirit while empowering communities to thrive. Their strong partnership with Georgia Southern University is shaping the future.
Through clinical training and the state-of-the-art 8,000 square foot St. Joseph's/Candler Nursing Suite, they prepare the next generation of skilled and compassionate healthcare professionals.
St. Joseph's/Candler embodies excellence and service, and their dedication strengthens our region and honors the best of Georgia.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the Bevill family of Georgia as recipients of the President's Innovator Award at Georgia Southern University.
Leonard ``Lenny'' Bevill; his wife, Sandra; his sons, Josh and Andrew; and his daughters-in-law, Jenna and Taylor, are all proud Georgia Southern alumni. Together, their close-knit family has poured their hearts into Georgia Southern with extraordinary generosity. They have given their time, talent, and resources to lift Eagle Athletics and support student athletes in powerful ways.
Through the Eagle Victory Plan, and especially the Eagle Nation Fund, they have backed capital projects, sport accounts, and initiatives to create new opportunities for our young athletes.
What sets the Bevills apart is their ongoing commitment. They continue strengthening programs like the Erk Russell Fund while helping elevate the entire Georgia Southern community.
Leonard Bevill embodies true innovation and leadership, and the Bevill family's legacy reflects deep dedication and a vision of gratitude.
Georgia is profoundly grateful for their nonstop support.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Greg Parker, recipient of the President's Visionary Award at Georgia Southern University.
From humble beginnings in 1976 as a one-man operation, Greg Parker built Parker's Kitchen into a powerhouse, serving over 1 million customers weekly across 110 locations.
Through relentless innovation and determination, he redefined the convenience store industry and created immense success.
Yet, Greg measures his legacy not only by business growth but by his generosity. He has donated more than $30 million to advance education, healthcare, childhood hunger relief, and veterans' causes across our region.
In 2019, Parker made the largest gift in Georgia Southern history, transforming the College of Business into the Parker College of Business in support of the next generation of business leaders in Georgia.
That single investment created new scholarships, strengthened faculty, and expanded life-changing opportunities for students.
His visionary leadership and belief in Georgia Southern's future embody the highest spirit of partnership and service. Georgia Southern is deeply grateful for Greg Parker's continued impact.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Hannah Harrison for being selected as a 2026 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Ernest F. Hollings Undergraduate Scholar.
This highly competitive program selects around 120 undergraduate students each year to receive tuition and paid summer internships across the country.
Since its creation, the scholarship has supported more than 2,300 students from over 450 colleges and universities. The goal of the program is to increase undergraduate training in oceanic and atmospheric science by offering hands-on experience in research, policy, and education.
Hannah is currently a sophomore, studying environmental science with concentrations in marine science and sustainability policy and management at the College of Coastal Georgia.
She has conducted extensive research on topics such as lead contamination in drinking water and the role of artificial reefs in tunicate recruitment.
She is currently an intern at Satilla Riverkeeper, where she continues to demonstrate dedication and drive. We are proud of Hannah for this outstanding accomplishment.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the wonderful life of Laura Wilund Adams.
Born October 9, 1963, she moved frequently to accommodate her father's career. She developed a fierce tennis talent and played for the University of South Carolina, later winning the South Carolina State championship.
Although she earned a law degree from Emory University, Mrs. Adams' dream was to be an artist, focusing first on photography and, later, collages. Her three decades as a working artist made her nationally renowned, representing galleries across the country and owning the Brickworks Gallery in Atlanta.
Additionally, Mrs. Adams was a naturalist. She never felt more alive than in the woods and trails surrounding her cabin home in North Carolina.
Her 14 years with her husband, Andrew, were said to be the best years of their lives, filled with art and mutual inspiration.
Laura faced leukemia with grace and optimism until her peaceful passing on March 27, 2026, at the age of 62. Laura's beautiful collages and love of nature leave a lasting light on all who knew her and admired her work.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate Pat Hackney, a true gem of Savannah.
A beloved community leader, Pat has devoted her life to shaping our city's civic, cultural, and philanthropic landscapes.
Through her tireless work with the Coastal Georgia Botanical Gardens, she has built outstanding educational programs, grown membership, and created signature events that bring families, students, and neighbors together to learn and inspire.
Whether chairing membership for the Friends of the Coastal Gardens, serving on the board of the Coastal Georgia Camellia Society, or quietly mobilizing countless charitable efforts across our community, Pat embodies the quiet strength and generous spirit that make Savannah shine brighter.
Her dedication and her commitment prove that real leadership isn't loud. It is consistent, kind, and always in service of a greater good.
Today, as Senior Citizens, Inc., honors her with the Legends, Leaders, and Life Well Lived Award, we thank Pat Hackney for a lifetime of lifting up others. Savannah is better because she walks among us.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Shirley Barber James, a mighty figure in Savannah's story.
Shirley is a respected civic leader whose lifelong commitment to education, media, and public service has profoundly shaped our city's civic and cultural life.
A proud graduate of Spelman College and holder of a master's degree from Harvard University's Graduate School of Education, Shirley dedicated more than 30 years to Savannah State University in senior leadership roles before stepping forward as publisher and retired editor of The Savannah Tribune.
Through her steady hand in journalism, Shirley has built bridges, amplified voices, and lifted countless lives with strength and purpose.
Her legacy is one of service, advocacy, and excellence, a shining example of what dedicated leadership can accomplish when rooted in community and conviction.
Today, as Senior Citizens, Inc., presents her with the Legends, Leaders, and Life Well Lived Award, Savannah pauses to say thank you to Shirley Barber James for a lifetime of shaping our city for the better.
We are stronger, wiser, and more connected because of her.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor distinguished educator and scholar Dr. Paul Pressly, who has shaped Savannah for decades.
Dr. Pressly served as headmaster of Savannah Country Day School from 1983 to 2004, guiding generations of students with integrity and mentorship.
A Rhodes Scholar with degrees from Princeton, Harvard, and Oxford, he elevated the school to national recognition as a Blue Ribbon School of Excellence.
Beyond the classroom, his impact continues through national leadership and independent education and his service as director emeritus of the Ossabaw Island Education Alliance, where he has preserved coastal history and inspired curiosity.
Dr. Pressly's intellectual depth and commitment to community have enriched Savannah's cultural and educational landscape in ways that will echo for generations.
As Senior Citizens, Inc., presents him with the Legends, Leaders, and Life Well Lived Award, we celebrate a life defined by excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service. Savannah is wiser, more thoughtful, and more connected to its rich heritage because of Dr. Paul Pressly.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize a true Georgia trailblazer.
Former Governor Sonny Perdue, the first Republican elected Governor of our State since Reconstruction, announced that he is retiring as chancellor of the University System of Georgia.
Born on a Houston County farm, Perdue built a life dedicated to public service. He served in the State senate, two terms as Governor, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture under President Trump, and, since April of 2022, as the 14th chancellor leading Georgia's 25 public colleges and universities.
More than four decades of public service, from the farm to the Cabinet, Sonny has always put Georgians first.
His leadership helped strengthen our higher education system with a $12.1 billion budget, growing opportunity across every corner of our State.
As the board of regents begins a national search, Perdue will stay until a successor is named.
Sonny Perdue leaves a legacy of integrity, results, and dedication that will benefit Georgia for generations. I wish him and his family well in their well-deserved next chapter.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Steve Mullenix, former chair of the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs.
Steve is retiring after 16 years of dedication and service to the council. He has been instrumental in strengthening relationships between pharmacies and industry associations, which contribute to positive outcomes for patients.
NCPDP is critical in driving technological innovation and collaborating with others to push pharmacy forward. His work as board chair has helped this vision become a reality and save patients money. In particular, his work on SCRIPT and ePrescribe have transformed pharmacy for the better.
I thank Steve for his commitment to improving outcomes for all patients. He will be missed, but his legacy will stand for years to come.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Jim Cantore for celebrating 40 years with The Weather Channel.
For four decades, Jim has been a trusted voice during some of the Nation's most severe weather events. He has shown true commitment to families across the country, working diligently day by day. Jim has served the American people by helping them better understand complex weather conditions.
His reporting, which he has delivered with great passion and energy, has brought clarity to those around him. His expertise in the weather field is nothing short of impressive, and his dedication has helped keep communities informed and prepared.
I have enjoyed watching Jim grow and succeed through his reporting career. His work will not go unnoticed, and we won't forget the lasting impact he has had on our communities.
We thank Jim for his years of service and congratulate him on this remarkable milestone. We wish him the very best as he celebrates this 40th anniversary.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Chad Nimmer for his recent appointment to the USDA Farm Service Agency Georgia State Committee. Mr. Nimmer is a former Georgia State House Representative from District 178 in Blackshear, Georgia, who I had the honor of serving with.
FSA State committees oversee conservation and agricultural programs for their State. Chad's background in timber harvesting, land management, and conservation makes him an exceptional choice for this important role in our State.
He is a recognized leader in the forest industry, owning his own successful timber company. His dedication to rural communities and stewardship of our natural resources makes him an invaluable resource to our State.
I thank Mr. Nimmer for his public service thus far and wish him well in his new position.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Vance Patterson, an exemplary North Carolinian and someone I consider myself very fortunate to call a friend.
Vance describes himself as a ``serial entrepreneur,'' and when you come to
He is someone who embodies the entrepreneurial and innovative spirit that is interwoven within the fabric of our Nation. It is what makes our Nation the greatest on the face of the Earth.
In 1989, he founded the Patterson Fan Company that manufactured industrial fans for national and international markets. Soon thereafter, Vance went on to start two dozen other companies. He is a serial entrepreneur, indeed, Mr. Speaker.
However, that is not all, Mr. Speaker. There is a lot more to Vance's story and work. For over 50 years, he has been married to his lovely wife, Mary Jo, and they are parents to four wonderful children and grandparents to over a dozen grandchildren.
In 2011, Vance and Mary Jo traveled to Washington and visited the National Archives, where they witnessed the Charters of Freedom, the three original documents that are the cornerstone of our Republic.
After seeing the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, Vance says that he experienced a deep emotional experience and had goose bumps.
Many Americans travel to the National Archives every year to see the documents that are so ingrained in our heritage and our society. Unfortunately, in the past, not every American who wished to see our Nation's founding documents in person were able to.
Vance remained so inspired after seeing the Charters of Freedom that he and Mary Jo decided to make this emotional experience one that should be available to students and citizens across the Nation.
Like so many others, Vance felt inspired and a renewed sense of patriotism after seeing the Founding Fathers' names on the Bill of Rights. Unlike many others, Vance channeled that feeling of patriotism into tangible monuments.
Upon returning home to North Carolina, Vance and Mary Jo established Foundation Forward, Inc. Foundation Forward, Inc., has a worthy goal of educating the public on the contents of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
This goal is accomplished by Vance's group, which builds monument displays that showcase the Charters of Freedom. These displays are often located near courthouses, in county squares, and are made accessible to all. In total, there are 73 completed settings across 17 States, with 25 more that are currently in the works. What a wonderful and worthy endeavor, indeed, Mr. Speaker.
To top it all off, Vance is now on the cusp of completing a book about his life so that others can come to learn from his own vast experiences, the successes and the failures.
It is one thing to go through life, become successful, and reap all the positives of what you have sown, but it means far more when you do exactly that and then share your story so that others may gain the perspective and wisdom that led you to where you are today.
I believe that many who will come to read Vance's book will be inspired and moved within their own lives and with their own endeavors, whether it be personal, professional, or both.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Frances Laterman and The Antisemitism Studies Laboratory at Baruch College in New York.
Through generous contributions made by the Laterman Family Foundation and AddressHate, a not-for-profit organization that uses new technological methodologies to disrupt the spread of online hate, this wonderful laboratory was made possible.
Frances Laterman, one of the original founders and current president and trustee of the foundation, is a wonderful human being. Aside from her entrepreneurial and artistic spirit, which are incredibly strong, she holds a solemn commitment to give back to her community through meaningful social impact.
There is no doubt in my mind that the communities she has served and continues to serve have benefited greatly from her passion.
The mission of The Antisemitism Studies Laboratory is to educate, create understanding, support research, and address the pressing challenges of anti-Semitism locally, nationally, and globally.
With the abhorrent rise of anti-Semitism across the United States and the world, this laboratory, as well as its dedicated members and educators, are needed now more than ever.
When I served as chair of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, I exposed to the world how anti-Semitism had infiltrated college campuses across our Nation, and I am still calling attention to it to this very day.
I continue to meet with countless Jewish students who are concerned for their well-being, and the well-being of their friends, who are facing anti-Semitic harassment.
I continue to meet with countless advocates who are calling attention to this issue and are dedicating their time and efforts to educating others about it, as well.
This is certainly an issue of our time, Mr. Speaker.
I thank Mrs. Laterman, her family, the members of the Foundation, and many others for their continued support of the Jewish community, and for helping accelerate an educational endeavor that will go on to make tremendous strides in combating anti-Semitism.
May they all continue to be blessed.
Mr. Speaker, I am very much looking forward to the positive progress that the Antisemitism Studies Laboratory will make in the coming months and years.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 6 o'clock and 21 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, April 22, 2026, at 11 a.m.
