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.
54 public bills, H.R. 8591- 8594, 8596-8645; and 28 resolutions, H.J. Res. 160-171; H. Con. Res. 95; and H. Res. 1237-1251, were introduced.
Pages H3329-32
Reports Filed
Reports were filed today as follows: H.R. 7266, to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to reauthorize the Rural and Municipal Utility Advanced Cybersecurity Grant and Technical Assistance Program, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-629); H.R. 3726, to amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make temporary lodging facilities of the Department of Veterans Affairs available for certain TRICARE beneficiaries on a space-available basis, and for other purposes, with amendments (H. Rept. 119-630); H.R. 8595, making appropriations for national security, Department of State, and related programs for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027, and for other purposes (H. Rept. 119-631).
Pages H3328-29
Guest Chaplain
The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Rabbi Peter Stein, Temple B'rith Kodesh, Rochester, New York.
Page H3297
Advisory Board for the House of Representatives Child Care Center: Appointment
The Chair announced the Speaker's appointment of the following individuals to the Advisory Board for the House of Representatives Child Care Center: John Byers of Alexandria, Virginia; Rachel Collins of Washington, DC; Giulia Leganski of Potomac, Maryland; Derek Harley of Avon Lake, Ohio; Lauren Hodge of Alexandria, Virginia; Thomas McAllister of Washington, DC; Anna McCormack of Alexandria, Virginia; and Kevin O'Keefe of Falls Church, Virginia.
Page H3299
Commission on the National Defense Strategy: Appointment
The Chair announced the Speaker's appointment of the following individual on the part of the House to the Commission on the National Defense Strategy: Robert O'Brien of Heber City, Utah.
Page H3299
Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026
The House passed H.R. 7567, to provide for the reform and continuation of agricultural and other programs of the Department of Agriculture through fiscal year 2031, by a yea-and-nay vote of 224 yeas to 200 nays, Roll No. 154. Consideration began yesterday, April 29th.
Pages H3299-H3311
Rejected the Craig motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Agriculture by a yea-and-nay vote of 211 yeas to 214 nays, Roll No. 153.
Page H3310
Agreed to
Steube amendment (No. 50 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that prohibits the purchase of agricultural land by foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism;
Pages H3300-2
Steube amendment (No. 51 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that establishes testing standards for honey products;
Pages H3302-3
Crawford amendment (No. 8 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that adds hot rotisserie chicken as an eligible item to be purchased by SNAP benefits (by a recorded vote of 384 ayes to 35 noes, Roll No. 145);
Pages H3303, H3304-5
Grothman amendment (No. 20 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that mandates a USDA report to Congress (after the SNAP restrictions pilots are completed) on implementation of the restrictions, outcomes, recommendations to Congress (by a recorded vote of 416 ayes to 8 noes, Roll No. 146);
Pages H3303, H3305
Luna amendment (No. 28 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that strikes section 10205 (relating to uniformity of pesticide labeling), strike section 10206 (relating to authority of States), and strike section 10207 (relating to lawful use of authorized pesticides) (by a recorded vote of 280 ayes to 142 noes, Roll No. 148);
Pages H3303, H3306-7
Scholten amendment (No. 39 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that revises the Agriculture Advanced Research and Development Authority program to provide federal support for sustainable agriculture and innovative sustainability solutions through enhancing the role of innovative voluntary resilience solutions and help farms adapt to challenges like extreme weather, drought, and soil water-holding capacity (by a recorded vote of 233 ayes to 194 noes, Roll No. 150); and
Pages H3303, H3307-8
Spartz amendment (No. 49 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that removes costly, overreaching emissions mandates on farm equipment that drives up expenses for farmers and consumers (by a recorded vote of 215 ayes to 213 noes, Roll No. 152).
Pages H3303, H3309
Rejected
Bentz amendment (No. 2 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that sought to broaden the Renewable Fuel Standard's definition of ``renewable biomass'' to include low-value forest materials and mill residuals, making them eligible for renewable fuel credits, while also permitting biomass sourcing from federal and tribal lands and supporting vegetation removal in wildfire-risk areas (by a recorded vote of 210 ayes to 216 noes, Roll No. 144);
Pages H3303, H3303-4
Grothman amendment (No. 22 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that sought to repeal and prohibits future implementation of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) rule mandating electronic identification (EID) eartags for bison and cattle moving interstate (by a recorded vote of 69 ayes to 355 noes, Roll No. 147);
Pages H3303, H3305-6
Moore (WV) amendment (No. 36 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that sought to preserve greyhound racing operations in West Virginia (by a recorded vote of 187 ayes to 239 noes, Roll No. 149); and
Pages H3303, H3307
Self amendment (No. 47 printed in part B of H. Rept. 119-628) that was debated on April 29th that sought to add ``soda'' to the definition of ineligible items and defines soda as a carbonated beverage containing more than 1 gram of added sugar, artificial sweetener, or flavoring per serving (by a recorded vote of 186 ayes to 238 noes, Roll No. 151).
Pages H3303, H3308-9
Agreed by unanimous consent that the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 7567. H. Res. 1224, the rule providing for consideration was agreed to yesterday, April 29th.
Page H3311
Recess
The House recessed at 11:16 a.m. and reconvened at 12:59 p.m.
Page H3311
Suspensions
The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the following measure: Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026: Recede from the House amendment to the Senate amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 7147, making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026.
Pages H3311-22
Recess
The House recessed at 1:06 p.m. and reconvened at 3:46 p.m.
Page H3322
Suspensions
The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the following measure: Amending the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to extend the authorities of title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978: S. 4465, to amend the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to extend the authorities of title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, by a \2/3\ yea-and-nay vote of 261 yeas to 111 nays, Roll No. 155.
Pages H3322-26
Work Period Designation
Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he designated the period from Thursday, April 30, 2026, through Monday, May 11, 2026, as a ``district work period'' under clause 13 of rule 1.
Page H3328
Senate Message
Message received from the Senate appears on page H3322. Quorum Calls--Votes: Three yea-and-nay votes and nine recorded votes developed during the proceedings of today and appear on pages H3303-4, H3304-5, H3305, 3305-6, H3306-7, H3307, H3308, H3308-9, H3309, H3310, H3310-11 and H3325-26. Adjournment: The House met at 9 a.m. and adjourned at 5:02 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: 98 of 188 spoken turns were found. Turns without a time are still listed; they just can't seek.
Welcoming Rabbi Peter Stein
The SPEAKER. Without objection, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Morelle) is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today with great gratitude for the opportunity to welcome Rabbi Peter Stein as our guest chaplain.
One of the privileges of our role in Congress is to introduce spiritual leaders from across the country who reflect the depth and diversity of faith in America. This tradition is more than ceremonial. It is a living expression of one of the most fundamental freedoms: the freedom to worship, to lead, and to serve according to one's faith.
Rabbi Stein embodies that calling. As the senior rabbi of Temple B'rith Kodesh, he has devoted decades to guiding his congregation with wisdom, compassion, and deep commitment to justice.
He has built bridges across faiths, worked to confront divisions and polarization, and reminded us that even in disagreement there is a responsibility to listen, to learn, and to treat one another with dignity.
Rabbi Stein, we are honored by your presence today, grateful for your leadership, and thankful for the example you set.
May your words continue to guide us in the work ahead.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the Juniata Valley Council American Heritage Camporee, which I had the privilege of attending this weekend.
This year's camporee, hosted by the Howard Pack and Troop 353, welcomed more than 400 Scouts to my hometown of Howard, Pennsylvania, to enjoy a weekend of camping and learning about core Scout values and American heritage.
This year's camporee brought Scouts together to participate in interactive sessions at the Eagle Iron Works and Curtin Village, one of the longest-running ironworks in Pennsylvania.
Scouts spent the weekend learning the history of ironworking and what life would have looked like more than 100 years ago. I spent Saturday instructing participants on the American Heritage Merit Badge.
As an Eagle Scout and former Scoutmaster of Troop 353, it is always an honor to meet and spend time with the Scouts and learn more about the way they are positively impacting our communities.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the Juniata Valley Council, which was established more than 100 years ago, for planning the annual camporee. I extend special thanks to Tom and Patti Long for leading the planning and implementation of this event.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Alfred Frank Bucci,
In World War II, Mr. Bucci served in the 99th Infantry Division during one of the war's most pivotal battles, the Battle of the Bulge.
Following the victory, Mr. Bucci and his division helped liberate three POW camps and one Jewish Holocaust concentration camp.
Mr. Bucci was awarded the Purple Heart for his injuries sustained during his service, and decades later, the French Government honored him with the Legion of Honor medal, France's highest military award.
Mr. Bucci continued his lifetime of service by working to improve the quality of life for all veterans at the VFW Post 7472 in Ellicott City. He also told his story to students around the world in the spirit of keeping history alive.
Today, we honor his sharp wit, his big heart, and his immeasurable devotion to our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, he leaves behind a historic legacy and is survived by his daughter, Joyce; his son-in-law, George; his grandson; many nieces and nephews; and friends who were like family.
Mr. Speaker, western North Carolina is still recovering from Hurricane Helene. Families are rebuilding homes; small businesses are getting back on their feet; and communities are working every day to repair critical infrastructure.
Now, Mr. Speaker, because some Members of Congress have chosen to protect their political interests over serving the folks of America, including those in western North Carolina, the Disaster Recovery Fund is about to run out of money, putting our recovery in serious jeopardy.
This fund supports debris removal, infrastructure repair, and emergency response already underway. Once it is depleted, Federal recovery operations will come to a halt, stopping reimbursements, delaying projects, and leaving local governments to shoulder costs that they cannot afford.
We cannot allow Washington to continue this dysfunction and derail disaster recovery or let the Disaster Relief Fund run dry.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to act immediately, end the political games, reopen the Department of Homeland Security operations, and fully replenish the Disaster Relief Fund so that western North Carolina can continue rebuilding without interruption.
Mr. Speaker, 250 years ago, on May 4, 1776, the people of Rhode Island became the first in America to declare their independence from the British crown.
Two months before the signing of the Declaration of Independence in Philadelphia, the Rhode Island General Assembly met in Providence and passed an act of renunciation to separate our State's political ties with the English King.
Rhode Islanders have always believed in freedom, democracy, and the right to chart our own course. Our State's founding document in 1663 made us the first place in the Western Hemisphere to allow freedom of religion.
In 1772, when the British Empire sent ships to enforce its unfair laws, we took matters into our own hands and burnt the HMS Gaspee in the Narragansett Bay, an act of defiance to inspire the continent to rise up against tyranny.
Rhode Island did not just participate in the American Revolution. We launched it. Happy May 4.
Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to honor the life of Anthony Yaniz, a proud son of Key West and a true pillar of the Florida Keys community.
Tony was a former Key West commissioner and a larger-than-life figure who dedicated himself to serving others and strengthening the community that he loved.
Tony's work supported important local institutions, including the Key West Veterans Memorial and the Center for Animal Welfare and Education. His commitment to his community was not just public. It was personal. He showed up for his neighbors time and time again.
Anthony Yaniz leaves behind a legacy of service, passion, and love for Key West. He will be deeply missed, but his impact will live on for generations.
Mr. Speaker, veterans give so much to our country, and it is up to us to take care of them when they become civilians. That means quality, easy-to-access care at VA hospitals and outpatient facilities and benefits for a disability diagnosis, purchasing a home, or learning skills to rejoin the workforce.
In Congress, I am committed to maintaining these benefits for veterans and preventing any action that would require additional hurdles to receive these earned benefits.
One major bill I am supporting is top of mind for veterans: H.R. 1970, Providing Veterans Essential Medications Act, will direct the VA to reimburse State homes for the cost of certain costly medications provided to veterans who receive nursing home care.
Last year, I visited the Bronx VA medical center to speak with staff and veterans about the high quality of services and research provided there.
It is clear that the VA staff are doing everything that they can to care for and improve services for veterans. We will push back against any cuts by this administration that renege on our commitment to our veterans.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand today to remember the life and legacy of a dear friend and fellow Idahoan, Dirk Kempthorne.
Dirk was a trusted leader and a devoted public servant. Throughout his distinguished career, he served as mayor of Boise, Idaho's Governor, United States Senator, and Secretary of the Interior.
In each role, Dirk worked tirelessly to strengthen our communities, promote responsible stewardship, and expand opportunity for Idaho families.
His leadership helped support job growth, drive commerce, and invest in infrastructure across the Gem State. He was also instrumental in the commissioning of the USS Idaho nuclear submarine, championing support for its crew and their families.
Beyond his many accomplishments, Dirk was a loving husband, father, and grandfather. He was just a good man.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor my dear friend, Eva Woodby, who recently passed away, and I send my deepest condolences to her devoted husband, Alex Yu, and family.
Eva lived the American Dream. She came to the United States as a student with nothing and worked tirelessly to build a very successful business. No matter how much she achieved, she never stopped giving back or lifting others up.
Even when her business struggled during COVID and as she battled late-stage cancer, Eva never gave up. She faced every challenge with strength, dignity, and determination. Her life was not defined by hardship, but by courage and resilience. She showed all of us what it means to keep moving forward, no matter the odds.
I am very grateful for Eva's friendship, and I will strive to live up to the example she set every single day.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 1224 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill, H.R. 7567.
Will the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Patronis) kindly take the chair.
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill (H.R. 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 Mr. Patronis in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today, a request for a recorded vote on amendment No. 47 printed in part B of House Report 119-628 offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self) had been postponed.
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 49 printed in part B of House Report 119-628.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is very simple: Does Congress really care about American farmers and consumers, or about Big Ag screwing them on the farms and in the grocery stores?
Does Congress really care about affordability, or is it just lip service during an election year?
All this bill does is exempt large tractors and combines from unreasonable Clean Air Act emission standards, standards we already waived for military equipment in the name of national security. Is not food security just as much as national security?
Really, Mr. Chair, how much damage to the environment is a combine going to do in 2 weeks in the field?
These emission standards, however, are doing real damage to family farms and grocery prices. They make equipment extremely costly, prone to breakdowns, and less reliable, causing delays, fires, and higher prices for consumers.
Ask any farmer about DEF, diesel exhaust fluid, and you will hear it: Farm equipment and input costs have increased 30 to 100 percent in just 5 years. Farmers are struggling to survive, and consumers are struggling to afford groceries.
These regulations only benefit large manufacturers like John Deere, controlled by billionaires like Bill Gates and BlackRock CEO, Larry Fink. You will hear a lot of BS arguments about the environment, but this has nothing to do with it. It is all about benefiting Wall Street and billionaire donors while screwing farmers and consumers.
Is it not interesting that John Deere runs two production lines, one to screw American farmers under heavy regulations and one for Brazilian farmers with no emission standards? How is an American farmer supposed to compete with that? No one seems to care about those same exempt tractors being used in Brazil or the rainforest, the lungs of the planet, being destroyed.
Democrats destroyed American mining and manufacturing, and now we appease China. Now they want to do the same to American farming, leaving us begging Brazil to feed us; Brazil, which has teamed up with Russia and China to take us down.
I know that Big Ag lobbyists are working hard through congressional staff, which many of my colleagues unfortunately are controlled by, to defeat this amendment.
These staffers have never held a real job. They are not going to be sweating fixing combines, getting covered with diesel fuel, grease, and chemicals, losing family farms, or struggling to put food on the table. They will be eating steak dinners at fancy restaurants in D.C. and trying to figure out how they can sell out our country to big money so they can get a million-dollar paycheck at the age of 30.
If my colleagues truly care about affordability, not Wall Street donors, I urge them to support this commonsense amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, just wow. Just wow. That entire speech is just wow. At the end of the day, we are sitting here talking about the farm bill, and this amendment does nothing to materially address the very real issues farmers are facing as they look at planting season today.
All I could really hear is the word ``Brazil.'' We have forced our largest export markets, like China, to Brazil and Argentina because of bad policies from this administration.
I am pretty sure that my farmers back home in Minnesota are far more concerned about how they are going to afford fertilizer to make it to next year without a substantial loss than they are about emissions standards on their tractors.
The cost of diesel has gone up 50 percent since the start of the war in Iran.
The tariffs have sent our trading partners to other markets, perhaps never to come back.
Let's talk about the domestic markets that we could be expanding into in this country, like year-round E15. However, are we taking a vote on year-round E15 today? No, because my Republican colleagues cannot even get themselves pulled together.
Mr. Chairman, if we are going to talk about helping farmers' bottom line, this bill and this amendment do nothing to help them. We are going to be right back where we are 1 year from now asking what is going to save family farms if we pass this version of a farm bill. This amendment does absolutely nothing to help anyone.
When we think about this farm bill, we think about the $187 billion in cuts to the SNAP program. That is $25 billion, Mr. Chair, directly to farmers' bottom line.
Do you know what else is $25 billion so far, according to the Secretary of Defense? The war in Iran has cost $25 billion. We are here talking about a skinny farm bill that adds no cost to anything when we just spent in the last 60 days $25 billion on a war in Iran that no one wants.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment is terrible, not to mention the critical role of the Clean Air Act in making sure that the health and safety of Americans across this country is secure.
Do you know why Brazil is getting all our business? It is because they are cutting down the rainforest, and they are planting our commodities, our business.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, it is very interesting. If my colleague from the other side would actually spend some time in Minnesota with farmers, I think she would have a different perspective.
Actually, as a generational farmer, my family came from Minnesota, and now I am in Indiana. If she would have spent a little bit of time actually talking to real farmers instead of trying to raise the price of commodities that a lot of working families will be paying for, she would start worrying about input costs and what it is doing to our prices and how family farms are going bankrupt, and if we continue on this path, we will have no farmers.
It is very ironic that we allow Brazil, on top of everything else, to actually buy combines and tractors with none of these standards. It is really sad for me to see what this institution has become. I came from a very terrible country with Communist corruption, and to see how reckless, how heartless we became and how we don't really care about real people on the ground and hardworking farmers, hardworking Americans that are trying to make ends meet and trying to just increase prices from everyone and getting out of the business because they know if they create oligopolies in farming and farmers are going to lose their farms, they are going to control them, they are going to drag them to this committee, and they are going to be puppets to the government. If that is what they want, that is the country I grew up in.
I hope we have some people in this institution who still care about real people on the ground, not big donors, not BS presentations, and all of these Wall Street funds like BlackRock that make a ton of money on that. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, my beautiful congressional district in Minnesota is 40 percent covered in corn and soybeans every single summer, and right now those farmers have nowhere to sell their crops.
Why is that? It is because we have systematically, under this administration's policies, created a situation where there are no export markets.
Mr. Chair, I don't know where we are talking to family farmers, but the ones that I talk to, their input costs are so high, and that is being driven by bad policy. Their input costs are high because fertilizer costs are out of control, and apparently the administration doesn't even know how much farmers have already secured their fertilizer.
It is just nonsense what the Secretary of Agriculture said about, no, they have already bought their fertilizer, so this doesn't matter whatsoever.
What about diesel costs? We know that farmers are facing a loss. Instead of standing here today and talking about more farm relief because of the bad policies of this administration, the Farm Bureau says that our farmers have lost $54 billion in the last year, and the administration offers $12 billion in relief, a small fraction of what is needed.
We had an amendment--it wasn't made in order--$17 billion in additional relief to our family farmers, but this administration doesn't want to do that. They want to keep promising the world and telling the farmers that they love them, and then doing absolutely nothing to help our family farmers. E15 is a good example. We could expand our domestic markets in this country today, but, no, we said-- Lucy with the football again on E15--we are going to take it away, and, oh, we will come back in 2 more weeks. Reporting is that they are going to change the bill at this point.
If you want to change the bill, change it back to my bill that would allow for year-round E15 that actually would save money. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, this is one of the bad policies the gentlewoman is talking about, the driving input costs, unreasonable burdensome regulations on tractors and combines by EPA.
Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).
Mr. Chair, I will just finish up by saying for the ranking member, if she is done with her political talking points of running for Senate, and hopefully she is here--I invite her--on May 13, she is welcome to be here to vote on an E15 bill on May 13.
I thank the gentlewoman. I support this bill. This drives up the cost of these pieces of equipment.
Mr. Chair, the agricultural land of the United States should be owned by Americans, not by foreign adversaries, hostile regimes, or those who actively seek to undermine the economic, food, and national security of the American people.
Right now, Federal law does not have a forceful provision that strictly denies entities and persons affiliated with foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism from buying up American farmland. The same governments that hack our critical infrastructure, poison our communities with fentanyl, and dare to surpass the United States on the world stage are slowly acquiring American farmland acre by acre, county by county, and State by State.
My amendment is simple. It would prohibit the purchase of agricultural land by foreign adversaries and state sponsors of terrorism. The fact that our enemies and their accomplices are not already firmly restricted from purchasing agricultural land in our Nation should alarm every Member of this body.
Enemy ownership of our agricultural land presents a clear, dire, and direct threat to our national security. Much of our farmland surrounds our Nation's most sensitive critical infrastructure assets and military installations, and such proximity can afford our enemies the ability to surveil our troops and disrupt critical supply chains that support military readiness and our energy grid and that keep our economy flourishing.
We should never allow our enemies to gain a foothold in the shadows of the installations that protect and defend our economic and national security.
Our agricultural land is perhaps one of our Nation's greatest strategic assets. It is the land that sustains American families, insulates our military installations, and serves as the backbone of the American economy. Why should we ever give our enemies a single inch of the very land that sustains our country?
My amendment draws a hard line, which should have existed all along: Our enemies don't get to own America's agricultural land.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the American people's sovereign right to our farmland by voting for my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chair, this amendment seems innocent enough. Surely, we do not want our foreign adversaries to acquire agricultural land here in the United States, but ultimately, this is a solution in search of a problem.
As of December 2023, the USDA reported that foreignly held agricultural land is approximately 3.5 percent of all privately held agricultural land in the United States. Essentially, five countries, Canada, the Netherlands, Italy, U.K., and Germany, account for 62 percent of this 3.5 percent, with land owned by China coming in at approximately 0.9 percent of the total foreign-owned land, this 3.5 percent, in the United States.
The definition is also very general and leaves the President with a lot of discretion to decide which countries or people fit within the definition. We have seen President Trump turn against longstanding allies and partners, calling them adversaries and targeting individuals who stand up to him or refuse to bow down before him. Allowing a President, any President, to target landholdings seems like a very dangerous tool to place in the hands of our current President.
Let's be clear: I share the concern about protecting U.S. agricultural land and national security, but this amendment is overly broad and risks serious unintended consequences.
We have been down this road before. So-called alien land laws once barred those deemed ineligible for citizenship from owning or leasing land, disproportionately targeting Chinese and Japanese communities because discriminatory Federal laws denied them naturalization.
In recent years, States such as Florida and Texas have passed laws restricting ownership of agricultural land by citizens or entities from foreign adversaries, which has resulted in xenophobic and discriminatory practices against Asian Americans, with Realtors literally concerned about selling land to Chinese Americans, insinuating any kind of affiliation to the CCP.
If the goal is to address national security, we should be precise. Restrictions should be narrowly tailored to foreign governments and individuals already identified through existing authorities, such as the Treasury Department's specially designated nationals list. We already have the tools to review and block risky transactions, including the CFIUS list that can be used to identify specifically who should not be purchasing our land.
We should strengthen and enforce these tools, not create vague, sweeping prohibitions that invite confusion and discrimination, particularly against immigrants and people of color.
We can protect our national security without undermining civil rights or opening the door to racial profiling. There is a better way to protect national security, protect our agricultural land, and protect our Asian-American community from the threat of racism. This amendment is not it.
Mr. Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to reject this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, the heads of our different intelligence agencies have stated that the Chinese Communist Party is the number one threat to the national security of the United States.
I had the opportunity to serve in Hawaii for 3 years. Hawaii has a number of different military installations that are surrounded by, for example, pineapple farms. To allow the Chinese Communist Party to purchase land around our military installations, some of the most sensitive military installations that we have, it is very surprising that you have Members from that very State with all of those military installations that wouldn't want to protect the national security of the United States.
This is a very simple amendment. It doesn't matter who the President is. It matters that we are not going to allow our enemies to buy agricultural land by our military installations and put our country at risk.
Mr. Chair, I think it is rich that the previous speaker insinuates that China may buy all our agricultural land when most of the land in Hawaii was stolen by the United States of America when it was illegally annexed by this country.
Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. Craig), the ranking member, to speak on this issue.
Mr. Chair, I will say it is great news. It is good news. We got a new date. We are going to get a vote on year-round E15 on May 13. That is terrific news, Mr. Chair.
I remember, though, that there was a partisan working group put together earlier this year, and we were supposed to get a deal by February 15. Then, it was supposed to be on the floor by February 25.
Mr. Chair, I would say, forgive my skepticism, but this certainly looks like every time we have a deal for a vote on year-round E15, there is an uprising in the Republican Conference and somehow my Republican colleagues from Midwest States, where farm bankruptcies are up 70 percent this year, get rolled.
Mr. Chair, I remind my colleague from the other side of the aisle that everybody here is running for election to
Currently, the vote on the farm bill, I remind us all, can't go to the Senate. The farm bill cannot go to the Senate without a vote on E15.
Although I remain skeptical that anything is going to go smoothly in that Conference, I hope that we do get our long-awaited vote on year- round E15. The last time E15 year-round passed was 2022, and Democrats were in the majority when it passed the House.
Mr. Chair, finally, I hope that Republicans can get their act together, figure out a path forward, and give us a vote on year-round E15.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Chair, Benjamin Franklin once said: ``An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,'' and this is not the first time that we have been threatened with foreign entities purchasing up agricultural assets, be it production or processing.
In the 1970s, it was Japan. The result of that: There are 29 States that have laws that restrict, to some degree, foreign ownership or investments in private agricultural land within their State. Yet, up to this point, the Federal Government has failed to do its job because we have not had an agriculture presence in the CFIUS interagency group.
By the way, we correct that in this bill, in this piece of legislation, Farm, Food, and National Security Act. The gentleman's amendment really complements that. Agricultural land is a strategic asset tied directly to food supply, and restricting foreign ownership helps to ensure that adversarial nations or entities, whoever those adversaries may be in the future, cannot gain control over land near a sensitive site or, quite frankly, cannot control our food supply.
A foreign entity controlling your food supply will control your nation. Keeping agricultural land in the hands of U.S. producers, away from adversarial nations, supports long-term stability and food production, reduces reliance on foreign-controlled resources, and ensures that land use decisions align with national interests, rather than with external, economic, or political priorities.
The CFIUS interagency group, which under this bill, the Secretary of Agriculture would be a part of, would be able to do their due diligence on that.
Food security is national security, and that is why I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment.
Mr. Chair, I rise today to offer an amendment defending the integrity of honey and the livelihood of the Americans who produce it.
My amendment establishes clear, direct, and enforceable testing standards for pure and authentic honey and ensures that claims regarding honey's purity, floral source, origin, grade, and authenticity are backed by rigorous and verifiable testing here in the United States, all under standards that we control, laboratories that we oversee, and methods that we recognize.
It makes one thing unmistakably clear: Foreign certifications on their own cannot be used to prove the authenticity and purity of honey.
Today, our markets are flooded with diluted, falsely labeled, adulterated, and fake honey. Far too often, such inauthentic honey is imported to our country and lands on the shelves of American grocery stores to the deceit of the American consumer and to the discredit of the thousands of American beekeepers and honey producers across our country.
This is not just a technical oversight but confirmation of an exploited system that favors foreign producers over the Americans that keep our food supply stable and our economy flourishing.
While this exploitation continues, American beekeepers and honey producers are being undercut in their own market, forced to compete against fraud dressed up as food. Most importantly, my amendment upholds the principle that consumers deserve to not be deceived in the foods that they consume.
This amendment helps to restore trust for the American consumer, returns fairness for honey producers, and sends a message to the United States that we will not be a dumping ground for fake and fraudulent products that cheat producers and mislead consumers.
Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to stand with American producers and support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chair, it is extremely important to support a regulated, safe supply of honey products in the United States. While I believe we can move forward on testing and creating a more consistent market, the complete exclusion of testing in some of our most reliable trade partners is an issue in this text.
I believe there is a compromise between better testing and creating rifts between trusted exporters.
I look forward to working with the Congressman on honey regulation through the FDA, but I will have to vote ``no'' on this amendment today.
Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
Mr. Chairman, I want to remind everybody what is happening. I did this last night, but I feel I have to do it again today.
We are considering on the floor a 5-year farm bill that, quite frankly, does nothing for our farmers, screws over poor people, and maintains the nearly $200 billion in cuts to SNAP. It is going to make hunger worse in this country. It may not matter to my Republican colleagues, but it matters to many of us on this side of the aisle.
I want to remind my friends that hundreds of amendments were offered, including many by Republican Members of Congress, and hundreds of those amendments were blocked by this Republican leadership.
Republican amendments were blocked 70 percent of the time. That should bother everyone on the Republican side. Democratic amendments were blocked 90 percent of the time.
Most of this bill was debated in the middle of the night. I was on the floor at midnight, 1 o'clock in the morning. This is what Republicans do. They
Here we are now wrapping this up at 9:45 a.m., but the majority of this bill was debated when everybody was asleep. This is crazy.
This is a lousy process, and one of the things I have learned in my years here is that crappy processes give way to crappy pieces of legislation. In fact, the way this is written, if anyone bothers to read it, I mean, the word I would use to describe it, I can't use on the House floor because my words would be taken down.
We need to do better here, and this is a chance for my Republican colleagues to stand with us and say ``no.'' Let's do this right. This is a big deal. This is an important bill, and the way it is written, it is insufficient to meet the needs of our farmers, and it is insufficient to deal with the rising hunger crisis in this country.
I mean, for God's sake, let's legislate here, and let's not be afraid to have other people on both sides of the aisle be able to contribute. This is lousy. This is terrible. This process sucks. I am ashamed of what we are doing here today, and I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Chair, Americans have the right when they go to the grocery store to know that the honey that they are purchasing is not adulterated, fake honey from places like the Chinese Communist Party and Brazil. They should know what their honey is. They should know that it is actual honey that they are purchasing. This amendment gives Americans the ability to do that. I can't think of anybody that would be opposed to that.
Mr. Chair, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson).
Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I thank the gentleman for bringing up this important amendment.
Mr. Chair, I can't believe that anyone is opposed to just making sure that honey is healthy and is produced in the United States. It just shows you the politics of my friends on the left side of the aisle, the Democrats.
Let me address this amendment first. As with all food quality provisions, it is important that we are relying on high-quality science and methods to make sure that when producers are making claims regarding their product's quality, purity, and authenticity, it be confirmed.
This amendment brings that certainty to the honey industry in the United States, protecting producers and consumers. The owners have a great secondary benefit of making sure that the honey industry is successful because we need those pollinators. We need those pollinators for everything: Our food, for beautiful flowers, for anything that grows. Basically, pollination is such an important part of that.
To be opposed to this amendment is to be opposed to American agriculture. I am not surprised by that. The accusations that this is a partisan bill, I wish most people were paying closer attention. I think folks who know this bill know that we are.
The core of this bill has 140 bipartisan, Republican and Democratic, markup bills in this. There were 40 bills just led by Democrats that went into this. We did 100 amendments in the committee markup process, and what got adopted was basically 50-50, half and half.
Today, if you are really paying attention to what is happening on the floor, it is probably 50-50 today. I didn't do the actual math, but there are a lot of amendments that have been made not only in order but that were accepted by voice vote that were offered by my friends who are both Democrats and Republicans.
This bill passed with bipartisan votes out of committee, so the political talking points for November that this is a partisan bill are just outrageous. You can't hide from the truth.
Getting back to the sweet topic of honey, I think this is great amendment. I support this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Mr. Chair, again, with respect to this amendment, I do believe there is a compromise between better testing and creating rifts between our trusted exporters. The minority would be happy to work with the majority and the Congressman on honey regulation through FDA, but we don't believe that this is the answer.
Mr. Chair, many of us were here pretty much all night last night, and what was interesting on the House floor during that time is after hours of delay in actually starting general debate on the farm bill, both sides of the Republican Party, both factions in the Republican Party who were negotiating for and against E15, came back claiming victory. I am just raising this issue because I personally witnessed both sides saying that they had a gentleman's agreement to bring E15 to the floor and not to bring E15 to the floor. I would just caution my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who believe that there is a deal to get E15 to the floor that there are some antics and tricks related to going back to the Rules Committee that folks may be planning.
At the end of the day, unfortunately, Republican leadership has a history of promising something different to a number of different factions within the Republican Party. I mean, hell, the Democrats over here, you don't need us to be your adversary because you are your own worst enemies these days. We just sort of pop the popcorn and watch this stuff happen.
But as this happens, I am not rooting for you all to be at war with each other. I am rooting for good public policy in this country. Year- round E15 is not getting a vote today. To me it is a really sad day when the Republican Conference can't vote for a commonsense bill that is going to lower the cost of gasoline at a time when the war in Iran is driving up gas prices.
Mr. Chair, Americans want to know that when they buy honey from the supermarket or from their local grocery store that it is authentic, genuine, not adulterated honey from another country.
Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Steube).
The amendment was agreed to.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report 119-628 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Bentz of Oregon.
Amendment No. 8 by Mr. Crawford of Arkansas.
Amendment No. 20 by Grothman of Wisconsin.
Amendment No. 22 by Grothman of Wisconsin.
Amendment No. 28 by Mrs. Luna of Florida.
Amendment No. 36 by Mr. Moore of West Virginia.
Amendment No. 39 by Ms. Scholten of Michigan.
Amendment No. 47 by Mr. Self of Texas.
Amendment No. 49 by Mrs. Spartz of Indiana.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 2, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Bentz), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 210, noes 216, not voting 9, as follows:
Mr. MEUSER, Ms. PELOSI, Mrs. MILLER of West Virginia, Mr. STEUBE, Ms. VAN DUYNE, and Mr. WALBERG changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. KNOTT, Ms. MATSUI, Messrs. PATRONIS, TRAN, HUFFMAN, YAKYM, MAST, COLLINS, WHITESIDES, JOYCE of Pennsylvania, Ms. LOFGREN, and Mr. CAREY changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 8, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Crawford), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 384, noes 35, not voting 17, as follows:
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Madam Chair, I was unable to be present to cast my vote on the Crawford of Arkansas Amendment No. 8. Had I been present for Roll Call No. 145, I would have voted ``AYE'' on this measure.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 20, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 416, noes 8, not voting 11, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 22, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Grothman), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 69, noes 355, not voting 11, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Madam Chair, on Roll Call No. 147, I mistakenly voted AYE when I intended to vote NO.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 28, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Luna), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 280, noes 142, not voting 13, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Madam Chair, during today's morning vote series on Luna of Florida Part B Amendment No. 28, I unintentionally voted NO. Had I been able to correct my vote, I would have voted AYE on Roll Call No. 148.
Madam Chair, I was not present for the following Roll Call vote. Had I been present, I would have voted as follows: Roll Call vote No. 148, on the Luna Amendment Number 28, had I been present I would have voted ``NO''.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 36, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Moore), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187, noes 239, not voting 10, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 39, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan (Ms. Scholten), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 233, noes 194, not voting 8, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 47, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Self), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 186, noes 238, not voting 11, as follows:
The Acting CHAIR. There is 1 minute remaining.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Madam Chair, on Roll Call No. 151, I mistakenly voted NO when I intended to vote Aye.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a recorded vote on amendment No. 49, printed in part B of House Report 119-628, offered by the gentlewoman from Indiana (Mrs. Spartz), on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 215, noes 213, not voting 8, as follows:
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The Acting CHAIR. There being no further amendments under the rule, the committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs. Bice) having assumed the chair, Mr. Stutzman, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 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, and, pursuant to House Resolution 1224, reports the bill, as amended by that resolution, back to the House with sundry further amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.
Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment reported from the Committee of the Whole? If not, the Chair will put them en gros.
The question is on the amendments.
The amendments were agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time.
Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, this 5- minute vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a 5-minute vote on passage of the bill, if ordered.
This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 211, nays 214, not voting 5, as follows:
So the motion to recommit was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Clerk be authorized to make technical corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 7567 to include corrections in spelling, punctuation, section numbering and cross-referencing, and the insertion of appropriate headings.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may hereafter be considered to be the first sponsor of H.R. 2424, a bill originally introduced by Representative LaMalfa of California, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?
Request to Recede From the House Amendment and to Concur in the Senate Amendment to H.R. 7147, Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 7147) making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes, with the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, to recede from the House amendment and to concur in the Senate amendment.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the House suspend the rules and recede from the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 7147) making further consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and for other purposes, and concur in the Senate amendment.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:
Senate amendment:
DIVISION A--DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2026
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford) and the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro) each will control 20 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the measure under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will begin with a simple reminder: We are here today to fully fund the Department of Homeland Security.
Tomorrow, many of our dedicated DHS workers, heroes who show up each and every day to secure our borders, screen our passengers in our airports, and protect our homeland, will be unpaid yet again. Some in the Department of Homeland Security will even begin to get furlough notices tomorrow.
Republicans refuse to let that happen, Mr. Speaker. We have tried to do this the right way. We have gone
We fully funded DHS in the House. Four times we have sent the funding package over across this very Hall to the Senate. Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, it has come to this. We need--no, we must pay our DHS workers. We must get back to the work that the American people sent us here to do. No more obstruction, no more games, and no more delays. Let's get this done, and let's get back to work.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say that this is a victory for the hardworking men and women whose lives were put on hold by Republicans for 76 days, but these hardworking men and women continued to work while Republicans shut down this government and held them hostage.
It is about damn time that you come forward and do this. We proposed this, I proposed it, 79 days ago.
Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take up too much time, given that I believe we are trying to expedite this and move forward.
We are in agreement on what we want to do to fund the Department of Homeland Security that we are going to fund here now, but the idea that we are isolating Border Patrol and isolating ICE is offensive to the men and women who serve in ICE and Border Patrol and are serving this country every single day to defend the people of this country.
It is absolutely ridiculous that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have done this to those men and women. I want everybody who is watching to understand what is happening here right now. While we are all unified in funding the rest of DHS, we are absolutely horrified that we are blowing up the appropriations process to target those brave men and women who are doing the Lord's work to keep us safe from cartels, from dangerous actors, and from illegal aliens across the streets of America that have been endangering the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I will just say that those armed, masked agents marauding our streets are terrorizing people in our communities. We have from the outset wanted to negotiate how we deal with that in a separate way and fund everyone else in DHS, including Coast Guard, FEMA, Secret Service, cybersecurity. It has been the Republicans who have been intransigent and not willing to do that, but there we go.
Today, we are going to do it. It could have been done 76 days ago. I will take it today. The men and women who are honorable, who are working every single day to defend this country, are not going to be held hostage any longer by my Republican colleagues.
Mr. Speaker, after sitting on his hands while the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security went without pay, Speaker Johnson finally did what he should have done a month ago: join Democrats in passing the bipartisan bill to end the Republican DHS shutdown.
For months, congressional Republicans have resorted to complicated legislative maneuvers and symbolic, self-congratulatory resolutions rather than compromise with Democrats to reform DHS and end the disastrous Republicans DHS shutdown, which became the longest partial government shutdown in history.
Republicans manufactured this crisis, prolonged it for months, and forced thousands of public servants and their families to pay the price.
House Democrats are glad Congress will finally be able to fund these vital agencies and pay the men and women who serve this country. But Democrats will continue demanding major structural reforms at ICE and CBP in the face of their continued misconduct and abuses of power.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate is expired.
The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Alford) that the House suspend the rules and recede from the House amendment and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 7147.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the House receded from the House amendment to the Senate amendment and the Senate amendment was concurred in.
Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (S. 4465) to amend the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 to extend the authorities of title VII of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, 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 gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) each will control 20 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material on S. 4465.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio?
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This is not the outcome that any of us wanted for the FISA 702 program, but here we are. The 702 program is incredibly important for protecting our national security and advancing our interests abroad.
This temporary extension will ensure that there is no disruption to the program while we work out our differences on a longer reauthorization.
I urge all Members to support the legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The Senate just unanimously passed this 43-day extension. Yesterday I was struck by a point my colleagues from the House Intelligence Committee made here on the House floor that the FISA 702 authorities were too important to turn off. We agree. But I also know that we cannot turn off our constitutional values and principles.
Nothing about protecting our safety should prevent us from protecting our rights. We can have both. When we talk about protecting civil liberties, we are not speaking of theoretical threats. We are talking of real violations perpetrated by the FBI, not just in 2022, but over the past year and still going on today.
The March 2026 FISC opinion describing the FISC judge's concerns about the FBI's violations of FISA is still classified by an administration that seems intent on keeping the public in the dark as we debate this fundamental problem.
We can say with some confidence that the FBI has no idea how many U.S. person queries they ran last year, how many times they spied on American citizens. We should not have to take this vote without being able to explain these serious deficiencies. We have a right to know how many times the communications of American citizens were accessed.
Every day that goes by where the Trump administration and Kash Patel's FBI can circumvent our constitutional values to spy on American citizens is one day too many. I won't oppose this short extension but only because it is my fervent hope and determination that it will give us the time to work together across the aisle to implement meaningful reform.
It is long past time for Speaker Johnson to stop blocking Members of this body from coming together across party lines to work in good faith to strike a bipartisan deal on section 702 that is the support of a robust, bipartisan majority which believes that the program is important for foreign intelligence but must be made consistent with the essential constitutional values of our privacy rights under the Constitution.
A significant majority of Members in this Chamber, Democrats and Republicans alike, want real reforms to protect Americans' privacy and civil liberties, not the paltry restatements of current law that have been offered to us so far.
The vast majority of Members of this body and the American people want a Federal judge, not an FBI agent or an FBI lawyer, to stand between them and their private communications. That is the constitutional design. You go to a judge. You don't leave it to the executive branch itself to check its own behavior.
The Speaker must allow the House to work its will. The Speaker must allow the House to serve the American people, to bring to the floor legislation that lives up to the spirit of the Fourth Amendment and ensures Americans are protected from their government as the Founders intended.
So as a gesture of good faith, we will give a few-week extension here, but we would love the Speaker of the House to get serious and allow us to have meaningful, bipartisan negotiation and compromise.
I have heard from so many distinguished Republican Members over there, including a number of former Federal prosecutors, who say: We can work this thing out. Let us do the people's business, and let's work it out.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I rise in opposition to this clean reauthorization of FISA and, in particular, to this short-term authorization of FISA.
A short-term infringement of the Constitution is still an infringement of the Constitution. How long has the Senate had to act on this? Is this an emergency? Is this something we haven't known about? No.
I appreciate the work of my dear colleague and chairman of our committee, Mr. Jordan, on this issue for so many years of trying to get warrants before Americans are spied upon. In fact, my colleague on the other side of the aisle Zoe Lofgren and I, over a decade ago, were successful in passing an amendment to FISA, during the appropriations process, that would have prohibited funds to be used in the FISA program without a warrant.
What happened to that amendment? It died in the Senate. They have had over a decade to work on this.
What does FISA stand for? Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
This, when it was originated, was never meant to be used to surveil Americans or to search through databases for their information. It was intended for foreign intelligence. But now it is used on Americans without a warrant.
FISA databases have been used to query political activists, journalists, Members of Congress and their staff, and random romantic interests of FBI agents. We are told: Oh, don't worry. It is not being abused anymore. Maybe that is because they changed the definition of a query. So when they use the program anymore and abuse it, it is not a query by their definition so they don't have to tell you when they have violated the law. They are interpreting it differently.
As a matter of fact, there is a secret interpretation of how this law is used by the FBI, so secret that you have got to go three floors underground to read about it. We can't tell the American public exactly how they are being spied on, but it is a particularly nefarious way. I think it is also unconstitutional. I know it is also unconstitutional.
For this and many other reasons, I oppose this FISA reauthorization, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I thank my friend from Kentucky for his always unswerving leadership on behalf of constitutional values, privacy, and the civil rights and civil liberties of the people.
The question here is how are we actually going to move the Speaker, who seems to be immersed in some combination of inertia, bureaucracy, and chaos, and the Senate, which doesn't seem to be living up to its traditional role in trying to reconcile our foreign policy and national security agenda with the constitutional values of the people?
We are saying, let's give it a few weeks now. I hope that Chairman Jordan will echo my endorsement of us really getting together to have bipartisan negotiations and compromise on this. This is not a partisan problem. We have people on all sides of this on both sides of the aisle. The vast majority of the Democrats want to make sure that we have a program that protects the privacy rights and the civil liberties of the people.
No, we do not trust Kash Patel to have conversations with Tulsi Gabbard as a successful substitute for the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. I am sure you don't trust whoever you would liken to Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard on our side.
That is fine. That is partisan politics. That is why we want this to rest on
Let's take a few weeks to have serious, meaningful discussion. As a gesture of good faith, we say we will work with the Speaker if the Speaker will work with us.
We see him conducting negotiations in the middle of votes on the House floor. How about we all get together the way that Congress is supposed to and have meaningful discussion and dialogue? Let's do the same thing with people in the Senate.
I challenge the Members of the Senate to stand up for a system that the American people can believe in. We simply cannot leave it up to Kash Patel and Tulsi Gabbard and Donald Trump to enforce our civil rights and civil liberties for us. That is not going to work. They are partisan actors. They have proven themselves to be partisan actors, and they don't make any bones about that. They are unashamed of it. That is fine. Then we need to put principles in place that are going to protect the American people.
Mr. Speaker, my friend and colleague on the Judiciary Committee and also on the Rules Committee, Chip Roy, has labored tirelessly to defend the constitutional rights of his constituents in Texas and all Americans.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
Mr. Speaker, it is nice to have the gentleman from Maryland on the pro-warrant side of this conversation this go-round.
I will note that there was a significant amount of abuses by the previous President with respect to the amount of focus on the American people using FISA and the abuses therein.
I hope we can achieve a bipartisan consensus here on how we reform this regardless of who is in the White House and regardless of who controls Congress. We need to do that in defense of the Constitution.
The reason I rise in opposition is because this body, this House, spoke and sent a bill to the Senate that has reforms that our Intelligence Committee chair worked on and a number of people worked on. We had reforms on there to stop the central bank digital currency. We sent it to the Senate, and they didn't even give it a vote. They didn't even put it on the floor for consent. They just said: Stuff it. We are going to send you a 45-day extension.
By the way, 45 days, which takes it to June 12, which some of us several weeks ago said: Let's do a 60-day extension and let's sit down and work, like the gentleman from Maryland said. That is what we ought to do.
We should go to committee. We should have a full-throated debate in committee. We should amend it. We should have a debate about warrants. We should have a debate about protecting the American people from the abuse of power by government.
My colleague from Texas, my friend over here, Mr. Cloud, he came into a meeting and he said the intel community never walks in, ever, saying: We have all of this power to collect information. Oh, we are going to give it back.
That never happens. The only way that happens is if we act, if this body acts, the people's Representatives.
Mr. Speaker, the question I would ask is: How much warrantless surveillance, how much spying on American citizens should we allow? How much? How much is acceptable? Because right now we know for sure there is warrantless collection of information on the American people.
We have other issues we have got to deal with: the kill switch, surveillance in automobiles, central bank digital currency, tracking what we spend, how we spend it, and what we can buy.
This body ought to be defending the people of the United States against the power of government being used against us. Under no circumstances should we allow technology to breach the wall that the Fourth Amendment created that the government is not supposed to go through to get into your personal business, to get into your homes, to look at your information, and to breach the privacy that you are guaranteed to not have the Fourth Amendment break.
I rise in opposition to this. We should move forward and actually try to get actual debate on this. But I do not accept what the Senate is doing to step over what the House did earlier. The Senate should take up that bill and pass it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The critical point is that we need to have a judge standing between the FBI and the private communications of the American people. This has got to be the essential constitutional value that is vindicated here. We need to interpose the authority and the independence of a judge between the FBI and the communications of the people.
The reform that my friend from Texas just mentioned is to have Kash Patel report his abuses to Tulsi Gabbard. If you think that is a good substitute for the Fourth Amendment, well, then you can go with what the gentleman was talking about, which was this 3-year extension. We are not willing go with the 3-year extension. 191 of us voted against it, including a dozen Republicans.
We are willing to give you 40 more days or 45 more days for us to negotiate this thing, if the Speaker will actually sit down with us. We want the Speaker to sit down with us, and we want the Senate to take its constitutional responsibilities seriously here.
The privacy rights of the people are too essential, and the privacy rights of the people should not be pitted against the national security interests of the country.
We can make this happen if we are willing to get rid of all of the chaos and the pandemonium that we have seen over the last several days and simply sit down and have a meaningful conversation and write the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
After observing the FBI and other intelligence agencies spy on Members of Congress, including Members who are in this debate right now, I am at a loss to understand why both Democrats and Republicans are arguing for a clean reauthorization of this program that has clearly been used to overstep the boundaries of the other branch of government.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Davidson), who serves on the Finance Committee and has warned us about the Orwellian dangers and powers of the central bank digital currency.
Mr. Speaker, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is a fine tool for foreign intelligence. Unfortunately, it has been abused and corrupted.
I am encouraged to hear Mr. Raskin reclaim his opposition to warrantless surveillance, and I am encouraged that there is a bipartisan effort to reform it. In fact, I think the will of this body is that we defend the Constitution and we defend this Nation. We can do both. We are presented this false dilemma that somehow if you just abandon your freedom, you can be more secure. That is a false tradeoff.
Freedom surrendered is barely reclaimed, but, by God, we are here to reclaim it today. We want both. We want a warrant to protect the civil liberties of American citizens, and we want the foreign intelligence to be focused on foreign intelligence.
We trust the leaders in the Central Intelligence Agency, the NSA, and others to do what they are supposed to do to target foreigners, but clearly, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has abused their access to this data. They have targeted Americans under all sorts of authorities and not just under 702.
We have come together in a bipartisan way. Frankly, the bill that we sent to the Senate just this week was bipartisan. Not only did it deal with 702, but it dealt with the money. People need to pay attention. The future of the money is going to determine the future.
Central bank digital currency is communist money for the digital age. Unfortunately, some of my Democrat colleagues, who are united in opposition to warrantless surveillance of all forms, somehow don't see the central bank digital currency for what it is. It is the most dystopian surveillance tool ever developed. It corrupts money into
We rejected that, and the Senate didn't even give us a debate. John Thune asked to be the leader of the Senate, but he is not leading. He didn't even bring this to the floor for a debate. He keeps throwing up excuse after excuse. Well, I will tell you: Anyone can find an excuse. Leaders find a way. It is time for John Thune to do that or step aside and let somebody lead the Senate who will give us at least a debate but deliver the results the American people have demanded in this election.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of our colleagues to come together and defend our Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Mr. Speaker, everyone here wants 702 reauthorized. The case has been made that it is a national security issue, that our troops on the ground need it. They need the intelligence that it provides. We want the CIA and the NSA to run as fast and as far as they can to identify the bad guys.
I have deployed on three continents, and believe you me, we want our military to know who to deal with when they get on foreign soil.
The FBI has abused 702, and that is why we are here today.
I want to reiterate my colleague's comments that we are really dealing with two surveillance bills here today. 702 is getting all of the attention, but the central bank digital currency is another surveillance tool that we sent to the Senate. We passed it in a bipartisan method.
Let me explain the difference in the two to the people that are listening. The electronic surveillance is 702, foreign agents on foreign soil. It says nothing about U.S. citizens, U.S. persons on U.S. soil.
The central bank digital currency is financial transparency for the Federal Government. Do you want the Federal Government telling you that you cannot buy a Ford 350 or anything else that the government thinks that you may not want to buy, that they will not want you to buy.
We have two bills that we are discussing today. All of the attention is on 702, but do not take your attention off CBDC. It is actually maybe more dangerous than 702.
Mr. Speaker, let's get 702 reauthorized with constitutional protections, and let's also address the central bank digital currency. We need both electronic privacy and financial privacy.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, what are we opposed to?
We are opposed to violating the Constitution. That is what is happening with FISA. It is happening with other provisions of law and court rulings.
Mr. Speaker, the third-party doctrine allows the government to go after your phone records without a warrant with a simple subpoena, go after your health records, and go after your bank records. That needs to be reformed.
We need to end the mandate on electronic kill switches in cars, the Orwellian technology that would be the judge, the jury, and the executioner, shut your car off midstream and mid-drive if some AI in your dashboard determines that you shouldn't be driving at that moment, Mr. Speaker, or maybe the government determines that.
There is a whole slew of ways that Americans' privacy, Fourth Amendment rights and other rights are being violated. Chief among them is the FISA 702 program. We should not do a clean reauthorization of this program.
Mr. Speaker, what would happen if you vote ``no'' today?
Maybe there are some people wondering: How will I vote?
Maybe they don't need my vote. Maybe it is going to pass. This has to pass with two-thirds vote.
What would happen if it did fail today?
The Senate would go back to work. They are trying to punt. They want to go home, leave town, and leave us with the work of this.
We have done our work. We have done it for years. We have sent them versions of this, and yet, they insist on another clean reauthorization.
Mr. Speaker, I object to that.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Roy).
Mr. Speaker, the reason I asked for the gentleman to yield to me is precisely the response we just heard.
Do you know what really the problem is, Mr. Speaker?
People want to get home to fundraisers. People want to get home to dinners. People want to go back to their districts and go on trips. They have codels.
Meanwhile, the American people are wondering: What on Earth is happening in this town?
Mr. Speaker, the American people are wondering: What on Earth is happening when they look at this body and see what we failed to do.
We are continuing every single day to drive this entire country into bankruptcy: $40-trillion debt, government spying on the people, failure to stop government spying on the people, kill switches in cars, and failure to stop sugar drinks going to children on the SNAP program voted by both sides of the aisle.
We go home, and the American people say: What are you doing?
Well, here we sit, and the response here is: Please let us get on our flights so we can go home and be away for 10 days while the country suffers because this body doesn't do its job.
Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, we can reconcile the essential constitutional values of the country with the national security of the country. This 45-day continuation is a mandate. It is a mandate to the Speaker to allow the House to finally come together to develop compromise legislation that guarantees that judges--not Kash Patel, not Tulsi Gabbard, and not Donald Trump--will be the ones to ensure our privacy and our civil liberties.
Let's use this period to engage in real legislative compromise and negotiation in the interests of the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, S. 4465.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. Speaker, today I stand before you to honor the extraordinary life of Robert ``Bob'' Busch, a devoted Nebraskan whose legacy will live on in our hearts and in the fields of western Nebraska.
Bob epitomized the spirit of hard work from a young age, starting his journey in agriculture by learning to drive a tractor at 12 years old before mastering the beet harvester at 16 years old.
This early dedication blossomed into a lifelong commitment to farming, embodying the values of diligence and perseverance in all he did. He will be remembered not only as a man of faith and deep conviction but also a pillar of strength around western Nebraska, where he farmed the same land that has been in his family for generations.
As a respected leader in agriculture, Bob made valuable contributions to organizations like the Nebraska Sugar Beet Growers Association and the Western Sugar Cooperative, tirelessly advocating for water and farming interests in western Nebraska. His voice will be sorely missed, and his impact will be felt for years to come.
Bob Busch was a remarkable individual, and while we mourn his passing, we celebrate the incredible life he lived.
Mr. Speaker, before I came to Congress, I led NASA as chief of staff under President Obama. I believed then, as I believe now, that NASA represents the best of us and the best of America. We were reminded of its ability to inspire just weeks ago with the triumph of Artemis II.
The sheer historic weight of sending humans around the Moon for the first time stopped our country in its tracks as we watched four brave astronauts take flight. The crew made history on multiple fronts as the most diverse to travel beyond low Earth orbit and by going further into space than anyone had ever been before.
Yet, just days after their launch, the President proposed a massive cut to NASA's budget, including slashing NASA's science division, which helps us detect wildfires in our district, fight climate change, and advance innovation.
They tried this last year, and we successfully fought back, making sure that NASA funding levels remained steady. We can, and we will do it again.
Artemis II didn't happen overnight. It required decades of investment, hard work, and the belief that America can still reach for the stars.
We must reaffirm our commitment to this essential work.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Ladies of Frederica on capturing the Sixth Annual Memorial Cup. This is their first title cup in this rotating interclub competition, defeating the Ocean Forest and Sea Island Golf Clubs.
In a nerve-racking Net Stableford finish, Frederica posted 493 points, winning over Ocean Forest by just 3 points, and Sea Island by 30.
What an incredible display of skill, heart, and teamwork.
Led by captains Bev and Linda, the championship squad featured Carol, Becky, Kelly, Sarah, Trace, Tracey, Christine, Kathy, Collette, Amy, Fran, Jane, Dawn, Carolyn, Tracy, and Molly.
Special thanks to Coaches VJ Trolio, Nick Osterman, and Joey Garber for their dedication in preparing this outstanding team.
In a game that rewards precision and poise, these women showed both and brought home the cup to Frederica.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to speak on the importance of the Ban Warehouse Detention Act.
The Trump administration wants to spend $40 billion for detention centers
Trump is planning to give $40 billion in taxpayer dollars to his megadonors and other private contractors to build and run more ICE detention centers that are literally killing people.
We must pass H.R. 8494, the Ban Warehouse Detention Act, because Americans across the country are standing up and saying, we don't want this.
From New Hampshire to New York, from Oklahoma to Tennessee, to my home State of Minnesota, when Americans find out about ICE's plans to buy massive industrial warehouses to hold nearly 100,000 human beings, they are flooding their city council meetings, putting pressure on their local officials, and demanding that these contracts be canceled. Across red States and blue States alike, Americans are saying that this is not what they want and this is not who we should be.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to celebrate the biggest high school sports achievement in the history of Cumberland County, Kentucky.
Congratulations to the Cumberland County Lady Panther softball team on their recent victory in the 2026 All A Classic State Championship.
The Lady Panther victory marks the very first State championship won by any sports team in the history of Cumberland County High School.
Cumberland County is one of Kentucky's most rural counties, with a population of just over 6,000 residents. Cumberland Countians were so proud of their softball team, they lined the streets of Burkesville, Kentucky, for a massive parade honoring their hometown heroes.
Congratulations again to the State champion Cumberland County Lady Panther softball team.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday Secretary Hegseth couldn't answer my question about how much the war in Iran is costing the American people, so I am going to answer it for him.
The answer is $631 billion, $5,000 per American household. That is how much it is costing because of the increase in the price of food, gas, and electricity. We need to end this war now and help the American people reduce costs.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to introduce a resolution to formally recognize April 30, 2026, as the 51st anniversary of Black April or Thang Tu Den.
For the Vietnamese diaspora, April 30, 1975, is not just not a solemn day in our history. It is a reminder of the day we lost everything--our homes, our livelihoods and our beloved country.
We honor the members of the South Vietnamese military who fought alongside American and Allied forces, risking everything to defend democracy.
My own parents escaped brutal repression by the Communist government and fled to the United States seeking the freedom that had been ripped away from them.
Amidst the darkness of war, our culture, our grit, and our resilience have spread across the world.
As the first Vietnamese American to represent Orange County's Little Saigon in Congress, I am proud to share our story on the floor of the House of Representatives to ensure that no Communist regime can rewrite our history.
Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to speak of a crisis of the President's own creation due to his war of choice in Iran and the confusion that has caused.
It is my duty every day to speak for the families of Ohio who are being squeezed. Gas and diesel, oh my. The prices in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and across Ohio are now crippling, at their highest level since the summer of 2022.
Prices are approaching a new all-time record according to data from AAA and Gas Buddy. Over the next 24 hours, Americans from coast to coast will spend half a billion dollars, $500 million more on gasoline than they would have on March 1. That is half a billion dollars with a b.
The President promised to lower prices. He did the opposite. The Speaker is doing nothing to stop it. He is forcing the American people to be dragged along on this terrible ride.
Here is some advice: Grow a spine. Do your job, Mr. Speaker. Bring up a vote to end this war.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to thank an extraordinary public servant, River Curt, who has been my legislative director for the past 3 years.
River has been a steady and thoughtful force behind so much of the work our office has been proud to lead, bringing not only deep policy expertise but a commitment to improving people's lives, from advancing housing solutions like the PRO Manufactured Home Communities Act to shaping efforts around the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention that we got done just a few months from being in the office in our freshman term.
Beyond the policy wins, what stands out the most is how River shows up with integrity, compassion, and purpose. They have strengthened our team in ways both large and small, including being a part of our now kind of legendary tiny desk-style concert in the office, a moment that has captured their creativity and spirit.
I thank Riv for everything. You inspire me. I thank you for your impact on this country. The Nation is better because of you and your work. I love you, dude.
Mr. Speaker, as we prepare to celebrate 250 years of our Nation's freedom, let us pause and ask: Who really made our freedom possible?
It was those who made the ultimate sacrifice, stories of courage, bravery, and yet heartache.
Gold Star families carry pain every single day. They never stop grieving, but they never stop loving, either. They are left remembering the birthday that will never be celebrated, a chair that sits empty, a voice they will never hear again.
For years, these families have poured their hearts into advocating for the passage of the Honor and Remember Flag, a powerful symbol that ensures their sacrifice is never forgotten.
I call on the President and Congress to stand with these families. Let us remember freedom is not free.
Mr. Speaker, this week the Supreme Court of the United States dealt another devastating blow to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a law that for nearly six decades has stood as a promise that every American, no matter who you are or where you live, has a voice in our democracy, a law that generations fought for, marched for, and organized for.
This decision is not just about the law. It is about our people, about our future, about our democracy, and about whether or not this country is by the people, for the people.
Mr. Speaker, we are angry, we are sad, and we are mad about the politics that have led us to this moment, that at every moment we have turned backwards, the American people have risen and taken this country forward, and so we will today.
We will fight back. We will fight back in Congress. We will fight back in the courts. We will fight back in our communities.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. Speaker, this is a speech that I am not supposed to give. That is because Mr. Salati would say: Don't make a fuss about me, you have more important things to do.
However, today, there is nothing more important than telling Mr. Salati how much we love him and how much we will miss him. Mario Salati was the son of immigrants from Italy who came to Endicott to seek the American Dream, and he found it.
Mr. Salati was not just our elementary school principal, he was in a lot of ways the village dad. We all looked up to him because of his quick wit, his commitment to service, and his genuine love for our community, and most of all, his pure kindness.
A proud U-E Tiger, Mr. Salati spent his career teaching and leading our public schools because he cared so much about our futures. Outside the classroom, you could find him at Saint Anthony's or the Sons of Italy, where his smile filled every room.
For his children, Brian, Colleen, and David, his grandchildren, Aubrey, Lucy, and Charlie, and his brothers Roz and Don, and all of Tiger Nation, I know there is a big hole in your hearts right now.
However, as Mr. Salati's favorite, Connie Francis, sang:
Mr. Speaker, today, I introduced the No War Appropriations Through Reconciliation Act, or the No WAR Act, which would prevent the partisan process from being used to fund military action in Iran.
We cannot normalize using reconciliation as the vehicle for every party-line priority when the drafters of the Congressional Budget Act designed it to be used to quickly resolve issues with the budget.
We have already spent $45 billion on this illegal, immoral war in Iran, and this administration is asking for $1.5 trillion more after already requesting $350 billion in mandatory defense spending that was passed through the last reconciliation.
On something as serious as this, where we are putting American lives on the line, we need strong bipartisan support and a transparent process with clear authorization from Congress because that is what the American people deserve. I am very proud to put this forward.
